Excerpts From Chapter One"Christian Zionism: Its History, Theology and Politics by Stephen SIZER,
AAARGH Internet Editions 2005
pdf Christian Zionism: Its History, Theology and Politics
www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres2/SIZERchriszion.pdfSimilar
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
"Darby and Scofield taught,
as a consequence, that God has two separate but parallel means of working, one through the church,
the other through Israel, the former being a parenthesis to the later.111 Thus there is, and always will
remain, a distinction, 'between Israel, the Gentiles and the Church.'112 It was Darby who first insisted
that, 'The Jewish nation is never to enter the Church.'113 Likewise Scofield elaborated,
Comparing then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, we find that in
origin, calling, promise, worship, principles of conduct and future destiny all is contrast."
Lewis Sperry Chafer, the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, elaborates further on this
dichotomy between Israel and the church,
The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes:
one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the
other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is
Christianity.116
For Chafer, 'Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on
which David rules from an eternal throne'117 so that in eternity, '...never the twain, Israel and church,
shall meet.' 118 Ryrie even concedes the conclusion of his critic Daniel Fuller in stating that the,
...basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two
peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity.119
Certain implications follow the unconditional nature of the Abrahamic covenant. For
dispensationalists, logically, Israel can do no wrong."
"This is probably the most basic theological test of whether or not a person is a dispensationalist,
and it is undoubtedly the most practical and conclusive. The one who fails to distinguish Israel and the
church consistently will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctions; and one who does will.123
Dispensationalism is based on a hermeneutic in which all Scripture, and especially the
prophetic, must always be interpreted literally. Darby's hermeneutic might be summed up in this
sentence in which he admitted, 'I prefer quoting many passages than enlarging upon them.'124
Scofield, who popularised and synthesised Darby's theology, taught,
Not one instance exists of a 'spiritual' or figurative fulfilment of prophecy... Jerusalem is always
Jerusalem, Israel is always Israel, Zion is always Zion... Prophecies may never be spiritualised, but
are always literal.125
Ryrie similarly asserts,
To be sure, literal/historical/grammatical interpretation is not the sole possession or practice of
dispensationalists, but the consistent use of it in all areas of biblical interpretation is".126
"Dwight Pentecost goes as far as to insist that,
Scripture is unintelligible until one can distinguish clearly between God's program for his earthly
people Israel and that for the Church.127"
"Nevertheless based on such an interpretative principle, dispensationalists hold that the
promises made to Abraham and through him to Israel, although postponed during the church age,
were nevertheless eternal and unconditional and therefore await future fulfilment since they have
never yet been literally fulfilled in their entirety. So, for example, it is an article of normative
dispensational belief that all Israel will be literally saved; that the boundaries of the land promised to
Abraham and his descendants will be literally instituted; and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and
theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on Jerusalem. In such a scheme the church on earth is relegated
to the status of a parenthesis130, '...a sort of footnote or sidetrack in contrast to God's main mission to
save ethnic, national Israel.'131"
"In the light of this principle, it is legitimate to ask whether dispensationalism is not orientated
more from the Abrahamic Covenant than from the Cross. Is not its focus centred more on the Jewish
kingdom than on the Body of Christ? Does it not interpret the New Testament in the light of Old
Testament prophecies, instead of interpreting those prophecies in the light of the more complete
revelation of the New Testament?136
Notwithstanding such serious criticisms, dispensationalism increasingly came to replace the
simpler form of historic premillennialism.137 Writing in 1958, Norman Kraus could observe how,
...the dispensationalists had won the day so completely that for the next fifty years friend and
foe alike largely identified dispensationalism with premillennialism.138
Today, premillennial dispensationalism still dominates American evangelicalism and
fundamentalism. R. C. Sproul concedes that dispensationalism is now '...a theological system that in
all probability is the majority report among current American evangelicals.'139"
Tracing the development of Christian Zionism from the mid-19th and early 20th Century, the
premillennial dispensationalist preoccupation with a distinctly Jewish millennium preceded by a pretribulation
rapture of the church and an end-time gathering of the remnant of Israel, came to replace
the simpler form of historic premillennialism.148"
"Crucial to the dispensationalist reading of biblical prophecy is the
conviction that the period of tribulation is imminent along with the secret rapture of the church and the
rebuilding of the Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount. This will signal the return of the Lord to restore
the Kingdom to Israel centred on Jerusalem. This pivotal event is also seen as the trigger for the start
of the war of Armageddon in which large numbers of Jews will suffer and die.162"
..
AAARGH Internet Editions 2005
pdf Christian Zionism: Its History, Theology and Politics
www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres2/SIZERchriszion.pdfSimilar
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
"Darby and Scofield taught,
as a consequence, that God has two separate but parallel means of working, one through the church,
the other through Israel, the former being a parenthesis to the later.111 Thus there is, and always will
remain, a distinction, 'between Israel, the Gentiles and the Church.'112 It was Darby who first insisted
that, 'The Jewish nation is never to enter the Church.'113 Likewise Scofield elaborated,
Comparing then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, we find that in
origin, calling, promise, worship, principles of conduct and future destiny all is contrast."
Lewis Sperry Chafer, the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, elaborates further on this
dichotomy between Israel and the church,
The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes:
one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the
other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is
Christianity.116
For Chafer, 'Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on
which David rules from an eternal throne'117 so that in eternity, '...never the twain, Israel and church,
shall meet.' 118 Ryrie even concedes the conclusion of his critic Daniel Fuller in stating that the,
...basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two
peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity.119
Certain implications follow the unconditional nature of the Abrahamic covenant. For
dispensationalists, logically, Israel can do no wrong."
"This is probably the most basic theological test of whether or not a person is a dispensationalist,
and it is undoubtedly the most practical and conclusive. The one who fails to distinguish Israel and the
church consistently will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctions; and one who does will.123
Dispensationalism is based on a hermeneutic in which all Scripture, and especially the
prophetic, must always be interpreted literally. Darby's hermeneutic might be summed up in this
sentence in which he admitted, 'I prefer quoting many passages than enlarging upon them.'124
Scofield, who popularised and synthesised Darby's theology, taught,
Not one instance exists of a 'spiritual' or figurative fulfilment of prophecy... Jerusalem is always
Jerusalem, Israel is always Israel, Zion is always Zion... Prophecies may never be spiritualised, but
are always literal.125
Ryrie similarly asserts,
To be sure, literal/historical/grammatical interpretation is not the sole possession or practice of
dispensationalists, but the consistent use of it in all areas of biblical interpretation is".126
"Dwight Pentecost goes as far as to insist that,
Scripture is unintelligible until one can distinguish clearly between God's program for his earthly
people Israel and that for the Church.127"
"Nevertheless based on such an interpretative principle, dispensationalists hold that the
promises made to Abraham and through him to Israel, although postponed during the church age,
were nevertheless eternal and unconditional and therefore await future fulfilment since they have
never yet been literally fulfilled in their entirety. So, for example, it is an article of normative
dispensational belief that all Israel will be literally saved; that the boundaries of the land promised to
Abraham and his descendants will be literally instituted; and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and
theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on Jerusalem. In such a scheme the church on earth is relegated
to the status of a parenthesis130, '...a sort of footnote or sidetrack in contrast to God's main mission to
save ethnic, national Israel.'131"
"In the light of this principle, it is legitimate to ask whether dispensationalism is not orientated
more from the Abrahamic Covenant than from the Cross. Is not its focus centred more on the Jewish
kingdom than on the Body of Christ? Does it not interpret the New Testament in the light of Old
Testament prophecies, instead of interpreting those prophecies in the light of the more complete
revelation of the New Testament?136
Notwithstanding such serious criticisms, dispensationalism increasingly came to replace the
simpler form of historic premillennialism.137 Writing in 1958, Norman Kraus could observe how,
...the dispensationalists had won the day so completely that for the next fifty years friend and
foe alike largely identified dispensationalism with premillennialism.138
Today, premillennial dispensationalism still dominates American evangelicalism and
fundamentalism. R. C. Sproul concedes that dispensationalism is now '...a theological system that in
all probability is the majority report among current American evangelicals.'139"
Tracing the development of Christian Zionism from the mid-19th and early 20th Century, the
premillennial dispensationalist preoccupation with a distinctly Jewish millennium preceded by a pretribulation
rapture of the church and an end-time gathering of the remnant of Israel, came to replace
the simpler form of historic premillennialism.148"
"Crucial to the dispensationalist reading of biblical prophecy is the
conviction that the period of tribulation is imminent along with the secret rapture of the church and the
rebuilding of the Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount. This will signal the return of the Lord to restore
the Kingdom to Israel centred on Jerusalem. This pivotal event is also seen as the trigger for the start
of the war of Armageddon in which large numbers of Jews will suffer and die.162"
..
