Dispensation Premillennialism: Fact or Fiction?

[Arial]

John Darby is generally credited as the father of dispensational premillennialism. This has been disputed by dispensational premillennialist on the grounds that it elements can be found among other theologians and in previous time periods to Darby (b. 1800 d 1892). That ignores the word "father" and also that the claim relates to modern dispensational premillennialism. It is a matter of debate whether Darby had redemption divided into seven dispensations or three. And he did not call them dispensations but simply ways in which God tests humanity. Modern dispensational premillennialism has seven, serving the same purpose.

In both this remains true. Quoted from daretothink.info/dispensationalism/the-origins-and-tenets-of-dispensational-premillennialism/



" Darby’s innovative approach to theology, particularly his division of history into dispensations—periods during which God tests humanity—laid the groundwork for Dispensational Premillennialism. He posited that God had two distinct peoples: the earthly Israel and the heavenly Church. According to Darby, the Church was a temporary phase in God’s plan, destined to end with the secret rapture, after which God would resume His dealings with Israel."

Does that have any biblical precedent? If one interprets the Bible by dividing it into specific ways in which God deals with and tests humanity, one could certainly find scriptures to support that view. Though imo, they would need to be isolated from the consistency of the whole of Scripture. So the question is, is that what the Bible, as a whole, is, and is doing? Is that what determines interpretation?

I don't believe it is. First, in Gen, it gives the account of creation, including the creation of mankind, the fall of humanity through Adam, and a declaration. A curse on the serpent who deceived Eve and instigated a rebellion. A promise that her seed would crush his head. That is the central destination of everything that follows. Everything that follows is connected and anchored in that verse (Gen 3:14-15). Jesus is the focus in every page, the main actor in every page. It is in the covenants that God makes with mankind that we see a uniformity of purpose. And these covenants are not ways in which God interacts with humanity to test them. They are relationships that he forms with mankind that lead to the ultimate and final relationship. God dwelling with us. He will be our God and we will be his people (Rev 21).

I am going to give an example of what dispensational premillennialism does to the full counsel of God. The example will come from John MacArthur's study Bible. This is not to bash him, I am sure his is basking in the presence of the Lord right now. Much of what he taught is consistent with the Reformed/Calvinist Doctrines of Grace. I can understand why the millions of people who agree with his teaching and are swayed by it, would just accept it as truth, given the source. He was a great theologian and teacher. What I don't understand is how, as such, he could have been swayed and interpret particularly OT prophecy, Revelation, and the couple of passages in the NT that are the staple of proof of a pre-trib rapture and a seven year tribulation. And do so from the premise of those things. My observation is to everyone, including myself, that we all must be very careful, to check and recheck and recheck again, anything that we see as truth or fact, against the whole counsel of God. That being said, I did that before posting this to the best of my ability, and I expect to be corrected where it is necessary---but with sound biblical support done by the one who corrects.

The Scripture: Ez 43: 19
"You shall give a young bull for a sin offering to the priests, the Levites who are of the seed of Zadok, who approach me to minister to me," says the Lord God.

MacArthur's study note: "Exact offerings in language just as literal as the descriptions given in Moses' day are also just as literal here.They are of a memorial nature; they are not efficacious anymore than OT sacrifices were, As OT sacrifices pointed forward to Christ's death, so these are tangible expressions, not competing with, but pointing back to the value of Christ's sacrifice, once for all (Heb 9:28; 10:10). God at that time endorsed OT offerings as tokens of forgiving and cleansing worshipers on the basis and credit of the Great Lamb they pointed to, who alone could take away sins (John 1:29). The tangible expressions of worship which the Israelites for so long will at least be offered acceptably, then with full understanding about the Lamb of God to whom they point."

This is a dispensational premillennialism interpretation of prophecy. It does not consider the form of OT prophecy and how it is to be interpreted. It often has an immediate application to those it is being given to, but often goes beyond that within the same prophecy to the ultimate fulfillment when Christ arrives and does his redemptive work, and even at times beyond that to the consummation of redemption. MacArthur here is interpreting the things found in Eze. as applying only to Israel as dis'/premil has two separate people of God or kingdoms of God. And he is applying this temple that is being measured and the reinstated sacrifices to a restored Israel in some future 1000 year period. So, even if the measurements and everything in them including the above verses are literal, and they may be, Ezek. was prophesying from exile in Babylon. The temple was rebuilt in Ezra's time. And even if the measurements are literal, they also have a spiritual significance. They are what they are because they are signing something. In any case, there is no reason to apply this to a rebuilt third temple after Christ's return and before the return of the Church. (Which is what is done in dispen/amil.)

Aside from that, the idea of animal sacrifices being reinstated, no matter what gymnastics with words are used to justify it, is antithetical to Heb 10:8-9 When he said above, "You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law). then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second.

The covenant that over arches the entire Bible is the eternal covenant between the Godhead before creation. Therefore Christ is the central figure always, never geo/politcal Israel. The covenant with Israel is a part of the Covenant of Redemption, not a separate interaction/testing by God of mankind. The Redeemer, the promised Seed, comes through Israel and Israel is a shadow of the things to come, just as the animal sacrifices were. That is the value of Israel, and it is no small value, but it is not what the Bible is interpreted through as its own central figure.

 

[CrowCross]

John Darby is generally credited as the father of dispensational premillennialism. This has been disputed by dispensational premillennialist on the grounds that it elements can be found among other theologians and in previous time periods to Darby (b. 1800 d 1892). That ignores the word "father" and also that the claim relates to modern dispensational premillennialism. It is a matter of debate whether Darby had redemption divided into seven dispensations or three. And he did not call them dispensations but simply ways in which God tests humanity. Modern dispensational premillennialism has seven, serving the same purpose.

A HISTORY OF PRE-DARBY RAPTURE ADVOCATES

by Thomas Ice

Critics of pretribulationism frequently state that belief in the rapture is a doctrinal

development of entirely recent origin. They argued that the doctrine of the rapture or

any semblance of it was completely unknown before the early 1800s and the writings of

John Nelson Darby. While it is clear that pretribulationism was not widely known since

the days of the New Testament writers, there have been clear examples of some form of

pretribulationism sprinkled throughout church history.......want to read more?

In both this remains true. Quoted from daretothink.info/dispensationalism/the-origins-and-tenets-of-dispensational-premillennialism/



" Darby’s innovative approach to theology, particularly his division of history into dispensations—periods during which God tests humanity—laid the groundwork for Dispensational Premillennialism. He posited that God had two distinct peoples: the earthly Israel and the heavenly Church. According to Darby, the Church was a temporary phase in God’s plan, destined to end with the secret rapture, after which God would resume His dealings with Israel."

Does that have any biblical precedent? If one interprets the Bible by dividing it into specific ways in which God deals with and tests humanity, one could certainly find scriptures to support that view. Though imo, they would need to be isolated from the consistency of the whole of Scripture. So the question is, is that what the Bible, as a whole, is, and is doing? Is that what determines interpretation?

I don't believe it is. First, in Gen, it gives the account of creation, including the creation of mankind, the fall of humanity through Adam, and a declaration. A curse on the serpent who deceived Eve and instigated a rebellion. A promise that her seed would crush his head. That is the central destination of everything that follows. Everything that follows is connected and anchored in that verse (Gen 3:14-15). Jesus is the focus in every page, the main actor in every page. It is in the covenants that God makes with mankind that we see a uniformity of purpose. And these covenants are not ways in which God interacts with humanity to test them. They are relationships that he forms with mankind that lead to the ultimate and final relationship. God dwelling with us. He will be our God and we will be his people (Rev 21).

I am going to give an example of what dispensational premillennialism does to the full counsel of God. The example will come from John MacArthur's study Bible. This is not to bash him, I am sure his is basking in the presence of the Lord right now. Much of what he taught is consistent with the Reformed/Calvinist Doctrines of Grace. I can understand why the millions of people who agree with his teaching and are swayed by it, would just accept it as truth, given the source. He was a great theologian and teacher. What I don't understand is how, as such, he could have been swayed and interpret particularly OT prophecy, Revelation, and the couple of passages in the NT that are the staple of proof of a pre-trib rapture and a seven year tribulation. And do so from the premise of those things. My observation is to everyone, including myself, that we all must be very careful, to check and recheck and recheck again, anything that we see as truth or fact, against the whole counsel of God. That being said, I did that before posting this to the best of my ability, and I expect to be corrected where it is necessary---but with sound biblical support done by the one who corrects.

The Scripture: Ez 43: 19
"You shall give a young bull for a sin offering to the priests, the Levites who are of the seed of Zadok, who approach me to minister to me," says the Lord God.

MacArthur's study note: "Exact offerings in language just as literal as the descriptions given in Moses' day are also just as literal here.They are of a memorial nature; they are not efficacious anymore than OT sacrifices were, As OT sacrifices pointed forward to Christ's death, so these are tangible expressions, not competing with, but pointing back to the value of Christ's sacrifice, once for all (Heb 9:28; 10:10). God at that time endorsed OT offerings as tokens of forgiving and cleansing worshipers on the basis and credit of the Great Lamb they pointed to, who alone could take away sins (John 1:29). The tangible expressions of worship which the Israelites for so long will at least be offered acceptably, then with full understanding about the Lamb of God to whom they point."

This is a dispensational premillennialism interpretation of prophecy. It does not consider the form of OT prophecy and how it is to be interpreted. It often has an immediate application to those it is being given to, but often goes beyond that within the same prophecy to the ultimate fulfillment when Christ arrives and does his redemptive work, and even at times beyond that to the consummation of redemption. MacArthur here is interpreting the things found in Eze. as applying only to Israel as dis'/premil has two separate people of God or kingdoms of God. And he is applying this temple that is being measured and the reinstated sacrifices to a restored Israel in some future 1000 year period. So, even if the measurements and everything in them including the above verses are literal, and they may be, Ezek. was prophesying from exile in Babylon. The temple was rebuilt in Ezra's time. And even if the measurements are literal, they also have a spiritual significance. They are what they are because they are signing something. In any case, there is no reason to apply this to a rebuilt third temple after Christ's return and before the return of the Church. (Which is what is done in dispen/amil.)

Aside from that, the idea of animal sacrifices being reinstated, no matter what gymnastics with words are used to justify it, is antithetical to Heb 10:8-9 When he said above, "You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law). then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second.

The covenant that over arches the entire Bible is the eternal covenant between the Godhead before creation. Therefore Christ is the central figure always, never geo/politcal Israel. The covenant with Israel is a part of the Covenant of Redemption, not a separate interaction/testing by God of mankind. The Redeemer, the promised Seed, comes through Israel and Israel is a shadow of the things to come, just as the animal sacrifices were. That is the value of Israel, and it is no small value, but it is not what the Bible is interpreted through as its own central figure.