What is Heresy?

[Josheb]

Where is that taught?

Before answering let me remind you of something that comes up often between us: you may be different than mainstream Dispensationalism. Just because you hold a different point f view from what DPism teaches does not mean that's not what DPism teaches. It means you are either not wholly Dispensationally premillennial, or you're an inconsistent Dispensationalist. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Dispensational Premillennialism reads passages like Zechariah 13:8 to be a reference to the future destruction of people living in the geo-political nation-state of Israel. The inhabitants of Israel are called Jews. Therefore the interpretation two thirds of Israel's inhabitants are going to be destroyed is equivalent to saying two-thirds of the Jews will be destroyed.

Zechariah 13:8
"It will come about in all the land,” declares the LORD, "That two parts in it will be cut off and perish; but the third will be left in it."

You may or may not read that text that way but that is what DPism teaches. HERE is an example of DPers doing so. It is found a lot among Zionist segments of modern futurism in Christianity.

 

[CrowCross]

I do not know what that means. The sentence is incoherent. The earth does not use terms. I assume there's a typo, so if you'll fix it I'll address the matter of Romans 8:19-22 accordingly. However, I will now say the "groaning" is evidence of continued separation, not the kind of integration described in Rev. 21-22.

If you say so.
If it means that much to you....start a new thread.

 

[Josheb]

Now you are presenting the red herring.

No, I'm not.

I explicitly stated Dispensationalism teaches salvation by grace through faith. I also said Dispensationalism also teaches salvation by works. Go answer the two questions I asked in Post 136 and get back to me because if you answer the first question "No," and the second question "Yes," then you've implicitly confirmed DPism teaches a bad soteriology.

It does not matter whether you subscribe to that teaching, that is what the theology teaches.

As far as the statement "I agree God has one people" goes, that is all well and good but that is NOT what DPism teaches. Dispensational Premillennialism teaches God has two people, one is the nation of Israel, and the other is the Church. Not only are there two different groups of people but each has its own purpose and destiny. That is what DPism teaches.

What I do know is that you need to be educated on how a Jew may be identified in today's current times.

There is neither nor gentiles in Christ. A Jew that is converted to Christ is called a Christian, even in today's current times. Some of those converts call themselves "Messianic Jews" but that label was coined by a Baptist minister in the 1960s as he began an effort to address the needs of Jewish converts in his congregation. That effort grew into a movement we know as the label he gave it. As far as God is concerned, all converts to Christ, whether previously Jewish or Gentile pagan, are now called Christians.


There are no red herrings.

 

[CrowCross]

Before answering let me remind you of something that comes up often between us: you may be different than mainstream Dispensationalism. Just because you hold a different point f view from what DPism teaches does not mean that's not what DPism teaches. It means you are either not wholly Dispensationally premillennial, or you're an inconsistent Dispensationalist. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Dispensational Premillennialism reads passages like Zechariah 13:8 to be a reference to the future destruction of people living in the geo-political nation-state of Israel. The inhabitants of Israel are called Jews. Therefore the interpretation two thirds of Israel's inhabitants are going to be destroyed is equivalent to saying two-thirds of the Jews will be destroyed.

Zechariah 13:8
"It will come about in all the land,” declares the LORD, "That two parts in it will be cut off and perish; but the third will be left in it."

You may or may not read that text that way but that is what DPism teaches. HERE is an example of DPers doing so. It is found a lot among Zionist segments of modern futurism in Christianity.

I wish you were a little bit more precise on what paragraph of the article you had in mind to use against me.

As to Zech 13:8....the bible says what it says.

Revelation 6 speaks of a time after the Christians are removed when 1/4 of the population is killed with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by wild beasts of the earth....later we see where 1/3 (Rev 9:15) of the remaining are killed.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with Zech 13:8.

 

[CrowCross]

As far as the statement "I agree God has one people" goes, that is all well and good but that is NOT what DPism teaches. Dispensational Premillennialism teaches God has two people, one is the nation of Israel, and the other is the Church. Not only are there two different groups of people but each has its own purpose and destiny. That is what DPism teaches.

I agree...one is the nation of Israel, and the other is the Church.

Things get complicated...

Jer 31:4 Israel, my bride, I will rebuild you.
You will be a country again.
You will pick up your tambourines again.
You will dance with all the other people who are having fun.

The nation of Israel isn't saved. That is those of the nation of Israel haven't found salvation in Christ Jesus. Yet, God promise to save them is biblical. Now, you may disagree, but I really don't care. It's for the most part what the 144,000 mentioned in the book of Revelation is about.

Each group has it's own purpose...but the destiny is the same. Salvation in Christ Jesus.

 

[Josheb]

I wish you were a little bit more precise on what paragraph of the article you had in mind to use against me.

No one is using anything against you.

The problem is what Dispensationalism teaches. Not you. If and when you post Dispensational Premillennialist content as fact or truth the problem is the contents of the post, not you. I can prove what Dispensationalism teaches and I can prove it false. None of that is "against you." The text in question is Zechariah 13:8, so if you're not sure what I am "getting at," then Rev. 6 is irrelevant. The question is not about what Revelation 6 might say about Zechariah 13:8 but what Dispensational Premillennialism says about Zechariah 13:8.





However, we have another problem. An accusation of fallacy was made in Post 135, but the fallacy was not proven. A red herring is an argument used to divert attention from the main point. That did not happen. You must either prove Post 119 is diversionary or retract the accusation. I have reported the post accordingly. I have also addressed the accusation, explaining

1. DPism does demonstrably teach what I posted,
2. the teacing salvation is by grace does not preclude DPism from also teaching salvation by works,
3. the post upon which the accusation is based was misrepresented.

You and I cannot proceed with the discussion until the accusation has been addressed, or the matter adjudicated by the mods.

 

[CrowCross]

I still though hold to premil eschatology, but from the perspective of Historical view, and like Spurgeon, do still see a hope for national israel but that will be happening at time of the Second coming event, so all Jews right now still must go thru the Lord jesus and into the NC, and be part of spiritual Israel , with both saved jews and Saved gentiles are Lord Jesus the Mess

I pretty much agree..that is I might say it in different words. Instead of Second coming event I might have chosen "great tribulation"

but, @Josheb replied back with a strange post....I'll try to make sense out of it?????

Great. However, we're not at this moment discussing your personal viewpoint on end times. We're specifically discussing heresy, and the premise Dispensational Premillennialism is demonstrably heretical.

YIKES!!!! Dispensational Premillennialism has been deemed heretical by Josheb. LOL. Josheb disagrees with this biblical truth so he calls it heresy. What's next? Dispensational Premillennialism aren't save because of this great heresy?

One specific example of that we were discussing is the fact they claim to uphold a view of salvation that is by grace and not works but the facts of the theology unavoidably evidence the accompanying existence of what is, logically speaking, a salvation by works.

I'm now assuming you're claiming Dispensational Premillennialism teaches salvation by works?

1. Does it make sense to you that I would tell you, "You must first build a temple before God will save you"?

No...but what context are you speaking of?

1. Isn't a requirement to perform some work first and predicate a subsequent salvation upon that work a works-based salvation?

For people...NO. Do you agree that Jesus fulfilled the work?

Assuming your answers to those two questions are 1. No and 2. Yes, then you have all the evidence needed to understand the heresy in Dispensational Premillennialism's soteriology (and ecclesiology).

Scratching head...see @JesusFan, I told you it was a strange post. Josheb made the assumption of your choice..no then yes. Strange how he creates red herrings then argues for his red herrings.

There's no need to change the subject to your personal view on the end times (unless you'd like everyone here to examine it for heresy ).

Hmmmmmm, can you explain to me why Jesus didn't leave riding on a white horse again?

 

[CrowCross]

No one is using anything against you.

The problem is what Dispensationalism teaches. Not you. If and when you post Dispensational Premillennialist content as fact or truth the problem is the contents of the post, not you. I can prove what Dispensationalism teaches and I can prove it false. None of that is "against you." The text in question is Zechariah 13:8, so if you're not sure what I am "getting at," then Rev. 6 is irrelevant. The question is not about what Revelation 6 might say about Zechariah 13:8 but what Dispensational Premillennialism says about Zechariah 13:8.

You're still not making sense. You seem to object to Zech 13. Take that up with God and not me.

However, we have another problem. An accusation of fallacy was made in Post 135, but the fallacy was not proven. A red herring is an argument used to divert attention from the main point. That did not happen. You must either prove Post 119 is diversionary or retract the accusation. I have reported the post accordingly. I have also addressed the accusation, explaining

Fallacy is a mistaken belief based upon an unsound argument. That you are guilty of.
Post 119 had nothing to do with me.

1. DPism does demonstrably teach what I posted,
2. the teacing salvation is by grace does not preclude DPism from also teaching salvation by works,

LOL...seriously, LOL.

The only works that save one is the works of Christ. Got it? Or will you also disagree with this and start a new red herring.

1. the post upon which the accusation is based was misrepresented.

You and I cannot proceed with the discussion until the accusation has been addressed, or the matter adjudicated by the mods.

Perhaps they will delete the portions where you claim dispensationalist premillennialist require works for salvation.

 

[Josheb]

@CrowCross,

Would it make sense to you if I said you had to build a temple before God would save you?

Isn't a requirement to perform some work first and predicate a subsequent salvation upon that work a works-based salvation?


Forget about DPism. Just answer those two questions.

 

[JesusFan]

@CrowCross,

Would it make sense to you if I said you had to build a temple before God would save you?

Isn't a requirement to perform some work first and predicate a subsequent salvation upon that work a works-based salvation?


Forget about DPism. Just answer those two questions.

Dispy though tend to see that temple as holding memorial services to celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus, almost like the communion of thre millennium

 

[JesusFan]

I am referring to the teaching in Dispensational Premillennialism asserting a third of Israel (which would Jews) are going to be destroyed in the end times.

You're committing a flaw in reason when asking me about scripture because when it comes to the end times your answer and my answer to questions about scripture are ALWAYS going to be different than what the Dispensational Premillennialists says about the exact same text. I don't read ANY scripture to state a third of all Jews will be destroyed in the future. That might happen but if it does it will not be because of, or a fulfillment of, some eschatological text in the Bible. It might happen consequent to a Dispensationalist reading of some text, but not an objective exegetical reading.

Just curious, are you holding to an A Mil viewpoint?

 

[JesusFan]

I’m not credo Baptist.

Thats fine, as to me its not a dividing essential doctrine of the faith which mode of water baptism

 

[Josheb]

Dispy though tend to see that temple as holding memorial services to celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus, almost like the communion of thre millennium

It does not matter how the temple is construed. Requiring a work as a conditional predicate to salvation is unscriptural. It's bad soteriology.


Salvation is...

• By grace,
• Through faith,
• For works.

Ephesians 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.


Salvation is never by faith, nor by works. Works are the purpose of salvation, not it cause nor its means.

 

[Josheb]

I don't want to take this thread too far afield of the op. I've broached the matter of Dispensationalist Premillennialism as an example of heresy that can be disproven by 1) scripture and 2) what is contrary to what "would actually be considered heterodox or even heretical by historic, conservative Christian standards" as this op puts it. I, personally, would re-word that metric to say "historical orthodox Christian standards," but that's probably just a matter of preferred wording.

I have asserted Dispensational Premillennialism teaches two different, not one, paths to salvation; one by grace alone and the other by works plus grace (or grace plus works, if the reader prefers). The best books on Dispensational Premillennialism (DP), imo, are the two books written by Lewis Sperry Chafer and Charles Ryrie. Both books have the same title. They are titled, simply, "Dispensationalism." They are very similar in content, and I prefer Chafer's version of over Ryrie's because of its breadth and articulation (and the Kindle format is only 99 cents!) but Ryrie's is the text most often quoted by contemporary Dispensationalists like Thomas Ice, Michael Vlach, and others. Both books are fairly big books. Both books explicitly claim to address the oft-leveled criticism DPism teaches a different soteriology. Both books explicitly affirm scripture and the historical, orthodox position salvation is by grace through faith and not by works. But that is as far as either book goes. Neither Chafer nor Ryrie ever address the substance of the criticism.

I have articulated the substance of the criticism as that of a two-pronged soteriology; a teaching in which the orthodox position is openly taught and a teaching in which another set of metrics is also taught, that of works. To evidence this second means of salvation I have made note of the events DPism teaches will happen and must happen before Jesus will physically return to earth and establish his monarchy a millennial kingdom that will last specifically and literally for one thousand years. Some Dispensationalists teach these events will happen prior to Christ's return, others teach these events will occur after his return but all Dispensationalists teach these events are necessarily occurring events on the path to God bringing the nation-state, bloodline Jews to salvation in Christ. I list four events but have focused on the matter of building a temple as a specific example of works eventually leading to salvation. Chafer and Sperry never address the specific connection between these supposedly prophesied works and their service as a means of salvation. Neither do Pentecost, Walvoord, Ice, Vlach, or any other DPist. It's a huge void in their apologetic.

For this post I've chosen to source John Walvoord. I've made this choice for a various reason. Chafer was the founder of the college we now call Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS) in the early 1900s. Ryrie was his successor. These two men (along with people like Pentecost and Moody) were the preeminent disseminators of Dispensational Premillennialism in the first half of that century. They are still used today but as source material they are 100 years old. Walvoord was a successor to Ryrie. He was president of DTS until from 1952 until 1986 (34 years). Mark Yarborough, a former instructor of mine, is the current president of DTS. Another reason for using Walvoord in this post is because Walvoord taught and mentored Thomas Ice. Walvoord educated Ice specifically on eschatology and the two of them worked together promoting Dispensational Premillennialism until Walvoord died in 2002. Contemporary Dispensationalists like Vlach came to DPism through a different schooling but they all still cite Chafer, Ryrie, and Vlach as the authorities within the theology.

So HERE is (part of) what Walvoord had to say about the Dispensational Premillennial belief Israel will build another temple. HERE is (part of) what Walvoord taught about the restoration and salvation of Israel. Note these articles were written by Walvoord in Walvoord's own words at Walvoord's own website. The first article lays out the apologetic for another temple specifically as an integral part of Israel's restoration. He explicitly states, "The answer to the question of whether Israel will rebuild their temple is integral to the larger question of whether the Bible teaches Israel’s restoration as a nation." Walvoord also states, "On the basis of Matthew 24:15 with supporting Scriptures from Daniel, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 13, it may be concluded that Scriptures anticipate a future temple with a sacrificial system which will be under way at the time 'the prince that shall come' exercises his authority, desecrates the temple, and establishes himself as the object of worship," which necessarily means the temple will be built prior to Christ's return. He's not a Dispensationalist who holds to a later timeline. The temple will be built prior to Christ's return, and the building of the temple is integral to the restoration of Israel. What this means is that Jesus is not physically on earth instigating or overseeing the rebuilding of the temple. The temple is built by Jews, not Christians.

So what? A temple is going to be built (according to the teaching of DPism) and that event is integral to the restoration of Israel. How does that factor into Israel's salvation from sin? I might rhetorically ask, "What good is the physical restoration of a geopolitical nation-state and national identity under Christ if no one gets saved from sin?" but I'll let Walvoord make the connection.

In the second article Walvoord lays out a case for the restoration of Israel, and about three-quarter of the way down he states,

"The combination of righteous government and abundant spiritual life will issue in many practical results in the millennial kingdom, and Israel will enjoy a period of physical as well as spiritual prosperity. Universal justice and peace will provide a proper basis for economic development without the curse of military expenditures, injustice, or inequities. Evidence seems to point to the fact that at the beginning of the millennium all adults who are permitted to enter the kingdom will be saved. The probability is that as children grow to maturity and a new generation is born a majority of those on the earth will experience real salvation, a situation far different than any previous period since the early days of man on earth."​

This is remarkable because Walvoord has predicated the salvation of Israel on the prospect of children growing up, growing to maturity, and thereby experiencing a "real" salvation. This stands in contrast to the alternative wherein God Himself acts as the soteriological agent (either monergistically or synergistically). What Walvoord has asserted is a salvation by generational development. He's also predicated this maturity on a "righteous government." In other words, saved people do not form the righteous government, growing up under a righteous government leads to salvation over the course of a few generations. More germanely to my original point, the building of the temple is necessary for the restoration of Israel, and the restoration of Israel lead to eventual salvation. If all the milestone in the middle or removed there is a direct causal link between temple building and eventual salvation. According to this article HERE, the salvation mentioned in Romans 11 is a group salvation, not an individual salvation. It's a salvation unlike Paul's Damascus road conversion or that even of Acts 2's Pentecost or the Areopagus in Acts 17. It's not an individual salvation and it's not a group salvation like anything previously presented in scripture.

This is what Dispensational Premillennialism teaches soteriologically. Yes, they do teach and individual salvation that is by grace through faith in which an individual is regenerated by God such that he professes Christ as Lord and Savior.... but they also teach a salvation that is necessarily and inescapably a causal consequence of physical works of the pre-saved flesh and a form of social Darwinism in which children growing up in the millennial kingdom under a righteous government mature into a real salvation.



Now if any of you reading this consider yourselves Dispensational Premillennialists (or more generically, modern futurists) and you hear yourself saying, "Well that is definitely not what I believe," that disagreement is not proof I am wrong. It simply means you are either

• You're not as much of a Dispensational Premillennialist as you thought you were,
• You were not fully informed about Dispensational Premillennialism and never realized all the theology teaches,
• You're doubled minded ,
• Or you might be Dispensationally Premillennial but inconsistently so.

Or some combination of the four . What is not possible is to deny the two-pronged soteriology implicitly taught by the Dispensationalist timeline of end time events. Some folks get saved by grace through faith and their profession of that faith in Christ. Those folks could come (be brought) salvifically to Jesus at any time, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, but bloodline Jews are going to be brought to salvation because they have built a temple, reconstituted the priesthood, reinstituted animal sacrifices and worked in a pre-salvific state to bring about the restoration of Israel before God sees fit to save them as a group through socialization.

Not only is that salvation by works, but it is also not an historical, orthodox view of salvation. It goes against everything scripture teaches and everything 2,000 years of historical, orthodox Christian thought, doctrine, and practice has taught. That qualifies the soteriology of DPism as heresy.

I can make similar cases - cases formed from the words of leading, authoritative Dispensationalists in their own words - proving DPism teaches a different Christology, and different ecclesiology, and (obviously) a different eschatology. Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology are core doctrines. It's not possible to teach three core doctrines differently than the historical, orthodox positions and not be heretical. So, I encourage all the modern futurists to critically examine DP theology. Be as critical of those sources as you are of my posts .

Anyone wishing to discuss this post and/or other compromises to Christian doctrine existing within Dispensational Premillennialism can post those comments and inquiries HERE so as not to further disrupt this thread.