Six Problems Inherent in Dispensationalism: Examples

[CrowCross]

What, exactly, do you mean by "soon"?

This has been explained to you several times...do you honestly need to go over it again????

 

[Josheb]

This has been explained to you several times...do you honestly need to go over it again????

I do not need anything from you. What I want is an answer to the question asked and it proves very difficult to get direct, immediate answers from Dispensational Premillennialists, especially when asking them question as specifically about their own comments. It demonstrates a lack of accountability, a failure to live a life consistent with values to which they claim to abide, and a disconnection between practice, teaching, and reality.

The best play in a discussion board is to always answer op-relevant questions when asked. That's not particularly specific to any given doctrine, eschatological or otherwise. It proves, however, to be enormously significant when trying to get a DPist to articulate their own teachings. Post 15 directly demonstrates the problem cited in the opening post.

"There is a recently posted op in this board titled, "The Rapture/Resurrection of the Church is near." I asked the op's author what "near" meant. The question had to be asked a couple of time before an answer was forthcoming but when the answer did finally arrive the answer was, "When is it going to happen? Some say it could happen on a Jewish festival this October. Perhaps the The Feast of Tabernacles. Yup, this October. Then again next October may still be in the window." Although there is a little ambiguity in that answer it is an answer that is more specific than most claims of nearness beget in Eschatology boards. According to that post the rapture is coming this October or next. I wanted to make sure I understood that correctly, so I asked to make sure. The answer to that second inquiry was, eventually, "No, you do not have that correct. lets start out with this...I don't know when the rapture will happen. "No, you do not have that correct. lets start out with this...I don't know when the rapture will happen. Now, what I do believe is that the rapture is much sooner than you think."

So the answer to the question asked, "How near, exactly? What, specifically, do you mean by "near"? Would you please tell us how much time we have to prepare[?]" is sometime either this October or next October but I do not know when the rapture will occur. I noted changing the assertion from "near" to "sooner" doesn't help pin down when the rapture will occur and provided the dictionary definitions of "near" and "soon." I was asked if I wanted a specific date, and answered in the affirmative, especially if such an exact answer could be provided. New answers to "What does the word "near" mean to you?" were then "Next month? Tomorrow? January 1st? 2030 is near," and an attempt was made to put the onus onto me to explain the meaning of that op's near. My response was to reiterate my singular interest in when, exactly, the rapture is going to occur because the op asserted the rapture is near. The response was to resort to ad hominem and call me an idiot (that has now been edited out of the post)."​

I am just shining a light on Post 15's claim, "It is soon," op-relevantly. You brought it up. I'm asking you about it, and you're doing the exact same thing that was done in the other thread. Only on this occasion I plan to come at the problem from a different perspective and not the perspective of obfuscation and gaslighting common in DPsim,

This has been explained to you several times...do you honestly need to go over it again????

So, for the third time.....


What, exactly, do you mean by "soon"?


.

 

[Ghada]

Were the other ops on the problems inherent in Dispensationalism read?

The problem I'm finding, is that you're not showing any Scriptures to disprove the doctrine.

For instance, in the part about hypocrisy, you point out that they say the coming of the Lord is near, but act as if it isn't true. That's not a uniquely dispensationalist hypocrisy. Dittoes with second coming predictions.

They taught and continue to teach a “two kingdoms” theology in which the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the world remain distinctly separate and Christians are to have nothing whatsoever to do with the things of the world.

This has nothing to do with dispensation doctrine, but rather the holiness doctrine of some dispensationalists. I also wonder if you are accurate in stating that they practice hermitism.

Eschatologically speaking, every single Dispensationalist or modern futurist is a false teacher whenever and because they make prognostications that never come true.

I.e. you don't give any Scripture proving dispensationalism is false, but only that many quack prophets arise under the banner. That does not prove any error in the doctrine, anymore than ungodly hypocrites naming Christ disprove the righteous and true doctrine of Jesus Christ in scripture.

Once again, my conclusion about dispensationalism, is that it's an unnecessarily long way around confirming that the Lord's not a false prophet and liar, and so He must still give the land on this earth promised to Abraham and his natural seed. The Lord will raise up Abraham from the dead to do so.

It's the same faith He had in the sure word of His God, when he offered up Isaac.

Rom 4:20He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

 

[CrowCross]

What, exactly, do you mean by "soon"?

You've been answered. From this time on to shortly in the future. I would say shorter than 5 years...probably sooner.

If I'm wrong...then so be it. The rapture will happen prior to the tribulation. Why are you so afraid of the pre-trib rapture as mentioned in the bible?

 

[Josheb]

The problem I'm finding, is that you're not showing any Scriptures to disprove the doctrine.

Which particular teaching of Dispensationalism would you like for me to post disproving scripture?

For instance, in the part about hypocrisy, you point out that they say the coming of the Lord is near, but act as if it isn't true. That's not a uniquely dispensationalist hypocrisy. Dittoes with second coming predictions.

No one teaches "near" or the Second Coming the way Dispensationalists do. Some of what you're asking does not require scripture to be proved wrong.

For example, the Dispensationalist teaching, and their use of "near," is one in which they are constantly claiming the coming of the Lord is near but not a single Dispensationalist has never been correct. Covenantalists do not teach "nearness," they teach imminence. Amils, Postmils, Idealisst...., none of them teach Dispensational nearness. You're just plain wrong to appeal to what others do. You are wrong twice over because the appeal to what others do is a tu quoque fallacy and it is factually incorrect. Others do not do what Dispies do, and what dispies do is demonstrably incorrect by simply observing the facts of history: what they predict never comes true when they say it will

Deuteronomy 18:20-22
But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.' "You may say in your heart, 'How will we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?' "When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

There is your scripture.

So stop having your problem .

They speak on behalf of God and what they teach never comes true. If we lived in the Old Testament era we'd be justified to take all of them out and stone them to death - the whole lot of them !


Now go over to the threads in which I made an attempt to get @CrowCross to explain and qualify his claims of nearness HERE. It takes many tries to get a Dispensationalist to explain and qualify their own claims and along the way anyone who asks must suffer ad hominem, red herring, straw men, false equivalences and a variety of other logical fallacies.... never getting an answer to the question asked. That is an observable fact of that thread, so I ask you whether or not you really need scripture proving whether or not that conduct is acceptable. When an answer is finally forthcoming it is so broad or so vague that it become meaningless. On the occasion of that op the word "near" could mean anything between now and a year from now. The minute next October ends that op will be proven wrong. It will be a false teaching, and the poster will be culpable of all the scripture that speak about false teachings and false teachers, beginning with Deuteronomy 18. I have also attempted to revisit the exact same claim with the exact same poster, and I am experiencing the exact same subterfuge in this very thread. See Post 24 above. His response, when asked to define what he means by "near," is

I'm not going to argue with your ignorance. No one, and I'll repeat it...NO ONE...said you have to look up to be raptured. So, stop with your false statements.​

He will not let his yes be yes and his no be no. He will not speak up assertively, with manners and respect to explain and justify his own words when asked. Instead, ad hominem is thought to be an acceptable response. The eschatology and prophecy board in this forum and every other forum is literally filled with Dispensationalists doing the exact same thing.

Proverbs 6:16-19
There are six things which the LORD hates, yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: ...............false witness who utters lies, and one who spreads strife among brothers.

How can it be that a brother in Christ cannot ask "What, exactly, do you mean when using the word 'near'?" without getting called ignorant and that be something you think needs to be proven with scripture? When this October ends part of his definition of "near" will be proven false. When next October ends the entirety of his claim, the entire op, will be proven false.

What do you think he will do? Do you think he will post a post acknowledging his error? Will you and I read any post anywhere in the forum expressing regret for the misleading teaching of that op and any potential damage it might have caused to the less mature and easily persuade? Will we read any acknowledgment the scriptures employed were mishandled to justify a false prediction? Will we read any statement expressing an intent to improve his exegesis so the same mistake doesn't repeat? Will there be any promise not to repeat the same mistake? Btw, he's already posted more ops making more claims that will all prove incorrect.


Show me any other poster from any other eschatological perspective that does that sort of thing. When you cannot do so then 1) acknowledge it's a uniquely Dispensationalist practice, and 2) stop employing tu quoque and telling me others do it too.

 

[Josheb]

You've been answered. From this time on to shortly in the future. I would say shorter than 5 years...probably sooner.

That "shorter than 5 years," is a different answer than the one I was previously given, but I will work with what you've just said.

Next question: When Jesus said the following, what did he mean when he used the word "near"? Did he mean "a month from now"? Did he mean "a year from now"? Did he mean "shorter than five years from now"?


Would you please answer the question just asked and answer it as politely and respectfully, directly and immediately as you can without added delay, obfuscation, or subterfuge. Prove to me and @Ghada the problems I have cited in my ops critical of Dispensationalism are not correct.

If I'm wrong...then so be it.

If you are wrong and the response is "So be it," then my ops of hypocrisy, a lack of accountability, and delusional life are all proved correct. It's not okay to make false predictions and it's even worse to teach falsehoods to others and then, when proven wrong by the passage of time, to shrug your shoulders and say "So be it." Especially when the results are more of the same errors.

The rapture will happen prior to the tribulation.

Only Dispensationalism teaches that. Everyone else in Christendom believes and teaches otherwise. That statement is so irreconcilable with what everyone else in Christianity has taught since the New Testament that there is only one option: Either...

1. Dispensationalism is correct and everything everyone in Christendom in the last two millennia has taught and believed is wrong,
2. Dispensationalism is wrong and what Christianity has been teaching and believing for the last 2000 years is correct.

Those are the only two options. When it comes to that statement of yours... both cannot possibly be correct. Some teachings of Dispensationalism are compatible with everyone else, but that one... it is wholly irreconcilable with historic orthodox Christian thought, doctrine and practice.

Why are you so afraid of the pre-trib rapture as mentioned in the bible?

I am not and that question is just one of many, many, many, many, many, godless red herrings suffered by those who ask the simplest of questions of Dispensationalists. There is simply no way a simple question like, "What does the word 'near' mean in that sentence?" should ever end with insinuating the asker is ignorant or afraid.



But Dispensational Premillennialists do it chronically. Every single occasion is an example of what I have written about in my six critical ops.


I am asking Dispensationalists to take a look at their own teachings and either reform them so these six problems don't persist, or leave Dispensationalism altogether because it is a hugely problematic theology that in many places does not reconcile at all with scripture or 2000 years of orthodox Christian thought, doctrine, and practice. I have done so without calling you ignorant or afraid.

I would like you to extand the same courtesy to me.

 

[CrowCross]

Next question: When Jesus said the following, what did he mean when he used the word "near"? Did he mean "a month from now"? Did he mean "a year from now"? Did he mean "shorter than five years from now"?

The word soon or near has a sense of "revving up".

I've already explained that to you....so, for you to keep acting dumb...as if I haven't answered your question is being dishonest.

Now, to make sure we're talking about the same word..what greek word was used? Feel free to use bible hub to look it up.

 

[Josheb]

The word soon or near has a sense of "revving up".

Says who?

I've already explained that to you....so, for you to keep acting dumb...as if I haven't answered your question is being dishonest.

Are you capable of having this discussion without making it personal? If so, then do so. If not, then expect me to use that example in support of my ops.

When Jesus said the following, what did he mean when he used the word "near"? Did he mean "a month from now"? Did he mean "a year from now"? Did he mean "shorter than five years from now"?

Now, to make sure we're talking about the same word..what greek word was used? Feel free to use bible hub to look it up.

My bad. I meant to come back on post the verse but forgot.

Matthew 26:18-19
And He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, 'The teacher says, "My time is near; I am to keep the Passover at your house with my disciples." The disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover.

What does Jesus mean when saying his time is near? Does he mean a month from then? A year from then? Five years from then? The Greek word is "engys." In Matthew 26:18, what did Jesus' use of the word mean in terms of an amount of time?

 

[Arial]

The problem I'm finding, is that you're not showing any Scriptures to disprove the doctrine.

How about 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Cor 15:50-58

At the sound of th last turmpet when Jesus returns, the dead in Christ will be resurrected immortal and imperishable, and those who are still alive will be changed in the twinkling of and eye. Unbelievers will face the wrath of God in judgement, Satan and his side kicks will be thrown forever into the fiery pit, and death will be destroyed.

Dispensationalism has all this happening and then Jesus sitting on a throne in a physical rebuilt temple as animal sacrifices are resumed. Mortal and sinful humans living alongside the resurrected righteous, and all the immortal, incorruptible, people. Armies of enemies (sinners) making war against national Israel. Where did these people come from? And if the devil has been destroyed and death destroyed and Jesus has already been victorious, where do these evil people come from? If Jesus is the final perfect sacrifice, why are bulls and rams being offered in worship to God? Even though Is. 11 tells us when Jesus returns in the consummation, the bear will graze with the cow?

Just asking.

 

[CrowCross]

Says who?

Are you capable of having this discussion without making it personal? If so, then do so. If not, then expect me to use that example in support of my ops.

My bad. I meant to come back on post the verse but forgot.

Matthew 26:18-19
And He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, 'The teacher says, "My time is near; I am to keep the Passover at your house with my disciples." The disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover.

What does Jesus mean when saying his time is near? Does he mean a month from then? A year from then? Five years from then? The Greek word is "engys." In Matthew 26:18, what did Jesus' use of the word mean in terms of an amount of time?

Jesus in the above was talking about his soon to happen death on the cross....not some eschatological event.

 

[Arial]

Jesus in the above was talking about his soon to happen death on the cross....not some eschatological event.

It was an eschatological event. The entire Bible from Gen 3 on is eschatological.
es·cha·tol·o·gy
a belief concerning death, the end of the world, or the ultimate destiny of humankind

 

[CrowCross]

It was an eschatological event. The entire Bible from Gen 3 on is eschatological.
es·cha·tol·o·gy
a belief concerning death, the end of the world, or the ultimate destiny of humankind

That may be the 40,000' look...but that particular verse was focused upon Christ near, soon to happen death....not return.

 

[Arial]

That may be the 40,000' look...but that particular verse was focused upon Christ near, soon to happen death....not return.

Of course it was. That was not what I was objecting to.

 

[CrowCross]

Of course it was. That was not what I was objecting to.

No problem. Josheb was seemingly reporting it an eschatological.

 

[Arial]

No problem. Josheb was seemingly reporting it an eschatological.

Well it was when he said it as he had not yet gone to the cross. We know that in hindsight. And it still does not make "near" always be describing the same thing in the same way. There is no fixed definition of "near" biblical speaking.

 

[CrowCross]

Well it was when he said it as he had not yet gone to the cross. We know that in hindsight. And it still does not make "near" always be describing the same thing in the same way. There is no fixed definition of "near" biblical speaking.

One of the words used is "5030. tacheós" (soon) emphasis on the "tach" where we get our word tachometer from...as seen on the dashboard of a car which indicates RPM's or "revving" up.

So can say when you see things revving up....as we are beginning to see today..it's one of many indications that the return of Jesus in the pre-trib rapture is ...."soon".
It can also mean "quickness"....more like a snake striking rather than an event rapidly approaching.

 

[makesends]

One of the words used is "5030. tacheós" (soon) emphasis on the "tach" where we get our word tachometer from...as seen on the dashboard of a car which indicates RPM's or "revving" up.

So can say when you see things revving up....as we are beginning to see today..it's one of many indications that the return of Jesus in the pre-trib rapture is ...."soon".
It can also mean "quickness"....more like a snake striking rather than an event rapidly approaching.

That's a logical leap, to go from 5030. tacheós to "see[ing] things rev... up". It's spiritualizing the text —not good hermeneutics.

 

[Josheb]

Jesus in the above was talking about his soon to happen death on the cross....not some eschatological event.

Yes, and what did he means when he used the word "near"? Did he mean a week, a month, a year, five years, or more?

 

[Arial]

One of the words used is "5030. tacheós" (soon) emphasis on the "tach" where we get our word tachometer from...as seen on the dashboard of a car which indicates RPM's or "revving" up.

So can say when you see things revving up....as we are beginning to see today..it's one of many indications that the return of Jesus in the pre-trib rapture is ...."soon".
It can also mean "quickness"....more like a snake striking rather than an event rapidly approaching.

Except from the first century on in various ways and various places people have seen those circumstances (that news. those signs) as the final "revving up."

 

[Ghada]

No one teaches "near" or the Second Coming the way Dispensationalists do.

Other than the Lord Himself:

Mat 25:13Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

Phl 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.

The day of the Lord's coming has been near since He ascended to heaven. The disciples were standing around looking up in the sky for Him to come right back after sitting with the Father on His throne. (Which sitting was prophesied that the risen Lord should do: "Sit thou on my right hand...")

Paul believed he could still be alive when the Lord returns into the air.

1 Th 4:15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep...Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

In fact, not to believe His coming is near, is the unbelief that corrupts the hearts of servants of the Lord to begin to do evil:

Mat 24:48But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming.

Some of what you're asking does not require scripture to be proved wrong.

True. I accept your own personal testimony of some corrupt practices in the dispensational church you were a part of.

For example, the Dispensationalist teaching, and their use of "near," is one in which they are constantly claiming the coming of the Lord is near but not a single Dispensationalist has never been correct.

There is of course a difference between believing the Scriptures the Lord is at hand, and making predictions of the day and hour of His coming.

The Bible teaches it is wise to understand tomorrow is not promised, and the fool does not number his days.

Covenantalists do not teach "nearness," they teach imminence.

Is there an opposition of dispensationalism to the covenants of God? Do they deny the OT and NT?

I'm born again into the new covenant of the risen God of Israel Jesus Christ. I don't believe in his imminence the Pope. (Just joking)

If you mean, the Spirit of the Lord is everywhere, then that's always been true, and always will be. If you mean the Lord is searching all hearts, and calling all men unto repentance, and judging all men by our works, then that has been true since the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

That's not any faith particular to any doctrine: That is the doctrine of Jesus Christ in Scripture. His covenant is taking away the foreskin of lust to be wholly new creatures of God in deed and in truth.

As a new testament member of the Lord's body on earth, I wholeheartedly believe and practice the Lord is at hand, and I pray for it daily.

And we already see the danger to the heart of not believing in His coming is always near at hand.

2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

It was the same in the OT pertaining prophecy of His coming to earth the first time.

Isa 30:9That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD: Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits: Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.

Isa 13:6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

Amils, Postmils, Idealisst...., none of them teach Dispensational nearness.

By definition they reject the Lord is at hand. And some don't believe His coming at all. And some make a fabulous joke out of it.

2Pe 1:16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

Deuteronomy 18:20-22
But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.' "You may say in your heart, 'How will we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?' "When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

There is your scripture.

True. It also applies to false prophets saying what will not come to pass.

Joe 1:15Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

They speak on behalf of God and what they teach never comes true. If we lived in the Old Testament era we'd be justified to take all of them out and stone them to death

True. It will once again be the same in the Lord's millennium:

Zec 13:3And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.

Any righteous person on earth will have right of law of the King, to execute on the spot any false prophet in their own family.

It takes many tries to get a Dispensationalist to explain and qualify their own claims

Scripture sufficiently teaches the coming of the Lord is at hand this day. And Scripture also sufficeintly warns against unbelief with a spirit of mocking His near coming.

Just no predictions of days.

No one, and I'll repeat it...NO ONE...said you have to look up to be raptured.​

True. Though I imagine every resurrected and change saint rising to meet the Lord in the air, will not doubt be looking up at Him, whom they loved unto the end.

Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

But we see Jesus...

How can it be that a brother in Christ cannot ask "What, exactly, do you mean when using the word 'near'?" without getting called ignorant and that be something you think needs to be proven with scripture?

My own experince with your handling of my own words, forbids any granted trust in what you may report about others. I don't even trust, but verify. I only verify if I care to.

Nothing personal. It's only that some people are so personally and emotionally charged about certain things, that they throw discipline out the window.

And in your case, I have no doubt your personal experince is hard learned from the past. Believe me, I can entirely empathize with you.