any evangelical non Dispensationalist here?

[Ginger]

You lost me Mondar... who's not being honest? Maybe we can correct them, if we knew who had erred. ... and if it was me, let me know, so I may correct myself. Thanks.

ah you make my point..so gracious and nice.
why mature good Christians are so important to others to be a living example of how Christians should be. thank you for encouraging me today by being a good example

 

[mondar]

The previous post came accross much more harsh then I intended it. My apologies.

It was actually intended as a criticism both ways. I admit to having some agreements with both dispensationalists and non-dispensationalists. I admit to also disagreeing with things said in both camps. My criticism was not intended to be harsh, but was as follows.

Dispensationalists---I hear dispensationalists claim that the other side "does not believe the bible." Such an accusation is not honest. The reformed belived in "sola scriptura" long before modern dispensationalism appeared. Another accusation I hear from dispensationalists is that the non-dispensationalist takes the bible non-literally. They say that there is a hermeneutical difference. I dont think that is correct. There might be a different starting point or a different methodology for the eschatology, but I think the issue is not hermeneutics.

Non-Dispensationalists---The thing bothering me about what I am reading about non-dispensationalists here is the accusation that dispensationalists believe that the "rapture" is a 2nd coming. Can anyone point to dispensational writings and show me where dispensationalists say the "rapture" is the 2nd coming?

Again, I did not intend to sound harsh. I guess I did question honesty and intregity, and that sounded harsh and I want to withdraw such language. People can make honest mistakes about the other persons theology.

 

[Vic C.]

Thanks Mondar, that was a good explanation of you first post. I agree the issue here is validity. Is what anyone is claiming validated? From my studies, I agree that pretribulationism doesn't view the harpazo as an "advent". I believe, and I think they'd agree, that the Parousia would consist of both the harpazo and the actual second coming as described in Acts 1:11.

Acts 1:11-Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Post tribulationism would see this as all one event; He comes and gathers. The other premillennial positions put a period of time between the two events. None of this is a matter of believing or not believing the Bible; it's a matter of interpretation and preconceived ideas based on, like you said, some point of reference or starting point. If one is convinced the ekkesia will not be subjected to satanic persecution, there is your starting point and your adherence to some sort of dispensationalism. http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html Note that Dispensationalism was not the accepted system of the Reformers, SO...

If you are true to your reformed beliefs, none of this even matters anyway! :-D For a reformed believer, the 70th. week is unrelated to a future tribulation period and anything in the future, it has passed. The ekklesia will not be subjected to a future 1260 day period of Great Tribulation; it would already be in a 1260 year tribulation period. Most of The Seals are events in the past and much prophesy is considered, "history, prewritten". Also, most of the Reformers were amillennialists.

Myself, I lean toward a historical premillennial view.

People, here is a site you may want to read. Dispensationalism: Part I - Millennial Views Prior to the Rise of Dispensationalism

 

[mondar]

Post tribulationism would see this as all one event; He comes and gathers. The other premillennial positions put a period of time between the two events. None of this is a matter of believing or not believing the Bible; it's a matter of interpretation and preconceived ideas based on, like you said, some point of reference or starting point. If one is convinced the ekkesia will not be subjected to satanic persecution, there is your starting point and your adherence to some sort of dispensationalism. http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html Note that Dispensationalism was not the accepted system of the Reformers, SO...

If you are true to your reformed beliefs, none of this even matters anyway! :-D For a reformed believer, the 70th. week is unrelated to a future tribulation period and anything in the future, it has passed. The ekklesia will not be subjected to a future 1260 day period of Great Tribulation; it would already be in a 1260 year tribulation period. Most of The Seals are events in the past and much prophesy is considered, "history, prewritten". Also, most of the Reformers were amillennialists.

Myself, I lean toward a historical premillennial view.

People, here is a site you may want to read. Dispensationalism: Part I - Millennial Views Prior to the Rise of Dispensationalism

Vic,
I am presently working on understanding the Historical PreMillenial position more deeply. I bought a book on the kingdom by Eldon George Ladd. Have you ever heard of him? I find what he wrote interesting but I need more time to finish the book and then to process what I read. One of the things I appreciate about Ladd is his idea that the kingdom is present now, and there will also be a future fulfillment of the kingdom. I want to reread his section on the future kingdom, I am not sure what he is saying about the differences between the present and future.

Concerning Reformed theology being only Amil or PostMil.... That is true. Neither did they believe in credo-baptism. There were also other differences within the Reformers. Zwingli did not agree with Luther on the place of the Lords Supper. Calvin had yet different views. Do you think dispensationalism is incompatible with reformed theology?

Then there are the progressive dispensationalists. I read a book by Saucy. He recognizes a present partial kingdom. He believes there will be a future more complete fulfillment. I have read comments on the similarities between progressive dispensationalism and historic premillenialism. Progressive dispensationalism has not seemed to take much of a position on the Rapture question. Both progressive dispensationalism and historic premillenialism are fairly recent positions and have things to work through. What is the exact nature of the kingdom... Or kingdoms?

Some have said that Dispensationalism died in the late 1980s. I have read complaints that Dispensationalism is such a broad spectrum of eschatologies that no one even knows what a person believes when he says "I am a dispensationalist." Yet Amillenialism and Postillenialism have broad spectrums of specifics within their respective eschatologies. There are different levels of preterism.

 

[Vic C.]

Vic,
I am presently working on understanding the Historical PreMillenial position more deeply. I bought a book on the kingdom by Eldon George Ladd. Have you ever heard of him? I find what he wrote interesting but I need more time to finish the book and then to process what I read. One of the things I appreciate about Ladd is his idea that the kingdom is present now, and there will also be a future fulfillment of the kingdom. I want to reread his section on the future kingdom, I am not sure what he is saying about the differences between the present and future.

Yes, I know of Ladd. Jason (JM) had introduced me to Ladd, when JM was still posting here. I really need to pick up a book or two of his and dig into them.

Jason also introduced me to http://www.historicist.com and the observations of Newton in particular. I was impressed enough by Newton's beliefs on Daniel and Revelation that it caused me to reevaluate my beliefs in eschatology.

I'm not so sure about the "Kingdom Now" beliefs... I'm certainly not a believer in "dominion theology" anyway. If there is a present Kingdom, it is invisible to us. All I see is an increasing apostasy in the "growing (emerging) church". :-?

Do you think dispensationalism is incompatible with reformed theology?

Good question. My first response would be no. My second response would be, it depends on how one understands and believes about dispensationalism. Even if one isn't a dispensationalist, they'd still have to concede there are two, old and new covenants. I believe though that Reformed theology is more in line with covenant theology anyway.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Any posters here (don't believe in the left behind novels to simplify things LOL)? I have found since moving to the US that most evangelical churches heavily are. Speaking to Christians here they have never even been told there are other evangelical (not wacky) beliefs re eschatology. :o

I believe in the 2nd coming of Christ one and one time only (no secret rapture etc).....

I agree with you. But then again, I'm a Catholic, not an Evangelical. :-D

But now that I think about it, since the term "evangelical" comes from the Greek word for "Gospel" or "good news", and since the Catholic Church is 2000 years old, maybe I'm the ORIGINAL evangelical :D .

But you said it correctly when you said: "..the 2nd coming of Christ one and one time only..".
.

.

 

[Paidion]

All of the church leaders until the end of the second century taught the coming of Christ from a historic pre-millenialist position. That is also the position I hold.

Dispensationalism did not come into existence until about 1830.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

All of the church leaders until the end of the second century taught the coming of Christ from a historic pre-millenialist position. That is also the position I hold.

Dispensationalism did not come into existence until about 1830.

Not true. The early Christians tended to agree with Augustine and the amillennialists' position. The Christian position has thus historically been "amillennial", including that of the Protestant Reformers

Premillennialists believe that the thousand years is an earthly golden age during which the world will be thoroughly Christianized, and they believe that it will occur after the Second Coming rather than before. But Scripture does not support the idea of a thousand year span between the Second Coming and the Final Judgment. Christ declares, "For the Son of man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay every man for what he has done" (Matt. 16:27), and "[w]hen the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. . . . And they [the goats] will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matt. 25:31–32, 46).

 

[Vic C.]

1 Cor 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
1 Cor 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

 

[Vic C.]

All of the church leaders until the end of the second century taught the coming of Christ from a historic pre-millenialist position. That is also the position I hold.

Dispensationalism did not come into existence until about 1830.

Not true. The early Christians tended to agree with Augustine and the amillennialists' position. The Christian position has thus historically been "amillennial", including that of the Protestant Reformers

b. Historic premillennialism draws its name from the fact that many of the early Church Fathers (i.e. Ireneaus [140-203], who as a disciple of Polycarp, who had been an disciple of the apostle of John, Justin Martyr [100-165], and Papias [80-155]), apparently believed and taught that there would be a visible kingdom of God upon the earth, after the return of Christ.

http://www.aracnet.com/~wing/esc_chrt.htm

Can anyone verity this before I do the research tomorrow?

BTW, the link above is a good site showing the differences between Dispensational Premillennialism and Historic Premillennialism. Much of it is based on George Ladd's beliefs.

 

[sheshisown]

Jason also introduced me to http://www.historicist.com and the observations of Newton in particular. I was impressed enough by Newton's beliefs on Daniel and Revelation that it caused me to reevaluate my beliefs in eschatology.

Hey Vic~ Where did you study Newton's beliefs in escatology? How do I find his writtings on Daniel and revelation? I admire his faith and walk with Christ and his fine mind, could you point me specifically to a website that includes His views on this topic? Thanks! :-D

All of the church leaders until the end of the second century taught the coming of Christ from a historic pre-millenialist position. That is also the position I hold.

Dispensationalism did not come into existence until about 1830.

Hi Paidion~ May I ask if you also know what caused the move toward dispensationalism in that era, and possibly what church or group it sprang from? I'm interested in researching the background of these theologies. Thanks for any simply explained information. :D bonnie

 

[mondar]

Hi Paidion~ May I ask if you also know what caused the move toward dispensationalism in that era, and possibly what church or group it sprang from? I'm interested in researching the background of these theologies. Thanks for any simply explained information. :D bonnie

John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren.

 

[turnorburn]

Hey Vic~ Where did you study Newton's beliefs in escatology? How do I find his writtings on Daniel and revelation? I admire his faith and walk with Christ and his fine mind, could you point me specifically to a website that includes His views on this topic? Thanks! :-D


That Newton link: http://members.aol.com/mariostz/christi ... ology.html

Reformed Christian Eschatology

Eschaton, Nâ'ba, and other often Neglected Topics
From Reformed Christian Perspectives



[ Theology | > Eschatology | Apologetics | Top ]
Reformed Church Eschatology!
The Historic Reformed Church view of Eschatology by many imminent Reformed Theologians covering topics such as the millennial reign of Revelation 20, and the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, from a 'distinctly Reformed' Perspective!
Biblical Eschatology!
This site has a Collection of Articles and papers on Millennialism, the reign of Christ, and Biblically based eschatological teachings of the Reformed Church.
The Historicism Research Foundation
The Historicism Research Foundation is a non-profit organiation that exists to promote the historical interpretation of biblical prophecy that the Westminster Confession (1646) espouses.The Rev. Prof. Dr. Francis Nigel Lee serves as our advisor.
The End Times
A collection of Studies and articles by different authors on the end time events.
The Final Tribulation
Days of Vengeance! (c)Bruno Kolberg [Second Edition, 1998], This book is a biblical analysis of end-time prophecy, particularly as it relates to the period we call The Tribulation. The first edition was published in May 1993 with a print run of 3000 (now exhausted).
Reformed Eschatology!
Collection of Articles on Reformed Eschatology from various Reformed authors. From Reformed Sovereign Grace Literature Home Page
His Tomorrow
Dedicated to equipping the saints with solid, Biblical exegesis of end-times prophecy in the Bible. Position taken is the same as that of Sir Isaac Newton, Matthew Henry, and Charles Spurgeon: Pre-millennial Historicism.
Your Reformed Eschatology Page

Description

Awe, I'm probably way off base here :smt064

 

[Vic C.]

Hi Paidion~ May I ask if you also know what caused the move toward dispensationalism in that era, and possibly what church or group it sprang from? I'm interested in researching the background of these theologies. Thanks for any simply explained information. :D bonnie

John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren.

Hi Bonnie, while you're at it, it would be worth researching the origins of the futuristic views of End Times.

Jesuits and futurism: Francisco Ribera, Emmanuel Lacunza

http://www.google.com/search?q=jesuit+p ... =firefox-a


Turn, thanks for the link. :D

 

[Vic C.]

Bonnie, your post got me a bit confused. Your part of the post got caught up in the quote.

But if you go to that link I provided, it is loaded with Newton links. His "picture" is even on the main page. ;-)

You can also visit here: http://www.isaac-newton.org/

Remember that Newton wasn't a Reformer like Luther, Calvin and the others; he didn't preach; be dedicated his studies to writing commentaries and observations. He understood and read the Bible from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.

 

[sheshisown]

Gee thanks guys~ :-D

Sorry for my fauty use of the quote references in my previous thread. DUH! :P

It looks like I'll be reading for months! So far I love the historical accounts of Newton's theology and philosophy of nature. I was completely unaware of his nontrinitarian theology, and his belief that God is also omnitemporal.

That God is ominpresent means He is present everywhere at once.
Then the idea that God is omintemporal means He is sequential or chronilogical in nature? How this plays out in the bible is a mystery to me at this time.

Newton also believed in a non personal devil? That would follow the idea of a non personal God~ Newton was a nontrinitarian. His concept of God is therefore without personality that co-exists, a God that interchanges all attributes, yet does not converse in continual relationship within His Godhead. What kind of interactions with his creation, or the fallen angel Lucifer, are realistic and biblical within this view? There is something anti-relational about this theology in its conceptual leading.

Newton also believed the created space and time of Genesis one to be absolute. That time and space are unlimited, unconditional, and supreme? God's attributes all carry absolutism. God is unlimited, unconditional, and supreme. However He is separate from His creation which is temporal. I do not see the idea of absolute time and space biblically, rather its reverse. For what God has created is within His hand to change, exchange, limit, and to ask conditions of, should He desire. Certainly He limited time when He held the earth in it's orbit about the sun for Joshua~ extending that day. He has designed a future that is eternal in it's essence for us, how can that existance mark time?

This stirs my mind to wonder about Newton's understanding of creation. His studies in the philosophy of nature were highly influencial, the papers and letters provided in my English and literaray classes promote mostly Newton's mathmatical genius, and little of his theology.

Obviously, I have much more to glean from these sources~ if any of you think you may direct, or correct my first impressions, please do. Tangents are goose trails that simply waste my existance.

In the Light of Christ ever~ bonnie

 

[Vic C.]

Gee thanks guys~ :-D

Sorry for my fauty use of the quote references in my previous thread. DUH! :P

It looks like I'll be reading for months! So far I love the historical accounts of Newton's theology and philosophy of nature. I was completely unaware of his nontrinitarian theology, and his belief that God is also omnitemporal....

... This stirs my mind to wonder about Newton's understanding of creation. His studies in the philosophy of nature were highly influencial, the papers and letters provided in my English and literaray classes promote mostly Newton's mathmatical genius, and little of his theology.

Obviously, I have much more to glean from these sources~ if any of you think you may direct, or correct my first impressions, please do. Tangents are goose trails that simply waste my existance.

In the Light of Christ ever~ bonnie

Months? Try years! LOL It took me months just do partially grasp some of what he wrote about Daniel. But it finally clicked and made sense. His knowledge of Hebrew and Greek and his unmatched math skills (he kept his formula for calculus secret for decades) weren't taken lightly. But...

At the end of the seventeenth century, Isaac Newton (1642-1727) initiated a revolution in science. At the end of the twentieth century, scholars began a revolution in the understanding of Newton. As Newton's long-concealed private papers on theology become increasingly accessible, students of Newton's thought are coming to see Newton as more than a scientist.

http://www.isaac-newton.org/

After reading some of his most unorthodox beliefs, it's no wonder his 4,000,000 + written words on the Bible were kept secret. ;-)

 

[Paidion]

Hi Paidion~ May I ask if you also know what caused the move toward dispensationalism in that era, and possibly what church or group it sprang from? I'm interested in researching the background of these theologies. Thanks for any simply explained information. bonnie

Bonnie, I believe Dave MacPherson has come up with the true story in his book The Incredible Coverup. You can do a search for this book and order it if you are interested.

Many pre-tribs have attempted to discredit MacPherson's writings, but, in my opinion, have not succeeded.

Dave's account, as I remember it from reading this book, is that a young woman named Margaret MacDonald attended the Catholic Apostolic Church. This church believed that God had restored apostles to the church as well as the gifts of the Spirit. In about 1830, Margaret received revelations which included that of Jesus coming before the Great Tribulation and snatching up all true Christians. He would come again after the tribulation to judge the world.

John N. Darby, who led the "exclusive brethren", an extreme wing of the so-called Plymouth Brethren, attended a meeting and heard the pre-trib message from Miss MacDonald. Darby wasn't interested in the restoration of the apostolic ministry or the restoration of the gifts, but he was fascinated by this message. He brought it back to his churches, and from their it spread to the more open groups of "Plymouth Brethren." It continued to spread throughout many evangelical and fundamentalist churches, and is still widely accepted, though not as much as it was 50 or 60 years ago.

Dave Macpherson has written several other books on the topic as well.