95 Theses Against Dispensationalism

[Covenanter]

The “tribulation” in Matthew 24:

I. Jesus said, “Then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.”
II. Immediately following this “tribulation” would be:

A. The sun be darkened
B. The moon shall not give her light
C. The stars shall fall from heaven
D.The powers of the heavens shall be shaken

Please read Isaiah 13 regarding the destruction of Babylon by the Medes. Jesus is using the same imagery.


E. The sign of the Son of man shall appear in heaven, followed by:

Jesus was asked about signs Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled? & here he is giving them. The OT sign of God's presence among his people was the pillar of cloud. Sadly the clouds from heaven show the sign of Christ's presence for final judgment on the city.

1.All the tribes of the earth mourn
Of course they do, but in the context of the destruction, the tribes are the tribes of Israel – of the land. The KJV translators are not imposing an interpertation. See also Rev. 1:7 which specific refers to those who pierced him – the rebellious Jews.

2.They shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

That is a ref. To Dan 7:13 – his prophesied ascension, & the words for which he was condemned for blasphemy. Sadly they will “see” him ascended & in glory as they did through the eyes of Stephen in Acts 7.


3. He shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Two possibilities here – Angels are messengers, & Gospel messengers were sent throughout the world to gather the elect by the Gospel.
A reference to the 144,000 sealed & delivered before the 4 winds are released. John is alluding to the Olivet prophecy.

-----

In answer to your “generation” question, there are several interpretations to that. I have a couple of ideas:

Matthew 24:32-34, “Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33) So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34)Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Jesus has given many signs – signs that were recognised 3 ½ years before the destruction by the Jerusalem Christians. All was fulfilled.
The $section mark should be on verse 35, where Jesus begins to speak about the passing of heaven & earth, when there will be no warning signs for Jesus to give, nor any date indicators.


35) Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.”

“When ye shall see these things…” as above mentioned, “…know that it is near…” What is near?

The destruction, obviously – that is what Jesus is talking about.

The question is answered in the next two verses:

Matthew 24:36-37, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37) But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”

What is near, when all these things happen, is the coming of the Son of Man. “This generation” is the generation that sees all these things. The idea is, that it will happen succinctly and rapidly, and when it starts the same generation will see it from beginning to end. It’s that, or it’s the generation that sees the fig tree (Israel) put for leaves.

Note the way Jesus refers to the fig tree in Luke 13 & 21. 29 ¶ And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; Luk 13:7   Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? Simply a warning to recognise the signs.

If you disagree with me, then you’re going to have a hard time reconciling every one of those above points as to having already happened, all in 70 A.D. They can easily be reconciled as occurring during the Battle of Armageddon throughout Revelation.

Once you do manage to do that, please answer what in Matthew 24 specifically is “…the end of the world” in verse 3?

Gk aion/world is variously translated: AV — ever 71, world 38, never + 3364 + 1519 + 3588 6, evermore 4, age 2, eternal 2, misc 5 so does not necessarily mean the planet. Likewise Gk kosmos.

Jesus has prophesied the destruction, obviously the end of the old covenant order or age. But if you insist, then Heaven and earth shall pass away, for which Jesus gives no signs.

One more thought, if "this generation" was specific to the actual people to Jesus was speaking to, as in it was meant personal and not representative, then please spiritual this passage for me and explain how every single Jew alive at the crucifixion was also alive at your spiritual Second Coming of Christ:
Invicta has answered that. All it needs is for some to be alive.
Hebrews says: Hbr 3:7 ¶ Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,
8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:
9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.
 10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in [their] heart; and they have not known my ways.11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)


Rev. 1:7, "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen."

John is referring to Mat. 24, & the judgment of the tribes of the land who pierced him.

I am not “correcting the KJV”, but seeking the precise meaning of words that have different meanings & translations according to context, & where we may see (with our understanding) a different meaning to that intended.

[Covenanter]

Yes, good point. It's not valid to post links to other arguments or links to stories or links to opinion pieces. That makes a lot of sense. So, if I went onto another message board and posted a link to one of your posts...it's not valid. Right, makes a lot of sense.

You did not express you own opinion, nor did you post a link.
You did not even give a reason for that massive c/p.
I don't object to relevant c/p - I do it with Scripture.

[DennisD]

You did not express you own opinion, nor did you post a link.
You did not even give a reason for that massive c/p.
I don't object to relevant c/p - I do it with Scripture.

I sorry that your pride of your prophecy/revelation knowledge hinders any thought that you could be wrong about anything in that subject. I fail to recognize how sharing an opinion by David Cloud is not relevant to the discussion, if it's about the discussion at hand...it is indeed relevant. I noted where it was from (there is no link, I c/p from Swordsearcher). If you read it, you would see it is relevant to the discussion. I see no rule that states I must express my own opinion on the matter. As has been stated, my knowledge on the topic isn't that good so I posted something that I found and read for food for thought. Edited December 4, 2010 by DennisD

[Wilchbla]

I'm not AM, but this is a pretty weak argument.
God bless,
Joel ><>.
2 Chronicles 7:14.

It's not a weak argument. England, as well as the rest of Europe and the papacy, claimed that the kingdom of heaven was was passed to the Gentiles via the so called ten lost tribes. This is how Armstrong came up with his British Israelism and it is what is taught in that hymn. That is pure amillennialism and is what is at the core of Europe's persection of the Jews and the constant wars of Imperialism.

In any case, the OP is ridiculous. Nobody is going to waste their time trying to refute all 95 points. I know how it goes. If we don't then surely it will be claimed that we wouldn't answer the OP's post or that we are dodging. Edited December 5, 2010 by Wilchbla

[Covenanter]

It's not a weak argument. England, as well as the rest of Europe and the papacy, claimed that the kingdom of heaven was was passed to the Gentiles via the so called ten lost tribes. This is how Armstrong came up with his British Israelism and it is what is taught in that hymn. That is pure amillennialism and is what is at the core of Europe's persection of the Jews and the constant wars of Imperialism.

In any case, the OP is ridiculous. Nobody is going to waste their time trying to refute all 95 points. I know how it goes. If we don't then surely it will be claimed that we wouldn't answer the OP's post or that we are dodging.

"Jerusalem" & the underlying doctrine is POSTmil, not amil. Once the power of the Papacy was broken, after 1260 years, by the Reformation, the Reformers saw the the millennium being spread by the Gospel.

[Crushmaster]

It's not a weak argument. England, as well as the rest of Europe and the papacy, claimed that the kingdom of heaven was was passed to the Gentiles via the so called ten lost tribes. This is how Armstrong came up with his British Israelism and it is what is taught in that hymn. That is pure amillennialism and is what is at the core of Europe's persection of the Jews and the constant wars of Imperialism.

...Sir, he didn't even say most British people took an AM stance; he just said that most AMs in England take a historcist view of their position. I can agree AM and PostM are false doctrines, but you can't argue against them just by saying some things against a person's nation. That's ridiculous.
God bless,
Joel ><>.
2 Chronicles 7:14. Edited December 5, 2010 by Crushmaster

[anime4christ]

In any case, the OP is ridiculous. Nobody is going to waste their time trying to refute all 95 points. I know how it goes. If we don't then surely it will be claimed that we wouldn't answer the OP's post or that we are dodging.

Some people did, and someone has posted a link to an answer to the theses. There is nothing ridiculous about it. Civilized debate is a good thing in the body of Christ. It helps us see the flaws of our systems and has us going back to the Bible for truth. What is so ridiculous about that? I still have yet to read the whole reply to the theses, but I have read part of it. While I still don't agree with dispensationalism, the guy is doing a good job of answering on a lot of the points. I respect people who can think and reply intelligently. Unfortunately, there are very few dispensationalists who can do that.

[John81]

I like reading civil discussions of biblical matters. There is nothing wrong with having our positions tested or built up. Many things I wrongly held to when I was a new Christian I may still believe today had I not encountered those willing to civily express their views. At the same time, it's possible that if there were not those willing and able to defend some good biblical principles I held to then, that those may have been swept aside by something else put forth convincingly.

We have many brothers and sisters in Christ who have learned false doctrine in this area and so many others, covering the terrain of everything from eternal security to healing and everything in between.

There are also many professing Christians who are yet lost because they have been taught false teachings and these are in great need of seeing the light whether they be Catholic, Episcopal, Methodist, Anglican, Presby, Baptist or whatever.

[Invicta]

Taken from Way of Life Encyclopedia:


Different Interpretations of Revelation

POST-MILLENNIAL. According to this view, the church will overcome evil in the world by Gospel preaching and socio-political action. Civilization will gradually become better, ultimately resulting in the kingdom of God. This view ignores much Bible prophecy-for example, the apostasy of the professing church (2Ti. 3) and the violent defeat of Satan and wicked men at Christ's return (2Th 1-2; Re 19).

Actually the most litteralist I know are Post Millenial, followers of B W Newton and Tregelles. The S.G.A.T. teach that you don't interpret prophecy, you just read it. Even David Cloud interprets pprophecy. I have a great respect for David Cloud in his ministry of bringing biblical standards to our attention and warning of he errors of many in the church, but when it comes to prophecy I would not trust him.

See for his prophecy which he confidently says is future, but which happened in the greek period.

David Cloud just copies other writers in this.

[John81]

Do you believe the world is becoming a better place?

[Invicta]

...Sir, he didn't even say most British people took an AM stance; he just said that most AMs in England take a historcist view of their position. I can agree AM and PostM are false doctrines, but you can't argue against them just by saying some things against a person's nation. That's ridiculous.
God bless,
Joel ><>.
2 Chronicles 7:14.

Yes sir. Armstrong was an American and his heresy spread over here. Those who believe this teaching are called "British Israelites." The British Israelites bekeieve that the first who taught something similar to their views was one, Richard brothers, 1757-1824. He was known as The Mad Prophet, claimed he was the "Nephew of the Almighty" and demanded that the king hand over his crown to him. Brothers was condemned to gaol as a criminal lunatic. We have somebody who comes into our services from time to time who is a member of the WWCOG, the former Armstrong church. He says his church ditched the Armstrong teachings and their membership plummeted from 120 to 6. (I had not reaalised that they had a "church" in our area till then. He first came as a result of our leaflets delivered last Christmas.) I asked him if they still believed that Britain and America are the lost ten tribes and he said they don't. Then added, "But I do." He went on to explain that the royal family were Jewish, according to him, and Princess Diana said that she was wary about marrying into a Jewish Family. I told him that the 10 tribes were not lost, anymore than the two tribes were.

[Invicta]

Do you believe the world is becoming a better place?

No, do you?

[Invicta]

I sorry that your pride of your prophecy/revelation knowledge hinders any thought that you could be wrong about anything in that subject.

Well I once spoke to a pastor who I disagreed with and said "We cannot all be right, but we can all be wrong." He replied I'm not wrong." (He is a-mil.) This is the view of Dispis that I have spoken to. For instance, our preacher this evening is a dispensationalist and when I have tried to speak to him on the subject, he just shouts his view and walks away.

Jerusalem is not a hymn. It is the signature tune of the Womens Institute, an organisation for women, in country areas, which I believe is based vaguely on the Anglican church, inasmuch as in villages most organisations would be based either on the village church or the village pub, or both. It would not be in any evangelical hymnbooks. I once needed the tune for something else and the book which I got had an explanation of each song at the back and of this one it said, "Basically the answer is "No!" Edited December 6, 2010 by Invicta

[John81]

No, do you?

No, but I've heard those who believe they are going to bring about paradise on earth so Jesus will return make prolonged arguments trying to convince folks the world really is getting better.

[Wilchbla]

...Sir, he didn't even say most British people took an AM stance; he just said that most AMs in England take a historcist view of their position. I can agree AM and PostM are false doctrines, but you can't argue against them just by saying some things against a person's nation. That's ridiculous.
God bless,
Joel ><>.
2 Chronicles 7:14.

Doesn't matter. Most British people (at least those who care about the issue) do take the AM stance. The is the historic view that has been propagated for centuries among the British people by it's religious leaders and would account for a lot of the European wars.

The Jew is cursed.

The kingdom of God has passed from Israel to the church.

The church is the kingdom of heaven on earth.

The Monarchy is its civil head (and religious to a certain extant i.e. the Divine Right of Kings).