Is This Typical Dispensationalist Thinking?

[makesends]

This was to me an astounding answer. From another site, first the question of a pretty well-read, and purportedly seeking, non-believer:​

"Hi... I'm still searching and not settled yet.

Can i ask.. how do Christians read the OT? How do you approach it? What should a Christian have in mind when going through the OT.
How important is it to read the OT for Christians?

Thank you."

Maybe the guy is, and maybe not, sincere, but wow, what kind of answer is this (below)????? —Is this what someone asking that question (above) needs to hear about the Old Testament?? Is this what Dispensationalists are all about? Is this typical of Dispensationalists? It's like the guy does all he can do avoid the gospel, or, maybe this IS his gospel. Is the gospel —to him at least— a separate thing to be handled apart from the rest of the Bible, instead of pervading the Bible?​

"When the old testament (covenant or contract) was established with the nation of Israel it was with the purpose of their being a nation of priests to bring the knowledge of God to the whole world. Most of the Old Testament is a record of the repeated failures of the nation to fulfill the promise their ancestors made.

"In the Old Testament are promises of a new covenant that would be given to the nation in the future. The gospel portion of the New Testament describes Jesus offering to the nation of Israel the earthly kingdom as promised. The gospel (good news) of the kingdom was not received by most. The book of Acts describes the decreasing possibility of Israel reviving the kingdom at that time.

"The boo of Acts also describes the call of Paul to be an apostle to the gentiles. The gospel of grace for the gentiles was not revealed in the past because Israel was given the opportunity to receive their earthly kingdom.

"The new testament (covenant or contract) with Israel has not yet been established. It will be when a surviving faithful remnant of Israel receives the return of Jesus and the earthly kingdom is established. This will be at the end of a seven year period of tribulation."

 

[makesends]

For comparison, (and not that I am any authority on the subject, nor anything else like that—there are plenty even on that site that would say better than I do here, but), here is how I answered the OP:​

"The OT begins the story of Redemption, which was God's plan from the very beginning, and the reason (redemption and its end-result) for him to create in the first place. The whole thing, OT and NT, is the Gospel. The infinite difference and distance between God and man, and between holiness and sin, was overcome by God himself dying in our place, instead of rectifying the horror of that blemish on his perfect creation by zapping us into oblivion. He caused that difference to be, and he accomplished his purposes by use of it. (See Acts 2:23)

"If a Christian must (or should) read the OT with something in mind, I suggest reading it looking for God's purposes and for his nature. And you didn't ask this, but I suggest reading very large amounts at a sitting, to get a feel for whole books and whole themes—not to avoid particular things from your notice, but for larger matters to come clear, for example, God's tender care in the face of his omnipotent absolute purity. If you are like me, you will even begin to see cross-references that aren't in any textbook—"this" over here in this book sounding like "that" over there in that other book. You will see a consistent God throughout, who has every reason to accomplish what he set out to do from the beginning, and does not change, and THAT being the whole of history.

"Creation is not a fact into which God must fit himself. It was made by him for his purposes, and he is pervasive throughout it. It is not just developing and evolving on its own. HE is driving it. To get an idea of his power, picture the universe swirling around his ankles. He's not just another fact within it. The universe is his doing, and it is reality because HE says so.

"THAT is found in the Old Testament. And found in both the OT and NT is the amazement that that magnificent God should bother to make us, and the realization that he made us for HIS purposes, for himself. It shows us completely at his mercy, which, it turns out, is the ONLY safe place to be."

 

[JesusFan]

Would say that at times those holding to CT have placed too much emphasis upon strictly spiritual and allegorical prophecy understandings, while those into DT tend to see too much literal meaning into prophetic understandings

 

[makesends]

Would say that at times those holding to CT have placed too much emphasis upon strictly spiritual and allegorical prophecy understandings, while those into DT tend to see too much literal meaning into prophetic understandings

You may have a point, but I see it loosely. I simply don't know.

However, this I do see, that from beginning to end, the covenant of Grace applies, and what God has set out to do, he will complete, and that is: God with us —in Rev 21 terms, "God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."

DT —from my experience, anyway— place the spectacular as front in their theology, and this is only one spectacular thing, though granted the last one, in their sequence. Their view sees history as relevant only eschatologically. Their sequence seems to me to be their gospel, or, if not, the gospel is a side issue with a handle on it to carry it about at their disposal. In CT, the gospel is the whole business, from beginning to end. "For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen."

 

[Arial]

Is this what Dispensationalists are all about? Is this typical of Dispensationalists? It's like the guy does all he can do avoid the gospel, or, maybe this IS his gospel. Is the gospel —to him at least— a separate thing to be handled apart from the rest of the Bible, instead of pervading the Bible?

There are variations I'm sure, but the thrust of Dispensationalism is that Israel is the main character in the story and the main character in redemption. They do not, as a general rule, adhere to the Covenant of Redemption and therefore do not see the Bible as one continuous progressive historical account of redemption. It is more a series of events, chopped into time periods of God testing humanity and judging them. The NT becomes the continued story of national Israel and the Church---the bringing in of the Gentiles, merely a way of judging Israel.

Not all believe as that poster does, that the NC is not for all believers, Jews and Gentiles alike, but is for the Jews. The Gentiles are more or less an afterthought and get to sit in the back row. I find that abhorrent, to say the NC is not for us but for the Jews only.

But yes, in all the eschatological conversations I have been in with Dispensationalists, national Israel takes precedence over Christ. They will never admit it but that does not mean it isn't so. If they are pre-mil, pre-trib, their eyes and focus are trained, not on Jesus, but on the "holy" rapture.

Christ is the protagonist, the central figure, and present on every page of Scripture. The Bible is his story. He makes his first appearance in God's announcement to the serpent in Gen 3:15. The curtain opens, the war begins, the story unfolds to the victory of Christ and ends with his triumphant return.

There have been children who understand the book of Revelation better than a pre-mil Dispensationalist.

 

[makesends]

There are variations I'm sure, but the thrust of Dispensationalism is that Israel is the main character in the story and the main character in redemption. They do not, as a general rule, adhere to the Covenant of Redemption and therefore do not see the Bible as one continuous progressive historical account of redemption. It is more a series of events, chopped into time periods of God testing humanity and judging them. The NT becomes the continued story of national Israel and the Church---the bringing in of the Gentiles, merely a way of judging Israel.

Not all believe as that poster does, that the NC is not for all believers, Jews and Gentiles alike, but is for the Jews. The Gentiles are more or less an afterthought and get to sit in the back row. I find that abhorrent, to say the NC is not for us but for the Jews only.

But yes, in all the eschatological conversations I have been in with Dispensationalists, national Israel takes precedence over Christ. They will never admit it but that does not mean it isn't so. If they are pre-mil, pre-trib, their eyes and focus are trained, not on Jesus, but on the "holy" rapture.

Christ is the protagonist, the central figure, and present on every page of Scripture. The Bible is his story. He makes his first appearance in God's announcement to the serpent in Gen 3:15. The curtain opens, the war begins, the story unfolds to the victory of Christ and ends with his triumphant return.

There have been children who understand the book of Revelation better than a pre-mil Dispensationalist.

What got me was that he answered with this! I've been accused of not being evangelically minded, having no concern for the lost, and such, because what drives me is the immense grace of our magnificent God. I want to talk about HIM. But this guy seems to think Dispensationalism is the Gospel, and he's just given a quick summation of that 'gospel' so the OP will understand what the OT is all about. I grew up in and around Dispensationalism, but I never heard it talked of as if it was the Gospel —not even by those who would foam at the mouth to defend it.

 

[makesends]

Here is another post to the same thread. Is this all the OT is, to these people?
------------------
"OT is more or less about how the Jews, as God's chosen people, are trained up to carry forward God's message of salvation. They are trained up through the spiritual war between God and the devil. It's a difficult task, and the Jews somehow "did it" such that God's message of salvation has reached today's humans.

"However the Jews fell at the end in terms of witnessing Jesus and preaching/broadcasting the message towards all mankind. It's Christianity which picks up from where the Jews left off for the message to be conveyed in a human-facing manner."

 

[JesusFan]

There are variations I'm sure, but the thrust of Dispensationalism is that Israel is the main character in the story and the main character in redemption. They do not, as a general rule, adhere to the Covenant of Redemption and therefore do not see the Bible as one continuous progressive historical account of redemption. It is more a series of events, chopped into time periods of God testing humanity and judging them. The NT becomes the continued story of national Israel and the Church---the bringing in of the Gentiles, merely a way of judging Israel.

Not all believe as that poster does, that the NC is not for all believers, Jews and Gentiles alike, but is for the Jews. The Gentiles are more or less an afterthought and get to sit in the back row. I find that abhorrent, to say the NC is not for us but for the Jews only.

But yes, in all the eschatological conversations I have been in with Dispensationalists, national Israel takes precedence over Christ. They will never admit it but that does not mean it isn't so. If they are pre-mil, pre-trib, their eyes and focus are trained, not on Jesus, but on the "holy" rapture.

Christ is the protagonist, the central figure, and present on every page of Scripture. The Bible is his story. He makes his first appearance in God's announcement to the serpent in Gen 3:15. The curtain opens, the war begins, the story unfolds to the victory of Christ and ends with his triumphant return.

There have been children who understand the book of Revelation better than a pre-mil Dispensationalist.

hard core Dispy would almost be making a case for God to still have a saving Covenant relationship between national Israel and Himself even today

 

[JesusFan]

You may have a point, but I see it loosely. I simply don't know.

However, this I do see, that from beginning to end, the covenant of Grace applies, and what God has set out to do, he will complete, and that is: God with us —in Rev 21 terms, "God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."

DT —from my experience, anyway— place the spectacular as front in their theology, and this is only one spectacular thing, though granted the last one, in their sequence. Their view sees history as relevant only eschatologically. Their sequence seems to me to be their gospel, or, if not, the gospel is a side issue with a handle on it to carry it about at their disposal. In CT, the gospel is the whole business, from beginning to end. "For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen."

Just was stating that I do not see that we can be dogmatic that there is no more dealings between God and national israel period, as do see God dealing with national Israel in ladt days, as preparing them to call upon Jesus as the Lord at His Second Coming I also though do see any Jew right now must be saved thru jesus same way as all saved gentiles, as both under same new Covenant now

 

[makesends]

Just was stating that I do not see that we can be dogmatic that there is no more dealings between God and national israel period, as do see God dealing with national Israel in ladt days, as preparing them to call upon Jesus as the Lord at His Second Coming I also though do see any Jew right now must be saved thru jesus same way as all saved gentiles, as both under same new Covenant now

I can't make a full mental picture of what you are saying here. I agree there may be more for national Israel yet to come, as his 'chosen people', but only in a way that agrees with the change the NT demonstrates—that the Gentiles are now seen grafted in, and that, permanently, as also his elect nation. What I don't like—what I don't get—is how it can be possible for what looks to me like a different gospel concerning any temporal spiritual salvation nor any final glorification. WE ARE ALL (THE ELECT) the body of Christ, the church. What members we are, what our "jobs" (places?, identities?,) are in Heaven are, may have something to do with this, but other than that, in the end, salvation is only by grace through faith, which is necessarily by regeneration by the Spirit's indwelling. I can see no other way.

 

[Arial]

hard core Dispy would almost be making a case for God to still have a saving Covenant relationship between national Israel and Himself even today

Almost doesn't count. And the fact that Dispensationalism does that doesn't determine whether or not it is correct.

 

[makesends]

JesusFan said:
hard core Dispy would almost be making a case for God to still have a saving Covenant relationship between national Israel and Himself even today

Almost doesn't count. And the fact that Dispensationalism does that doesn't determine whether or not it is correct.

I don't get what you are saying here, @Arial . Are you saying, 1)that what JesusFan said is not relevant to the subject at hand or the OP, and/or, 2)that what JesusFan said does not show that Dispensationalism is wrong, just because they have a two-gospel structure? That is what I get him to be saying, which, in my opinion is relevant to the OP, and my particular, to my consternation at the fact they answered the 'seeker' the way they did. How they answered, which, apparently, to @JesusFan demonstrates their two-gospel mentality, is relevant.

Or, 3) That Dispensationalist thinking, which he more or less accurately represented, 'doesn't count' (in some way I don't see you stating)?

 

[Arial]

"OT is more or less about how the Jews, as God's chosen people, are trained up to carry forward God's message of salvation. They are trained up through the spiritual war between God and the devil. It's a difficult task, and the Jews somehow "did it" such that God's message of salvation has reached today's humans.

That can't be correct as national Israel was never intended to remove the decreed necessity of the Savior by their own actions. Or of salvation unto eternal life. The purpose it was given, and the purpose it served (one of them) was to segregate a community of people in covenant with God, to reveal himself both to them, the surrounding pagan nations who believed/worshiped many gods as the One true and living God. The creator of all things who owns all things, governs all things, and the only one who is to be worshiped. And who commands worship of him and him alone. He demonstrated his power over all things, his power and faithfulness in covenant, and his personal relationship with humanity through/in covenant.

And yes, he placed this covenant community at a crossroads of commerce, so this good news would spread. The failure was in Israel continuously breaking the covenant. But isn't it remarkable that it was through this breaking of covenant and loss of the land as promised, is the very thing that scattered the Jews, who did know God, even if unfaithful but many who were, far and wide into Gentile territories. And it was the descendants of those Jews who were present at Pentecost, and those who believed carried that good news home to the Gentiles. (Sorry. Bit of a rant.)

What went south in reality is when Israel decided they did not want to just be a covenant community with God as their King. They wanted to be a nation like all the other nations and have a human king. So that whole idea of national Israel being the purpose and center of salvation unto eternal life, and that in God's economy it still is, that the prize he holds out is about a tiny piece of real estate in his creation and a prized ethnic group above all other ethnicity, falls on its face with careful reading.

"However the Jews fell at the end in terms of witnessing Jesus and preaching/broadcasting the message towards all mankind. It's Christianity which picks up from where the Jews left off for the message to be conveyed in a human-facing manner.

They fell many times before that, and their failure was not in "not witnessing" Jesus. It was failure of covenant faithfulness. They worshipped God and other gods. They broke moral laws and statutory laws. I am convinced the only reason they were scattered for breaking what was a land grant covenant instead of being destroyed is because it was through Jacob (Israel as a people, not a nation) that the Savior would come. as promised.

The story of Israel is the story of Christ's home country. Born under the Law so as to keep it perfectly as the sin bearing substitute. It is not the story of the enthronement (metaphorically) of a piece of land and an ethnicity.

 

[Arial]

JesusFan said:
hard core Dispy would almost be making a case for God to still have a saving Covenant relationship between national Israel and Himself even today

I don't get what you are saying here, @Arial . Are you saying, 1)that what JesusFan said is not relevant to the subject at hand or the OP, and/or, 2)that what JesusFan said does not show that Dispensationalism is wrong, just because they have a two-gospel structure? That is what I get him to be saying, which, in my opinion is relevant to the OP, and my particular, to my consternation at the fact they answered the 'seeker' the way they did. How they answered, which, apparently, to @JesusFan demonstrates their two-gospel mentality, is relevant.

Or, 3) That Dispensationalist thinking, which he more or less accurately represented, 'doesn't count' (in some way I don't see you stating)?

Two.

 

[makesends]

Two.

If he's right that Dispensationalism has a two-gospel mode of salvation, then he has in one fell swoop eliminated the viability of Dispensationalism. There can be only one gospel.