Is there a relationship between eschatology and how one experiences society

[Neto]

The main implication of the type "Dispensationalism" that I encountered most is that which put a great deal of focus on Cessationism - the ceasing of the gifts of the Spirit with the end of the original Apostles (including Paul, as one "born out of season"). I never heard anything from the type of belief that apparently had been more prevalent in an earlier time, the idea that the Church would grow in number, power, and influence to the point that 'she" would have prepared the world for the arrival of the King, that the whole world would be under the domination of the Kingdom before Christ returns.

I think that where a view of eschatology would bear an influence on people's lives now is as it relates to a pre-tribulational vs a mid- (or pre-wrath) or post-tribulational view, in that the pre-trib position pretty much assumes that there will not be any severe persecution before the time of the "catching up", so that one would maintain control over, for instance, one's home and savings. (The pre-trib position assumes that yes, we will leave things behind, but we won't need them at all, so no matter. The other views basically assume that we will be deprived of our belongings before that time. The mid-trib might be an exception, in that the first 3 1/2 years are said to be a time of world prosperity under the growing rule of the anti-Christ.)

[Sudsy]

Some believers experienced COVID as an era of serious government overreach that believers must resist, others were more comfortable observing health regulations. Is this distinction correlated to eschatology?

Myself, I was comfortable observing what the government thought was best and did not feel threatened by their restrictions. Whether it being a sign of the end, I was raised where all kinds of changes in the world were supposed indicators that the rapture would soon occur. It was often used in my pre-trib, pre-mill Pentecostal background to 'scare the hell out of us' , so to speak. It was more a case of 'you don't want to be caught doing this or that or being in a certain environment when the rapture takes place'. I would not be surprised that this Covid restriction was preached as a sign of the last days before the rapture takes place.

These two variables are the poll options, did government overreach necessitate personal resistance and is your theological background sympathetic to dispensationalism (left behind, pretrib rapture) or skeptical of it.

Although my eschalogical background was as I mentioned above, I chose to be a 'pan mill, pan trib' believer now. 'Pan' meaning it will all pan out in the end so the more important way to look at the future is that your next breath may be your last one so repent today and focus on bringing others into the Kingdom life.

[Josh]

I was once part of a Beachy mission type of church (lots of seekers) where we simply would not read passages past Revelation 4, due to the diversity of opinions in eschatology, the rapture, dispensationalism, and cessationism.

One of the challenges of trying to have a single church be pluralistic in doctrine.

[Nomad]

One of the challenges of trying to have a single church be pluralistic in doctrine.

I agree, its difficult when people have strong opinions and are unwilling to bend. I personally have been edified by amill, postmil, premil, and all types of prophetic persuasions which has lead me to think its a 3rd-tier issue that we can respectfully and lovingly disagree with brothers on. At the same time I dont think avoiding the subject is a good solution either since there is prophecy all through the Bible and we shouldn't be scared to discuss it in a kind manner.

I once heard a sermon at Anabaptist identity conference on dispensationalism and virtually none of it was true. Which made me wonder if some of my presuppositions on amill and postmill could be wrong. So I read some books by different Christians of that persuasion and I was surprised to find that there were things I actually learned and could agree with them on. It kind of feels like we have this weird Americanized sociology-type view where we want to classify everybody and place them in a box so that we can understand them. Basically make them the puppet and us the puppetmaster who claims I have their view entirely pinned down when in reality we are just as biased as they are...Anabaptist themselves never came up with that name. Others labeled them such. Same with all the other views, (Covenant theology, pre a and post-mill). We love to put labels and pretend we have everyone figured out.

[Josh]

I can confidently state the the dispensational doctrine espoused by Cyrus Scofield in his Scofield Bible is untrue, and it is frankly sad that any plain Anabaptist would listen to a commentary by someone who defrauded his own mother and abandoned his wife and children and refused to support them.

[Nomad]

I can confidently state the the dispensational doctrine espoused by Cyrus Scofield in his Scofield Bible is untrue, and it is frankly sad that any plain Anabaptist would listen to a commentary by someone who defrauded his own mother and abandoned his wife and children and refused to support them.

No worries. You have made your point loud and clear.

[Nomad]

I use the term "dispensationalist" loosely. The reason I would classify myself as such is because I see a future for Israel with Jesus as their King fulfilling his promises to them made in the Old Testament to reign in Jerusalem over the tribes of Israel in a literal sense. When I read Ezekiels vision in ch. 40-48, it gives a promise of a massive temple described in intricate detail, twice the size of Herods. And since there is no temple in the eternal state it makes sense to me it must be in the Millennial reign. The tribes are also given land in a different layout than they ever were previously, the Levites given land with boarders which previously they didn't have, a platform is built in the temple that will hold millions of people to worship, no veil, shewbread, or ark of covenant are described in the temple along with different Laws + sacrifices. A prince is mentioned who will reign and live with land near the temple. All of this seems like it hasn't happened yet and it appears to me that it must be future. The other explanations I've heard of this temple just being subsumed into the Church or it being what Zerubbabels temple "should" have been doesn't make sense to me. The plethora of verses speaking of Israels restoration in the OT don't seem to me to be the church since its often spoken in contrast of their rejection and to subscribe the "blessings to the Church" and the "curses to Israel" seems a bit like a subjective read and a touch cruel if I can say that...

I also am not comfortable with the "Christocentric" view of reading scripture. Its true, everything is fulfilled in Christ, including both the NT church and the nation Israel. But I dont think that the OT is "reinterpreted", "subsumed", or "transcended" by the NT. To me it diminishes the power and meaning of the OT if we read it as such. Though I have learned good solid Christian teaching that I am very thankful for from amillennialist and postmillenialist, I usually underline it in my mind when they start using NT "transcends" the OT language.

All this said, I probably couldn't list the 7 dispensations off the top of my head, nor do I applaud every modern Israel war accomplishment or see it as prophecy. As a Christian I am closer to a Christian Arab than I am a non-believing Israeli Jew. I dont have any prophecy charts currently hanging on my wall and I've never read the "Left Behind series". Nor have I read Scofields notes (for every sinner you name that is dispensational I could name an Anabaptist/amill/postmill sinner in return). I do believe that there are allegorical interpretation on the Bible, meaning I dont think trees will actually clap their hands or Jesus was actually a physical Lamb. Although I probably wouldn't read into the types and allegories as much as some. I personally could care less what dates the dispensational view was started or if Darby or Plymouth started it. Its just a system that I got labeled and rather than fight it all the time, I chose to embrace it...even if I dont agree with every aspect of it.

[Josh]

I’ve never really had a dispenasationalist (or the charismatic / evangelical edition of such who just believes the State of Israel established in 1948 is somehow connected to biblical prophecy, such as my parents) explain exactly who modern day “Israel” is.

Exactly what promises did God make and to whom? He sent Jesus and many believed, some of whose descendants continue to live in the Holy Land to this day - as Arab Christians. I don’t see any special promises to people who refused to believe and continued to refuse to believe for 2,000 years, other than the same offer of salvation made to all unbelieving people everywhere.

Membership in an ethnic group, I think, no longer is God’s plan for special promises and privileges.

[Neto]

If you believe that the 'Church' started at Pentecost, then you are a dispensationalist, whether you like being called that, or not. I don't believe that, but I would still consider myself to be a dispensationalist. (Like Nomad says, I also believe that Israel as a people still has a place in God's plan. Just not the current state of Israel. I haven't thought so since the early to mid 70's.)

[Josh]

Who exactly are “Israel as a people”?