Dispensationalism is it Scriptural?

[Harvest 1874]

Yes, I would like to know why you all appear to object to dispensationalism so much. What specifically do you object to?

Don't look at me, I believe the scriptures to teach "dispensationalism" just not exactly as some of our friends believe it. A short hop on the internet and you will see that there are various views on dispensationalism, some for some against, and even among those (pro-dispensation) there are varied differences as to what exactly dispensationalism consist.

I like to keep it simple and say that it is simply a division of time periods or ages in which the Lord accomplished certain works, sometimes with certain individuals, such as the Patriarchs (Noah, Abraham, Issac, Jacob), at other times with certain nations (specifically Israel) under what was then termed the Age (or Dispensation) of the Law, and still at other times (the time in which we live now) the Age (or Dispensation) of Grace in which he is dealing with the prospective members of the body of Christ. In the next "age" the Millennial age he will be dealing with the largest group thus far, all mankind.

 

[Willie T]

I can see your point, @Willie T, and can see that a word of explanation is also needed, to confirm the reason for using a quotation.

I am not aware of the Baptists you refer to, unfortunately, so cannot respond to that.

Thank you, Willie T.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

The simple reason that I quoted your comment about "the verse that says it all" is because just posting a verse that perhaps I (or you... or another poster) feels explains all there is to know about a certain topic... actually does nothing to show WHAT it is I (or you... or another poster) feels that verse actually explains about the topic under discussion.
All we have really done is transferred those words from one place to another. They still mean exactly what they meant to others who first read them elsewhere. Our posting them did not magically make them say something new to another person who never did see them the same way we did................ UNLESS we also eloquently (it means, "clearly & persuasively") add at least a small flow of thoughtful text that attempts to explain our own understanding of the verse we quoted.

 

[APAK]

The difficulty here Willie is that you ascribe to the teachings of the church nominal who preach that now is the only day of salvation, that if you're not a believer (now during the Gospel age) all is lost. The scriptures to the contrary are quite emphatic that God will not only have ALL men to be saved (Saved from the Adamic curse), but likewise that he will have ALL men to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1 Tim 2:4

"My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure." Isa 46:10

"The word that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it." Isa 55:11

Since God does not propose to save men on account of ignorance, but "will have all men to come unto the knowledge of the truth"; and since the masses of mankind have died in ignorance; and since "there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave" (Eccl. 9:10); therefore God has prepared for the awakening of the dead, in order that they might be brought to knowledge, faith and salvation. Hence his plan is, that "as ALL in Adam die, even so ALL in Christ shall be made alive, but each one in his own order"--the Church, the Bride, the body of Christ, first; afterward, during the Millennial age, all who shall become his during the Mediatorial reign, the Lord's due time for all to know him, from the least to the greatest. 1 Cor. 15:22

Harvest 1874:

I just want to point out that you may have misread 1 Tim 2:4. The KJV and even the Douay-Rheims version did not do a great job in their translations. They left a vague word or words ‘will have’ that without too much thought can be quickly understood as just ‘will.’ It does not mean ‘shall’ which then would indicate ‘all will’ come to the knowledge of the truth.

The ‘will have’ used a few Bible versions means ‘wishes,’ ‘desires’ or ‘wants’. The heart of men will determine if God shall seek them to come to the knowledge and truth. Not all men shall be saved.

(1Ti 2:4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. (KJV)
(1Ti 2:4) Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.(DR)
(1Ti 2:4) who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.(ESV)
(1Ti 2:4) οςG3739 R-NSM πανταςG3956 A-APM ανθρωπουςG444 N-APM θελειG2309 V-PAI-3S σωθηναιG4982 V-APN καιG2532 CONJ ειςG1519 PREP επιγνωσινG1922 N-ASF αληθειαςG225 N-GSF ελθεινG2064 V-2AAN

(Textus Receptus)

Strongs - G2309

θέλω, ἐθέλω

thelō ethelō

thel'-o, eth-el'-o

Either the first or the second form may be used. In certain tenses θελέω theleō thel-eh'-o (and ἐθέλέω etheleō eth-el-eh'-o) are used, which are otherwise obsolete; apparently strengthened from the alternate form of G138; to determine (as an active voice option from subjective impulse; whereas G1014 properly denotes rather a passive voice acquiescence in objective considerations), that is, choose or prefer (literally or figuratively); by implication to wish, that is, be inclined to (sometimes adverbially gladly); impersonally for the future tense, to be about to; by Hebraism to delight in: - desire, be disposed (forward), intend, list, love, mean, please, have rather, (be) will (have, -ling, -ling [ly]).

Bless you,

APAK

 

[OzSpen]

Yes, I would like to know why you all appear to object to dispensationalism so much. What specifically do you object to?

charity,

I object to its idiosyncratic interpretation of Scripture. From what I read of its theory/theology, I find it pushing Scripture to fit its pre-arranged plan.

See: What is dispensational premillennialism / premillennial dispensationalism?

Oz

 

[Willie T]

Harvest 1874,
Where are you getting these strange notions that I think all men will be saved? Did you miss the ratio I posted? I said I think (because the Bible indicates it) that there will be about 5 Christians to 1 Unbeliever when Jesus returns.

 

[charity]

charity,

I object to its idiosyncratic interpretation of Scripture. From what I read of its theory/theology, I find it pushing Scripture to fit its pre-arranged plan.

See: What is dispensational premillennialism / premillennial dispensationalism?

Oz

Hello @Oz,

Thank you for responding. Would you please be more specific, so that a defensive can be made, for I do not understand what you are referring to?

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[Harvest 1874]

Harvest 1874,
Where are you getting these strange notions that I think all men will be saved? Did you miss the ratio I posted? I said I think (because the Bible indicates it) that there will be about 5 Christians to 1 Unbeliever when Jesus returns.

You see Willie this is what happens when you are conversing with someone in the written word, one small misstep or statement can lead to a whole lot of confusion.

I never said anything about "you" personally believing all men will be saved, I was merely quoting what the scriptures have to say upon the matter.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yes, I would like to know why you all appear to object to dispensationalism so much. What specifically do you object to?

i think bc of instead of it being considered as a way to describe how human nature has evolved, it gets used to posit doctrines that would suggest God respects persons (generations). So iow that's how we get "2 gospels," or even "rapture."
also "no human could have possibly gotten grace BC," stuff like that

 

[Willie T]

You see Willie this is what happens when you are conversing with someone in the written word, one small misstep or statement can lead to a whole lot of confusion.

I never said anything about "you" personally believing all men will be saved, I was merely quoting what the scriptures have to say upon the matter.

Then, though it may take a bit of effort.... spend two or three more minutes on a SHORT (Brevity is a very important point when writing on a forum.) post to make what you are saying clear. Especially when you quote or address one specific person, then say you are, instead, talking to someone else with that reply.

BTW, did you watch the Westboro Video I posted? There are four very good tips in there about conversing online.

 

[Willie T]

You do understand that was sarcasm toward complainers of long posts with detailed information?

It's the modern day. Everyone want to know everything, but they do not want to be bothered to Learn it.

God Bless,
Taken

Actually most of the time spent on composing long, tedious posts is almost totally wasted. It is stated here, time and time again, that hardly anyone ever reads them. And, if they do, most are so poorly written that they are usually just skimmed over... and nothing substantial is conveyed by them.

It is far more effective to try to discuss one single — relatively short — point of an issue at a time.

 

[Harvest 1874]

Harvest 1874:

I just want to point out that you may have misread 1 Tim 2:4. The KJV and even the Douay-Rheims version did not do a great job in their translations. They left a vague word or words ‘will have’ that without too much thought can be quickly understood as just ‘will.’ It does not mean ‘shall’ which then would indicate ‘all will’ come to the knowledge of the truth.

The ‘will have’ used a few Bible versions means ‘wishes,’ ‘desires’ or ‘wants’. The heart of men will determine if God shall seek them to come to the knowledge and truth. Not all men shall be saved.

(1Ti 2:4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. (KJV)
(1Ti 2:4) Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.(DR)
(1Ti 2:4) who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.(ESV)
(1Ti 2:4) οςG3739 R-NSM πανταςG3956 A-APM ανθρωπουςG444 N-APM θελειG2309 V-PAI-3S σωθηναιG4982 V-APN καιG2532 CONJ ειςG1519 PREP επιγνωσινG1922 N-ASF αληθειαςG225 N-GSF ελθεινG2064 V-2AAN

(Textus Receptus)

Strongs - G2309

θέλω, ἐθέλω

thelō ethelō

thel'-o, eth-el'-o

Either the first or the second form may be used. In certain tenses θελέω theleō thel-eh'-o (and ἐθέλέω etheleō eth-el-eh'-o) are used, which are otherwise obsolete; apparently strengthened from the alternate form of G138; to determine (as an active voice option from subjective impulse; whereas G1014 properly denotes rather a passive voice acquiescence in objective considerations), that is, choose or prefer (literally or figuratively); by implication to wish, that is, be inclined to (sometimes adverbially gladly); impersonally for the future tense, to be about to; by Hebraism to delight in: - desire, be disposed (forward), intend, list, love, mean, please, have rather, (be) will (have, -ling, -ling [ly]).

Bless you,

APAK

Thanks for the reply APAK,

However just for clarification when I quoted 1 Tim 2:4 in my reply to Willie I was not quoting it directly word for word, I was simply summarizing. I am well aware of the correct interpretation of the text, that it in no way implies simply that God “desires” to have all men to be saved, this gives the false impression that God desires IF he could (as though it were an impossibility for him) to have all men be saved.

"My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure." Isa 46:10

Although I use the NKJV for day to day study, I don’t rely upon it for complete accuracy, for this I consult the Diaglott, which contains the Original Greek text and an Interlineary Word for Word English translation of the New Testament, when this is not enough or if I simply need a second opinion I consult one of the most accurate translations available Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible (this one covers both the Old and New Testaments).

Now as for our text in question (I included verse 3 for further reference), first the NKJV:

“For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

As we said the original Greek text does not render it “desires” to have, as noted in the following:

“This [for] good and acceptable in presence of the preserver of us God who all men wishes to be saved and into in exact knowledge of truth to come.” Diaglott, Word for Word

Are we to suppose that if God “wishes” something that it will not come to past? God’s will, will be done, unconditionally, he spoke and it stood.

Lastly we have Rotherham’s version of the same text:

“This is comely and acceptable before our Saviour’ God, Who willeth all men to be saved, And unto a personal knowledge of truth to come.”

God’s will, will be done, unconditionally, he spoke and it stood.

Bless you too my brother, Harvest

 

[Willie T]

The Diaglott is where Hollywood got the inspiration for the speech pattern Yoda employed in Star Wars. ( Matthew 4:3 And coming to him the temper, said: "If a son thou be of the God, speak, that the stones these loaves may become." )

 

[Helen]

Typical Bible Class

Instructor: "Brother Jones, will you read Verse #1?"
Brother Jones reads it.
Instructor: "Brother Smith, can you tell us what that verse means?
Brother Smith: "Just what it says!"
All the Class: "AMEN!!!"
Instructor: "Thank you. Now, Brother Brown, will you read verse #2?"

Oh so true...so sadly true!! Well said.

 

[Helen]

I think the ISSUE becomes more complex muddling the simple, when men start LABELING themselves.

A pre-tibber, a dispensalationist, a Calvinist, a Christian, a Universalist, blah, blah.

It makes ones beliefs CURT, limited, when each label has an element of truth in them and a LIMITING aspect of the Lords Truth.

Scripture does not dole out Labels, NOR limit the Lords Truth. It is His TRUTH, the Lord desires a man to BELIEVE and TRUST...whether or not they Understand it.

It has been for centuries MEN that like to physophically decide the Extent and Limits of the Lords Truth and then LABEL it, and then Adopt the Label and Slap that LABEL on their foreheads For all to know and see.

The Lords way is simple....They do not require man made Labels. And a man can not even KEEP the Lords way, without the Power of the Lord within the man.

Pretrib, midtrib, end of trib, during the rest of your natural life cycle, what you eat, where you live, who you eat with.........what man can kill your body, slander you....

ALL irrelevant, for a man WHO IS IN Christ, and the Holy Spirit IN the man....!!

Such a man IS already alive forever and forever with His Lord, His God.

If the Lord desires to drag you though the tribulation....He is with you.
Which means, whatever You are being subjected TO, so also is His Spirit.

If He desire to cause you to sustain the hardships of locusts, of lack of food, of chaos, wars, stench of sulfur........He is with you, and either enduring the same, or overpowering the effects to Him and to those that ARE HIS.

For one thing...God has His Earth to deal with, aside from its occupants. The Earth itself is Corrupt. It's already sustained it's Water cleansing, and WILL be subject to His Purifying FIRE. And Like with the FLOOD, so also will many men who rejected the Lord, BE affected by Gods Wrath upon the Earth.

And Like with the FLOOD, many were destroyed in the FLood and a few were raised above the Havoc of the Flood, to the face of the waters and saved.
So also shall shall it be the SAME, when the Wrath of God is upon the Earth with FIRE, many will be destroyed in the Fire, and few will be raised above the face of the earth and saved.

Trust in the Word of God, and the gifts He has prepared and given to men who believe in His Christ, the Lord Jesus.
Mankinds limiting Labels...pfft!

God has a LABEL for men...It's called His People ISRAEL....(and I do not mean Isralies, a Land, or Jacob....I mean the name of the Lords People, IS ISRAEL)...and has a name for each man that IS His People for their forehead.

God Bless,
Taken

Great ( long) post! Well said!
Sorry just had to tease you there.lol

 

[charity]

Hello @Willie T,

Thank you for providing the U.tube address in #80, it gives some sound advice that we can each learn from, regarding how we engage with others, and address points upon which we differ.

I do not like the blanket approach made by entrants on this thread, in which so much is placed before the reader, that very little is truly taken in and thought about, including by myself. I prefer that issues are considered in isolation, so that their truth can be ascertained point by point, with an open Bible and a prayerful attitude.

I am saved by grace, a workmanship of God in Christ Jesus. That truth I stand on: and though I have benefited from the dispensational approach to Bible study, I am not going to allow it's defence to create barriers between myself and my fellow believers. For as a member of the Body of Christ there is a unity that God has created in Christ Jesus, that I am to endeavour to keep, and that is not served by divisive debates. (Ephesians 4).

So, if there are doctrines that need to be examined, fine, I will talk about them, but, prejudicial accusations which are not fact based, I an not interested in discussing.

Thank you again, Willie T, and all others who have responded to my remarks, and may God's perfect will be done in and through each one of us for His Name and Glory' s sake. For that our object, regardless of our different perspectives.

In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified,
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Christine

 

[Helen]

Actually most of the time spent on composing long, tedious posts is almost totally wasted. It is stated here, time and time again, that hardly anyone ever reads them. And, if they do, most are so poorly written that they are usually just skimmed over... and nothing substantial is conveyed by them.

It is far more effective to try to discuss one single — relatively short — point of an issue at a time.

Yay!! A man after mine own heart.

Many, many people, even on this Forum Site admit that they only speed read the long and boring posts...but just hot the high spots..and the main kernel of the POINT being made.

If we were all in one room ( which we kind of are...) and one person yapped on and on...the other would for sure begin to fidget and find the dominant person quite rude. It's just that when it is written, the writers don't even realize that some people have slowly 'left the room'.

I personally am a believer that in the end all will be saved. ( I think a month ago your challenged me on this) Anyway...I am interested on your mention of "5 to 1" for the believers...care to say more?
No worries if you don't.

Helen

 

[Willie T]

Hello @Willie T,

Thank you for providing the U.tube address in #80, it gives some sound advice that we can each learn from, regarding how we engage with others, and address points upon which we differ.

I do not like the blanket approach made by entrants on this thread, in which so much is placed before the reader, that very little is truly taken in and thought about, including by myself. I prefer that issues are considered in isolation, so that their truth can be ascertained point by point, with an open Bible and a prayerful attitude.

I am saved by grace, a workmanship of God in Christ Jesus. That truth I stand on: and though I have benefited from the dispensational approach to Bible study, I am not going to allow it's defence to create barriers between myself and my fellow believers. For as a member of the Body of Christ there is a unity that God had created in Christ Jesus, that I am to endeavour to keep, and that is not served by divisive debates. (Ephesians 4).

So, if there are doctrines that need to be examined, fine, I will talk about them, but, prejudicial accusations which are not fact based, I an not interested in discussing.

Thank you again, Willie T, and all others who have responded to my remarks, and may God's perfect will be done in and through each one of us for His Name and Glory' s sake. For that our object, regardless of our different perspectives.

In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified,
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Christine

I am a big believer that if an issue has, say, nine points (for instance), then each of those points should be addressed separately, in turn. And, that we should not move on to a pending point if all the previous ones have not been, more or less, settled, agreed upon, and laid to rest.

 

[Willie T]

Yay!! A man after mine own heart.

Many, many people, even on this Forum Site admit that they only speed read the long and boring posts...but just hot the high spots..and the main kernel of the POINT being made.

If we were all in one room ( which we kind of are...) and one person yapped on and on...the other would for sure begin to fidget and find the dominant person quite rude. It's just that when it is written, the writers don't even realize that some people have slowly 'left the room'.

I personally am a believer that in the end all will be saved. ( I think a month ago your challenged me on this) Anyway...I am interested on your mention of "5 to 1" for the believers...care to say more?
No worries if you don't.

Helen

Gladly. Some suggest, and I tend to agree, that Isaiah 19:18 symbolically implies a five-to-one ratio for Christians over non-Christians at the height of the millennial glory: "In that day five cities in the land of Egypt will speak the language of Canaan and swear by the LORD of hosts; one will be called the City of Destruction.” To speak the language of God's people seems to indicate salvation. Language plays an important role in Scripture: if it is the language of God's people, it evidences His favor; if not, it symbolizes His curse.

But, beyond that, there are the inescapable references to Abram's descendants ("Spiritual" Israel, I believe) being more numerous than the stars in the skies or the grains of sand on the beaches. And, that is not to mention Revelation's mention of "numbers too great to count." (Paraphrased...... to calm down the "sticklers")

 

[Taken]

Actually most of the time spent on composing long, tedious posts is almost totally wasted. It is stated here, time and time again, that hardly anyone ever reads them. And, if they do, most are so poorly written that they are usually just skimmed over... and nothing substantial is conveyed by them.

It is far more effective to try to discuss one single — relatively short — point of an issue at a time.

Gotcha.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Helen]

@Willie T

Lovely...I have never considered those scriptures before like that...obviously I like it very much .
Thank you .