Dispensationalism

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you had only one scripture directly supporting any of the main tenets of Dispensationalism, we would not be having this discussion.

Eph 1:9-10
9 having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself,
10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth — in Him.
NKJV = dispensation = age = the fullness of time as apposed by the beginning of time

Eph 3:1-5
3 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles —
2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,
3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already,
4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),
5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets:
NKJV

God gave Paul a new message, the dispensation of the grace of God. Under it God has given mankind a free gift of salvation of which He saves those that trust in His work on the cross as opposed to those who trust in their own religious works.

1 Cor 2:7-8
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory,
8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
NKJV = before the ages, ages is plural not singular.


If a person does not divide the ages where God dealt differently with man they will mix it all together and come up with a gospel of man.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,794
19,242
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Eph 1:9-10
9 having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself,
10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth — in Him.
NKJV = dispensation = age = the fullness of time as apposed by the beginning of time

Eph 3:1-5
3 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles —
2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,
3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already,
4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),
5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets:
NKJV

God gave Paul a new message, the dispensation of the grace of God. Under it God has given mankind a free gift of salvation of which He saves those that trust in His work on the cross as opposed to those who trust in their own religious works.

1 Cor 2:7-8
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory,
8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
NKJV = before the ages, ages is plural not singular.


If a person does not divide the ages where God dealt differently with man they will mix it all together and come up with a gospel of man.


Paul gave the gospel message to the Gentiles. It isn't any different from the Jews...just the clientele! :)

The kingdom of God is ACCORDING to grace....which is the power to fulfill the law.

Grace doesn't save us from the effects of sin...but from the power of sin. The wages of sin is still death...separation from God.
 
Last edited:

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,505
12,924
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The "written" word of God, approved words of God, Is/Are for ALL men.

The "written" word of God, Is Not, accepted By ALL men.

The word of God, Is accepted, as it stands, without Jesus.

The Word of God; in the flesh; ie Christ the Lord, Is Not, accepted By ALL men.

That defines Three separate groups of Men, We, Us.

1) Men who Reject the word of God.
....commonly called Atheists.

2) Men who Accept the word of God, but Not that the word of God Is, Jesus In the Flesh.
....commonly called Jews.

3) Men who Accept the word of God, and that Word Is, Christ Jesus.
.....commonly called Gentile Jesus Christ believers/also loosly called Christians.

The, we, us, our....ie ManKIND; to whom particular Scriptures DO and Do Not Apply particularity and severally.

ManKIND is directed to divide the word of TRUTH (ie Gods word, Gods approved words).

Consideration of Mankind ~
A baby, toddler, child, teen, young adult.....
Continuously being "introduced" to "information".

What "information"?
Begins with the "caretaker" direction and example.
Continues with the pre-adults access, interests, curiousity.

Developes into, the pre-adult To adult, and the adult individual making their own choices and decisions and accountability and consequences for their choices and decisions.

It is not secret;
The Lord directs adults given the gifts of children To foster a foundation In Knowledge of the Lord, that the lord dictates Is acceptable.

It is not secret;
The world directs adults given the gifts of children To encourage primary "care-taking" of the children To be "multiple others", and foster a foundation In Knowledge of the world, that the world dictates Is acceptable.

The Lords own, "we, us, our", Is specific To He Himself.

A mans, "we, us, our", Is specific To a mans own "choice/decision" of which "group" he himself has accepted to identify within.

Scripture, the approved word of God; "separates" the "we, us, our" of men, "approved of God", and those not approved of God, as "them and they"....not "included as, we, us, our".

Not ALL men are "included" as acceptable to God.
Not ALL men are "excluded" as accepted to God.

The inclusion or exclusion is exclusively dependent upon...
"IF" a man has "chosen" AND "accomplished" what the Lord Requires for vowing allegience TO the Lord God.

It is Not about, what other men require, or what other men believe is acceptable "to them".....

It IS exclusively about what the Lord requires and what the individual man chooses and accepts from the Lord God.

God Bless,
Taken
 
D

Dave L

Guest
Eph 1:9-10
9 having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself,
10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth — in Him.
NKJV = dispensation = age = the fullness of time as apposed by the beginning of time

Eph 3:1-5
3 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles —
2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,
3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already,
4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),
5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets:
NKJV

God gave Paul a new message, the dispensation of the grace of God. Under it God has given mankind a free gift of salvation of which He saves those that trust in His work on the cross as opposed to those who trust in their own religious works.

1 Cor 2:7-8
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory,
8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
NKJV = before the ages, ages is plural not singular.


If a person does not divide the ages where God dealt differently with man they will mix it all together and come up with a gospel of man.
This misses the point. The point is, you haven't any direct quotes from scripture supporting a 7 year tribulation. A pre-trib rapture. A restored Roman Empire. A physical millennial kingdom and so on...
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,230
113
North America
'These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,
and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.'

(Act 17:11)

Hi there,

Mr Charles Welch and Dr E.W. Bullinger, both respected teachers on the Word 'rightly divided'; urged those who read their studies to search the Scriptures for themselves, to see whether what they said was true. It is the responsibility of each one of us to do so, isn't it?
Therefore, it is no point pointing the finger at any one method of approach to the Word of God, for the responsibility for embracing any doctrine lies with you and I, before God, in Christ Jesus.

'According to the grace of God
which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder,
I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon.
But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,
which is Jesus Christ.'

(1 Cor 3:10-11)

Praise God!

In Christ Jesus
our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris
Searching the Scriptures in a daily, Berean spirit is certainly a vital and wholesome pursuit which in faith brings many dividends!
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
This misses the point. The point is, you haven't any direct quotes from scripture supporting a 7 year tribulation. A pre-trib rapture. A restored Roman Empire. A physical millennial kingdom and so on...
Just because you are unable to discern certain Bible truths does not mean that they do not exist. Let's take your notion of no "physical millennial kingdom". Had you taken the time and trouble to carefully read and study my thread on "CHRIST’S LITERAL KINGDOM ON EARTH: AN ACCOMPLISHED FACT FOR GOD" you would not have made that remark. In fact you would have acknowledged that you had not studied Bible prophecy.

Also, you seem to be under the impression that if something is not stated explicitly, then it does not exist. But a great deal of Scripture includes what is implied.

 
D

Dave L

Guest
Just because you are unable to discern certain Bible truths does not mean that they do not exist. Let's take your notion of no "physical millennial kingdom". Had you taken the time and trouble to carefully read and study my thread on "CHRIST’S LITERAL KINGDOM ON EARTH: AN ACCOMPLISHED FACT FOR GOD" you would not have made that remark. In fact you would have acknowledged that you had not studied Bible prophecy.

Also, you seem to be under the impression that if something is not stated explicitly, then it does not exist. But a great deal of Scripture includes what is implied.
Christ's kingdom is in heaven extending over the earth. He is God who forever rules the universe. On the last day, this universe explodes in fervent heat being replaced by the New Heavens and earth where heaven and earth become one. = no measly 1000 year rule on an earth full of sickness and disease.
 

Naomi25

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2016
3,199
1,801
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I Trust...
1) God cannot lie
2) Jesus IS the Truth

I do not find it "obvious" that others Believe:
God cannot lie
Jesus IS the truth...

When they claim what Scripture says, is NOT literally true.

So, not taking scripture "literally" means that people think God is lying and Jesus is NOT the truth?
What do you take "literal" to mean, however? Do we take it to mean that all of God's word is true, essential and necessary for life and growing in the knowledge of God? Or must it mean that everything in God's word needs to 'come about' in a literal sense? In other words: when God describes himself as a giant hen, then so he must be? Or Christ is literally a lamb...and a lion, and Satan is literally a snake or a dragon.

You see, just because something is true, does not mean it has to be taken literally. For example, if someone says, "today is hotter than h*ll", they do not mean that literally, but they do mean that the day is scorching. We do not suppose they are lying, or trying to "spiritualize" and therefore dismiss any notion of heat or weather. No...we know they are honestly describing a true condition.
Likewise, we know that Christ is not really a lamb, or a lion, but those descriptions give us true and precious images of his nature. Like a lamb to the slaughter went our Lord, a sacrifice in our place; and when he returns, he will be like a lion, triumphing in Majesty.

So say, therefore, that one must take all the bible in a "literal" sense, rather than take it as true, you are forcing conditions and meanings upon certain illustrations God has used to make his point. And this is just as wrong as those who do, indeed, try and brush away God's words as not true, but just "moralistic stories". God gave us his word in different genres and styles. The truly incorrect way to read it is to dismiss how he gave it...true words, examples, illustrations, images, facts...all together pointing towards Christ.

"You" claimed you did not understand.
But yet "You" want to argue what "You" claim "You" do not understand.

I also said that I know what Dispensationalists (and Pre-Mills in general) say about the purpose of the Millennium. My "not-understanding" has to do with the TOTAL disconnect the painted out purpose that is laid down for it has from what is said in scripture about what we can expect in the future.
That is not a 'lack of understanding' as you would have it. That is bafflement that people see what is not there. Plain and simple.


You said "obviously" you believe the word of God.
You said you did not understand.
You then decide what you do not understand, must be "not literal".
Then you reveal it is "not literal", because other men have decided it is "not literal".
Okay...see above for the whole "understanding" thing.

And I most certainly DO NOT assign things 'non-literal' status simply because I don't understand them. Indeed, my point is that I assign them that status because I understand them.

Ah...the old "follow the fallen multitude" plot. And you follow Jesus, right? Your doctrines and hermeneutics are better than ours because Jesus shows you directly what to believe?
This is a circular argument that could (and often does) go round and around. We too are born again believers, we too have the Spirit of God within us. We too pray for wisdom and guidance as we come to the scriptures and we too feel sure and led that he has given us clarity on these matters.
So...does it become a case of "my Spirit's leading is better than your Spirit's leading?"
That is folly. And this is one of the reasons that doctrine is important. It's easy to stand up and say "God showed me...", but not so easy to sit down and plot, in length, God's thoughts, promises and plans through scripture and then say "see....this is his word". And then...then, if they line up with the Spirit's leading, we can know it is of God. Before that, we're just people who haven't "tested the spirits".

You are basically saying, you believe the word of God, but not really, because you do not understand.
Ah, no. Not at all. You really seem stuck on that one comment, don't you? Which is sort of hilarious, if you think about it. My usage of the comment "I don't understand" didn't have a literal meaning...not in the way you would insist it needed to be understood. I understand what the bible says about the Millennium, and I understand what Pre-millennialists think about what the bible says about it and that they focus on a literal understanding. My bafflement comes in how, or why, they see it that way, as the passages that touch on it seem extremely non-literal. It doesn't make my word usage of "I don't understand" wrong, or what I said incorrect...it was just the way I chose to express myself.


I agree with your own comment 'you' made for yourself, that you do not understand.

I disagree with your "not literal" stance.

God Bless,
Taken

Well...right back at ya! But that's okay, I know many people like you and the difference of opinion here hasn't been an issue.
But all the same, I don't think we're really getting anywhere with the conversation, so I might sign off.
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,230
113
North America
It comes back to an understanding (or whatever word one uses) of who's who in the three groups of people mentioned in 1 Corinthians 10.32: 'Jew', 'Gentile' and 'church of God'.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,794
19,242
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
It comes back to an understanding (or whatever word one uses) of who's who in the three groups of people mentioned in 1 Corinthians 10.32: 'Jew', 'Gentile' and 'church of God'.


If we look at the gospel call into the kingdom from God's perspective...He is just looking for ANYONE who will lay down their lives in the world so as to enter into His. I think we get hung up far too much on a kind of person...whereas God is not a respecter of persons.

We are all...entities...of sorts...created beings. God has made accessible a place in the heavens for people to occupy... in order to win the world back to His dominion. How much do we care about that? I mean as opposed to having a self-interest that would think more about our own security than the fact that God is watching and waiting for us to fight the good fight...for Him!
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,505
12,924
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So, not taking scripture "literally" means that people think God is lying and Jesus is NOT the truth?

This comment is about;
Using the implication of 'NOT Literal".
This comment is about:
Scripture.
This comment is about "NOT' trusting Scripture is true.


What do you take "literal" to mean, however?

No. I do NOT take the term "literal" to mean, however.

I take the term "literal" redundant and unnecessary. Especially concerning "the word of God".

Either a person believes the word of God is True, or he doesn't believe the word of God is True.

What men routinely say, is more in line with your opening statement....
In regard to Scripture and men proclaiming, it is at times, NOT LITERAL, which is to say, it is NOT EXACTLY TRUE, which is to say, it is NOT TRUE.

I am of the belief, God does not Lie, Jesus does not Lie. He is not capable of speaking what is NOT TRUE.

And I find men who say they believe Jesus, while cllaiming what he says is not (literally) True, are men who speak oxymorons.

Do we take it to mean that all of God's word is true,

I do not consider "the term literal" is necessary when reading Gods word.

I trust God does not lie. I trust Jesus is the truth.
I find no benefit for men to "add" to that, the term "literal, as if, Gods words were not sufficient , and men need to impress, really, Gods word is what he says....
Nor do I find a benefit for men to "add" to that saying, Gods word is "NOT LITERAL", as if God had to lie, to get a point across.

essential and necessary for life and growing in the knowledge of God?

Knowledge is Information period.
How God gives a man His Knowledge is through His word.

If you are still challenging His word....why would you be moving to the next step?

Do you even know what the next step is?

I have spoke before of Gods Order of things.

Knowlege is First given a man.
The man can Accept the knowledge is TRUE, or NOT.

Understanding of the knowledge is given a man AFTER the man Accepts the knowledge is TRUE.

Men who are proclaiming the knowledge is NOT true (ie their term, NOt literal), has NOT yet accepted the Knowledge is TRUE.

Learn the Order. God gives individuals UNDERSTANDING of HIS WORD, "AFTER" a man trusts to Believe His Word IS TRUE...

Not AFTER a man is proclaiming and teaching other men, that his word is not (literally) true.

Or must it mean that everything in God's word needs to 'come about' in a literal sense? In other words: when God describes himself as a giant hen, then so he must be? Or Christ is literally a lamb...and a lion, and Satan is literally a snake or a dragon.

Your "human" Mind Limited to only what "you understand".

Gods "Understanding", is NOT measured by what YOUR Mind "Understands".

You see, just because something is true, does not mean it has to be taken literally. For example, if someone says, "today is hotter than h*ll", they do not mean that literally, but they do mean that the day is scorching. We do not suppose they are lying, or trying to "spiritualize" and therefore dismiss any notion of heat or weather.

Thank you for your expose' on the understanding of one Carnal Mind to another Carnal Mind.

What does that have to do with Gods Understanding? NOTHING!

Likewise, we know that Christ is not really a lamb, or a lion, but those descriptions give us true and precious images of his nature. Like a lamb to the slaughter went our Lord, a sacrifice in our place; and when he returns, he will be like a lion, triumphing in Majesty.

Interesting.
So Jesus was called the LAMB OF GOD.
That is simply a Scriptural true fact

What does a Carnal mind Understand a Lamb is? A fluffy 4 legged animal?

Did anything in Scripture say Jesus was an animal? Had four legs? No.

So for what purpose does man teach Jesus "was not a four legged animal" ?

Nothing in Scripture says He was.

Glory to God,
Taken
 

Harvest 1874

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2018
1,100
573
113
62
Tampa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hello there,

I loved the attitude and demeanour of the man who spoke in the video clip, I listened for a while, but chose not to see it through to the end. I chose not to, because dispensationalism is merely a means to an end. The end of all Bible study is the knowledge of God and of His Son, our Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, now risen and glorified. The knowledge also of our calling and the known will of God, doctrinally, in relation to it.

We who believe are God's workmanship, in Christ Jesus; and He is leading us, individually, into all truth, as we wait on Him. It is for us to read the Word, believe what it says, and apply it as appropriate. Taking into account, what is said, by whom, and to whom, at what time, and with what intent. Only by so doing will we be free of man's influence and be wholly reliant upon God for our walk in the spirit, our spiritual growth and sustenance.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

It is important to understand that not all teachings on dispensationalism are false, the scriptures do indeed teach dispensationalism, but not that which is commonly expressed by diehard dispensationalist.

The Apostle Peter talked about dispensationalism when he spoke of the three worlds or ages in 2 Pet 3.

Please see the thread Dispensationalism is it Scriptural? Post # 1, 2 and 13, which explains our point of view.
 

Harvest 1874

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2018
1,100
573
113
62
Tampa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
'These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,
and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.'

(Act 17:11)

Hi there,

Mr Charles Welch and Dr E.W. Bullinger, both respected teachers on the Word 'rightly divided'; urged those who read their studies to search the Scriptures for themselves, to see whether what they said was true. It is the responsibility of each one of us to do so, isn't it?
Therefore, it is no point pointing the finger at any one method of approach to the Word of God, for the responsibility for embracing any doctrine lies with you and I, before God, in Christ Jesus.

'According to the grace of God
which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder,
I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon.
But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,
which is Jesus Christ.'

(1 Cor 3:10-11)

Praise God!

In Christ Jesus
our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

Agreed,

"Individual Christians cannot shirk their personal responsibility in proving all things, placing it upon their ministers and teachers, nor upon councils and creeds. It is by the Word of the Lord that we (as individuals) are judged (John 12:48- 50; Rev. 20:12), and not by the opinions or precedents of our fellow- men in any capacity. Therefore all should imitate the noble Bereans who ‘searched the Scriptures daily’ to see if the things taught them were true" (Acts 17:11).
 
  • Like
Reactions: charity

charity

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2017
3,234
3,192
113
75
UK
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
It is important to understand that not all teachings on dispensationalism are false, the scriptures do indeed teach dispensationalism, but not that which is commonly expressed by diehard dispensationalist.

The Apostle Peter talked about dispensationalism when he spoke of the three worlds or ages in 2 Pet 3.

Please see the thread Dispensationalism is it Scriptural? Post # 1, 2 and 13, which explains our point of view.

Hello @Harvest 1874,

All that is taught concerning the Word of God has to be brought before the plumb-line of the Word of God itself, and judged accordingly, regardless of what school of thought it is the expression of.

I don't understand why it should be assumed that one particular school of thought, in this case 'Dispensationalism' should be any more subject to error than another.

In Christ Jesus
Chris
 

Harvest 1874

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2018
1,100
573
113
62
Tampa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hello @Harvest 1874,

All that is taught concerning the Word of God has to be brought before the plumb-line of the Word of God itself, and judged accordingly, regardless of what school of thought it is the expression of.

I don't understand why it should be assumed that one particular school of thought, in this case 'Dispensationalism' should be any more subject to error than another.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

This is what I am saying, Dispensationalism in itself is not error, but how it is used to promote an erroneous doctrine, such as the seven year tribulation theory is error.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009
D

Dave L

Guest
This is what I am saying, Dispensationalism in itself is not error, but how it is used to promote an erroneous doctrine, such as the seven year tribulation theory is error.
It's a complex system that has many deviations from scripture. But what I found most alarming is that it is not linked directly to scripture. They base all of their end time forecasts on a gap they insert into Daniel, that scripture never mentions. And then they fill their plate with scripture removed from its historical settings and context to support the theory. People hear lots of scripture thinking it must be true, but none of it actually says what they make it out to say. Challenge any for direct quotes from scripture about a 7 year tribulation. Or a pre-trib rapture. Or a restored Roman Empire. Or Russia marching on Israel, etc., and they cannot do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Belafonte

Hidden In Him

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
10,600
10,883
113
59
Lafayette, LA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have posted this video which I think is fair and balanced. I very much like this brother and his kindly approach. He actually acts like a brother. It's a bit long...but very worth the listen. Enjoy! :)


Episkopos, I've watched some of the video, and Steve Gregg does indeed seem like a nice fellow, but he's misrepresenting the truth about Dispensationalism's origins. He asserts (incessantly) that Darby was the founder of Dispensational thought, and doesn't seem to be aware that Irenaeus was teaching it in the 2nd century in great detail, and with surprising accuracy.

I can provide some quotations if you're interested.
 
Last edited:

charity

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2017
3,234
3,192
113
75
UK
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
It's a complex system that has many deviations from scripture. But what I found most alarming is that it is not linked directly to scripture. They base all of their end time forecasts on a gap they insert into Daniel, that scripture never mentions. And then they fill their plate with scripture removed from its historical settings and context to support the theory. People hear lots of scripture thinking it must be true, but none of it actually says what they make it out to say. Challenge any for direct quotes from scripture about a 7 year tribulation. Or a pre-trib rapture. Or a restored Roman Empire. Or Russia marching on Israel, etc., and they cannot do it.
Hello @Dave L,

With respect, you say, 'they', and thereby tar everyone with the same brush. 'They' are individuals, who have the same requirement to use the Berean spirit of Acts 17, as you and I.

My experience of dispensational teaching, (namely, 'The Berean Publishing Trust' of Wilson Street, London & works by, Charles Welch and Dr. E.W, Bullinger) has been extremely helpful. Everything is based firmly on the Word of God, and every doctrine brought to that plumb-line for confirmation. The accusations that you make in your post certainly cannot be laid to the door of that ministry at least.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Berean Publishing Trust
 
Last edited: