• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Six Problems Inherent in Dispensational Premillennialism; Part 5: The Lack of Accountability

Titus 2:13 tells us....Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; KJV.

2 Tim 2:8 mentions a crow for those that await Jesus return...
Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.

Why would Jesus give us "hints" of His return if we are not to look for it?

When Christ returns at the resurrection and rapture...will this not be the end of our current dispensation?
The reason for the lack of clarity, is so that we would always be alert.
Very simple.
 
If that is what you want to discuss, please do so according to my suggestion. It would make a very good thread. I would like to discuss it myself but until and when @Josheb gives the green light to do so, we must respect his request.
Thank you.
Yes I know....but, what I have presented seems to be a thorn in his side concerning his post and should be addressed and not censored and swept under the rug.
 
Yes I know....but, what I have presented seems to be a thorn in his side concerning his post and should be addressed and not censored and swept under the rug.
The thorn is derailing before he had laid out the full set of posts on the subject. Anyway, that is my understanding. He has posted them all but before we as admin give the full ok to "have at it", I feel we should wait to see exactly where he intends to go with it. I am not sure what the follow-up intentions are, or even if he has any. Be patient.

@Josheb
 
That list shows some reasons why this "dispensation" as some like to call it is about to end.
Which has nothing to do with the lack of accountability.
That list shows some reasons why this "dispensation" as some like to call it is about to end.
If that is what you want to discuss, please do so according to my suggestion. It would make a very good thread. I would like to discuss it myself but until and when @Josheb gives the green light to do so, we must respect his request.
Thank you.
Given the propensity for Dispensationalists to go off-topic in every thread (even non-eschatological ones) I'd prefer the tou be adhered to by all.

Use self-control and focus on reconciliation when discussing differences. Disagreements exist, but that is not a license to post divisive content or violate the forum's rules. No bickering. Address the issue or specified subject or topic, not the person. Do not make derogatory personal remarks or your posts will be removed from the thread. Repeated offenses may result in temporary or permanent suspension.​

Dating is not the specified subject. The lack of accountability is the subject and one example of that lack of accountability is the in-house failure of Dispensationalists to self-correct or self-sanction their own. If this sort of thing happened in the Presbyterian or Lutheran denominations that person would be summoned before the session or synod and asked to account for his mistake.

Perhaps @CrowCross can explain to us why that does not happen in Dispensationalism.
 
As dispensationalism is not a denomination, the point is not as valid as could be.
 
The thorn is derailing before he had laid out the full set of posts on the subject. Anyway, that is my understanding. He has posted them all but before we as admin give the full ok to "have at it", I feel we should wait to see exactly where he intends to go with it. I am not sure what the follow-up intentions are, or even if he has any. Be patient.

@Josheb
Where I want the thread to go is to have everyone acknowledge what should be obvious to al, what is objectively provable to all: the lack of accountability in Dispensational Premillennialism.

If some modicum of consensus is achieved, then maybe, hopefully, we can discuss why that it the case. Why does it occur in Dispensationalism and not any other theology or eschatological point of view? The goal of that discussion would be either 1) Dispensationalists begin working toward reform so this very real and very serious problem does not persist, or 2) Dispensationalists wake up to the very real and seriously problems in Dispensationalism and begin leaving for more scriptural, more historical, more orthodox, more livable alternatives where personal integrity and institutional accountability can be found.

None of which can happen, or will happen, unless and until we all stay on the singular topic of accountability lacking in Dispensational Premillennialism.
 
Everyone,

Take a look at this op HERE. The title of the op is "Christ is coming soon!" but when asked how the author of the op defines the word "soon," there is absolutely no accountability. The question is avoided; there is no answer forthcoming. If search for the word "soon" is done in this Eschatology - End Times and Prophecy board the result will be the failure of Dispensationalists to answer this question whenever to ask. There are ten pages of threads in this board and few if any DPers define the term.

This isn't the only op that is relevant. After reading that thread, consider how all the other five OPs I've recently posted on DPism's problems apply (and take those observations to the relevant thread).
 
Last edited:
As dispensationalism is not a denomination, the point is not as valid as could be.
The problem with dispensationalism is....there's too many definitions of what dispensationalism is.

You are right it is not a denomination.
 
The problem with dispensationalism is....there's too many definitions of what dispensationalism is.

You are right it is not a denomination.
Right…although there are a few consistent points that are problematic. Frankly, my biggest problem stems from the new temple deal and the notion of God honoring animal sacrifices.
The blood of bulls gave Him no pleasure. It simply pointed us to Christ.
““To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to Me?” Says the LORD. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams And the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, Or of lambs or goats.”

(Isaiah 1:11 NKJV)

 
As dispensationalism is not a denomination, the point is not as valid as could be.
That is incorrect.

Aside from the fact Dispensationalism is the single greatest cause of fragmentation in the last two centuries (it makes the Reformation look like a trial run), the fact is ff they wanted to, ALL denominations could unite behind the need for reform. More importantly, since much of what I have posted in the six critical ops is taught, the needed changes should begin in the seminaries. Most younger Christians do not know this but there used to be many seminaries in the US that taught Dispensational Premillennialism exclusively. Currently, while there are some lesser seminaries and some Christian/Bible colleges that still teach it, the one main seminary doing so is Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS). That one seminary could radically alter the landscape simply by teaching a more representative curriculum.

One of the universities I attended was Pat Robertson's Regent University. It's been many years, but I've had the privilege of discussing some of these points with Mr. Robertson and I know from my decades of supporting that alma mater that it has changed it curriculum to better reflect Christianity as a whole and is much less rigid in its adherence to Dispensationalism. Many of its instructors are still DP, but many are not. When DTS opened a satellite campus in my area I went to its open house and spoke to several of the recruiters. I briefly described how I had attended congregations covering a diverse set of denominations, was currently attending an Evangelical Presbyterian one, subscribed to a modified Amillennial eschatology, and had partial-preterist leanings, but I was interested in an MDiv or MTh degree. Would that be problematic? Every single one of those recruiters told me the exact same thing: I'd probably be better off NOT attending DTS and finding another seminary. Keep in mind that some of the leading seminaries/universities in the nation have campuses in my locale. I don't know whether those recruiters knew, but everyone else knows this is a very competitive market when it comes to advanced education. I asked the exact same question before I enrolled at Regent and was told everyone was welcome, both the student and professor population was diverse, and they believed I and others would benefit from the diversity everyone brings to the campus. I found that report to be correct. I had professors who were (charismatic) Anglican, Presbyterian, Messianic Jewish, and Catholic! There were plenty of Robertsonian Dispensationalists, but they never imposed a monolithic pint of view that deviated from core orthodoxy, and they all entertained the kind of conversations I routinely bring to cyber forums.

Yes, the problems I have described are not limited to a specific denomination but that is part of the problem to be solved and much of the solution lies in the arena of the seminaries where Dispensational Premillennialism is taught. The radio preachers did not learn it on their own and they did not learn it in a vacuum. We've witnessed the powerful effect of academia in the larger society can have in a single generation (I first read Francis Schaeffer's "He is There and He is Not Silent" in the late '70s, and Allan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" shortly after it came out in the late '80s). To suggest the problem of no accountability is unsolvable because Dispensational Premillennialism transcends denominational structures is incorrect.
 
Good Morning Everyone,
As dispensationalism is not a denomination, the point is not as valid as could be.
That is incorrect.

Aside from the fact Dispensationalism is the single greatest cause of fragmentation in the last two centuries (it makes the Reformation look like a trial run), the fact is if they wanted to, ALL denominations could unite behind the need for reform. More importantly, since much of what I have posted in the six critical ops is taught, the needed changes should begin in the seminaries. Most younger Christians do not know this but there used to be many seminaries in the US that taught Dispensational Premillennialism exclusively. Currently, while there are some lesser seminaries and some Christian/Bible colleges that still teach it, the one main seminary doing so is Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS). That one seminary could radically alter the landscape simply by teaching a more representative curriculum.

One of the universities I attended was Pat Robertson's Regent University. It's been many years, but I've had the privilege of discussing some of these points with Mr. Robertson and I know from my decades of supporting that alma mater that it has changed it curriculum to better reflect Christianity as a whole and is much less rigid in its adherence to Dispensationalism. Many of its instructors are still DP, but many are not. When DTS opened a satellite campus in my area I went to its open house and spoke to several of the recruiters. I briefly described how I had attended congregations covering a diverse set of denominations, was currently attending an Evangelical Presbyterian one, subscribed to a modified Amillennial eschatology, and had partial-preterist leanings, but I was interested in an MDiv or MTh degree. Would that be problematic? Every single one of those recruiters told me the exact same thing: I'd probably be better off NOT attending DTS and finding another seminary. Keep in mind that some of the leading seminaries/universities in the nation have campuses in my locale. I don't know whether those recruiters knew, but everyone else knows this is a very competitive market when it comes to advanced education. I asked the exact same question before I enrolled at Regent and was told everyone was welcome, both the student and professor population was diverse, and they believed I and others would benefit from the diversity everyone brings to the campus. I found that report to be correct. I had professors who were (charismatic) Anglican, Presbyterian, Messianic Jewish, and Catholic! There were plenty of Robertsonian Dispensationalists, but they never imposed a monolithic pint of view that deviated from core orthodoxy, and they all entertained the kind of conversations I routinely bring to cyber forums.

Yes, the problems I have described are not limited to a specific denomination but that is part of the problem to be solved and much of the solution lies in the arena of the seminaries where Dispensational Premillennialism is taught. The radio preachers did not learn it on their own and they did not learn it in a vacuum. We've witnessed the powerful effect of academia in the larger society can have in a single generation (I first read Francis Schaeffer's "He is There and He is Not Silent" in the late '70s, and Allan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" shortly after it came out in the late '80s). To suggest the problem of no accountability is unsolvable because Dispensational Premillennialism transcends denominational structures is incorrect.
 
That is incorrect.

Aside from the fact Dispensationalism is the single greatest cause of fragmentation in the last two centuries (it makes the Reformation look like a trial run), the fact is ff they wanted to, ALL denominations could unite behind the need for reform. More importantly, since much of what I have posted in the six critical ops is taught, the needed changes should begin in the seminaries. Most younger Christians do not know this but there used to be many seminaries in the US that taught Dispensational Premillennialism exclusively. Currently, while there are some lesser seminaries and some Christian/Bible colleges that still teach it, the one main seminary doing so is Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS). That one seminary could radically alter the landscape simply by teaching a more representative curriculum.

One of the universities I attended was Pat Robertson's Regent University. It's been many years, but I've had the privilege of discussing some of these points with Mr. Robertson and I know from my decades of supporting that alma mater that it has changed it curriculum to better reflect Christianity as a whole and is much less rigid in its adherence to Dispensationalism. Many of its instructors are still DP, but many are not. When DTS opened a satellite campus in my area I went to its open house and spoke to several of the recruiters. I briefly described how I had attended congregations covering a diverse set of denominations, was currently attending an Evangelical Presbyterian one, subscribed to a modified Amillennial eschatology, and had partial-preterist leanings, but I was interested in an MDiv or MTh degree. Would that be problematic? Every single one of those recruiters told me the exact same thing: I'd probably be better off NOT attending DTS and finding another seminary. Keep in mind that some of the leading seminaries/universities in the nation have campuses in my locale. I don't know whether those recruiters knew, but everyone else knows this is a very competitive market when it comes to advanced education. I asked the exact same question before I enrolled at Regent and was told everyone was welcome, both the student and professor population was diverse, and they believed I and others would benefit from the diversity everyone brings to the campus. I found that report to be correct. I had professors who were (charismatic) Anglican, Presbyterian, Messianic Jewish, and Catholic! There were plenty of Robertsonian Dispensationalists, but they never imposed a monolithic pint of view that deviated from core orthodoxy, and they all entertained the kind of conversations I routinely bring to cyber forums.

Yes, the problems I have described are not limited to a specific denomination but that is part of the problem to be solved and much of the solution lies in the arena of the seminaries where Dispensational Premillennialism is taught. The radio preachers did not learn it on their own and they did not learn it in a vacuum. We've witnessed the powerful effect of academia in the larger society can have in a single generation (I first read Francis Schaeffer's "He is There and He is Not Silent" in the late '70s, and Allan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" shortly after it came out in the late '80s). To suggest the problem of no accountability is unsolvable because Dispensational Premillennialism transcends denominational structures is incorrect.
No…I was correct and although you packed a bunch of stuff in your reply,it doesn’t comport with my statement. Perhaps, in your mind.
None of your efforts here will change Dallas, I fear. Have you addressed the faculty and leadership there?
Dispensationalism is not a denomination.
I won’t be responding any further on this.
 
Last edited:
Right…although there are a few consistent points that are problematic. Frankly, my biggest problem stems from the new temple deal and the notion of God honoring animal sacrifices.
Who says God is going to honor the sacrifices? I don't believe He will.
Jesus said "it is finished".

On the other hand, many Jews will believe God honors the sacrifices.
The blood of bulls gave Him no pleasure. It simply pointed us to Christ.
““To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to Me?” Says the LORD. “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams And the fat of fed cattle. I do not delight in the blood of bulls, Or of lambs or goats.”

(Isaiah 1:11 NKJV)

 
The problem with dispensationalism is....there's too many definitions of what dispensationalism is.

You are right it is not a denomination.
What do you make of the seeming notion of two different gospels —saved by the sacrificial system and/or faithful obedience in the OT, vs saved by Grace in the NT? I've heard it explained that the old way was also grace, but nevertheless not quite by Christ's death and resurrection.
 
What do you make of the seeming notion of two different gospels —saved by the sacrificial system and/or faithful obedience in the OT, vs saved by Grace in the NT? I've heard it explained that the old way was also grace, but nevertheless not quite by Christ's death and resurrection.
Jesus was the fulfillment of the "sacrificial system"...which is grace.
 
Jesus was the fulfillment of the "sacrificial system"...which is grace.
Are the saints in the OT saved via regeneration and its necessarily accompanying gift of faith? Or simply by obedience and/or the sacrificial system, as those dispensationalists I referred to seem to think?

Like it, while you are at it, and since I haven't read this whole thread and its accompanying threads, is the NT church a separate entity from the OT saints?
 
Are the saints in the OT saved via regeneration and its necessarily accompanying gift of faith? Or simply by obedience and/or the sacrificial system, as those dispensationalists I referred to seem to think?

Like it, while you are at it, and since I haven't read this whole thread and its accompanying threads, is the NT church a separate entity from the OT saints?
The OT saints are saved via faith. Faith that God will provide a future savior. I'm not all sure what you mean about "regeneration" but we know the Holy Spirit wasn't given to the believers until the day of Pentecost.
 
Are the saints in the OT saved via regeneration and its necessarily accompanying gift of faith? Or simply by obedience and/or the sacrificial system, as those dispensationalists I referred to seem to think?
They were saved the same way Abraham was saved (Ge 15:6), through faith in the promise (Ge 15:5, Seed, Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16).
Like it, while you are at it, and since I haven't read this whole thread and its accompanying threads, is the NT church a separate entity from the OT saints?
It is apostolic teaching that they are both the one olive tree of Ro 11:16-23, where the branches of believing Gentiles have been grafted in and the branches of unbelieving Israel have been cut off. . .and whose destiny is to be grafted back IF (not "when") they do not persist in unbelief (Ro 11:23).
 
I'm not all sure what you mean about "regeneration" but we know the Holy Spirit wasn't given to the believers until the day of Pentecost.
Well, no, 'we' don't believe that. Maybe most the Reformed do, but I don't —but we are wandering off-topic, so I'll leave it alone for now. Maybe start another thread on the question.
 
Back
Top