Dispensationalism, John Darby, etc.

[Heirbyadoption]

Where are you, Heir? May I ask if this is an exciting time for you with the current events in Israel? Do the GB's keep a pulse on what is occurring in Israel?

It seems worth reiterating at this point that not all of us pre-mill types are wholesale Dispensationalists, nor do we all pin all of our hopes and dreams on particular dates and exactly assumed timeline, even if we see a chronological order suggested in Scripture. There have been some unfortunate generalizations and misrepresentations of various positions in a couple previous posts in this thread. Probably the one fundamental one I would note is the idea that "Dispensationalists" (and we have admittedly had our share among our particular strain of Plain folk) do NOT necessarily discount the teachings of Jesus as having been given under the Old Covenant (as opposed to the teachings of Paul under the New Covenant) - that would be "Hyper-Dispensationalists". Even from the Dispensationalist-leaning ministers I grew up under in our Brethren groups, none ever went to the "Hyper" extreme. And you have to bear in mind, we ARE only half-breed Anabaptists after all, lol. But that's probably a post in its own right - it just seemed worth pointing out that there is indeed a difference in Ds & HyperDs. We also had our share of Replacement Theology preachers in the midwest/east, though most/all of that thinking would would have stayed with the Old Conference (OGBBC) folks after we (OGBBC-NC) got the boot or even drifted on into the new ultra-conservative bunch (OGBC) which pulled out of OC two years ago.

AndersonD (are we acquainted IRL, btw?) - all of history is exciting to me. Are the currents events in Israel exciting to me? As I age, they're probably more sobering than exciting, perhaps, along with all the various posturings and conflict potentials around the world as well, not just Israel. Having said that, yes - a lot of our folks have long kept, and continue to keep, an eye on what happens specifically in Israel or in connection with it. While we don't necessarily set dates or concretely ascribe specific nations or contemporary geo-political entities to specific players in eschatology, we still keep our eyes open.

[Ernie]

Where are you, Heir? May I ask if this is an exciting time for you with the current events in Israel? Do the GB's keep a pulse on what is occurring in Israel?

It seems worth reiterating at this point that not all of us pre-mill types are wholesale Dispensationalists, nor do we all pin all of our hopes and dreams on particular dates and exactly assumed timeline, even if we see a chronological order suggested in Scripture. There have been some unfortunate generalizations and misrepresentations of various positions in a couple previous posts in this thread. Probably the one fundamental one I would note is the idea that "Dispensationalists" (and we have admittedly had our share among our particular strain of Plain folk) do NOT necessarily discount the teachings of Jesus as having been given under the Old Covenant (as opposed to the teachings of Paul under the New Covenant) - that would be "Hyper-Dispensationalists". Even from the Dispensationalist-leaning ministers I grew up under in our Brethren groups, none ever went to the "Hyper" extreme. And you have to bear in mind, we ARE only half-breed Anabaptists after all, lol. But that's probably a post in its own right - it just seemed worth pointing out that there is indeed a difference in Ds & HyperDs. We also had our share of Replacement Theology preachers in the midwest/east, though most/all of that thinking would would have stayed with the Old Conference (OGBBC) folks after we (OGBBC-NC) got the boot or even drifted on into the new ultra-conservative bunch (OGBC) which pulled out of OC two years ago.

AndersonD (are we acquainted IRL, btw?) - all of history is exciting to me. Are the currents events in Israel exciting to me? As I age, they're probably more sobering than exciting, perhaps, along with all the various posturings and conflict potentials around the world as well, not just Israel. Having said that, yes - a lot of our folks have long kept, and continue to keep, an eye on what happens specifically in Israel or in connection with it. While we don't necessarily set dates or concretely ascribe specific nations or contemporary geo-political entities to specific players in eschatology, we still keep our eyes open.

Interesting. So what are some predictions or chapter/verse assignments to world events that you have heard or heard about in your lifetime that you think were off track or misguided at best?

[HondurasKeiser]

I know people don't love videos posted but this happened to come across my transom this morning and I thought it was good and relevant to the topic:

[JohnHurt]

Where are you, Heir? May I ask if this is an exciting time for you with the current events in Israel? Do the GB's keep a pulse on what is occurring in Israel?

It seems worth reiterating at this point that not all of us pre-mill types are wholesale Dispensationalists, nor do we all pin all of our hopes and dreams on particular dates and exactly assumed timeline, even if we see a chronological order suggested in Scripture. There have been some unfortunate generalizations and misrepresentations of various positions in a couple previous posts in this thread. Probably the one fundamental one I would note is the idea that "Dispensationalists" (and we have admittedly had our share among our particular strain of Plain folk) do NOT necessarily discount the teachings of Jesus as having been given under the Old Covenant (as opposed to the teachings of Paul under the New Covenant) - that would be "Hyper-Dispensationalists". Even from the Dispensationalist-leaning ministers I grew up under in our Brethren groups, none ever went to the "Hyper" extreme. And you have to bear in mind, we ARE only half-breed Anabaptists after all, lol. But that's probably a post in its own right - it just seemed worth pointing out that there is indeed a difference in Ds & HyperDs. We also had our share of Replacement Theology preachers in the midwest/east, though most/all of that thinking would would have stayed with the Old Conference (OGBBC) folks after we (OGBBC-NC) got the boot or even drifted on into the new ultra-conservative bunch (OGBC) which pulled out of OC two years ago.

AndersonD (are we acquainted IRL, btw?) - all of history is exciting to me. Are the currents events in Israel exciting to me? As I age, they're probably more sobering than exciting, perhaps, along with all the various posturings and conflict potentials around the world as well, not just Israel. Having said that, yes - a lot of our folks have long kept, and continue to keep, an eye on what happens specifically in Israel or in connection with it. While we don't necessarily set dates or concretely ascribe specific nations or contemporary geo-political entities to specific players in eschatology, we still keep our eyes open.

The other problems that "Dispensationalism" has:

1. The Jews are not "Biblical Israel", because they do not fulfill the prophecies of Israel. The modern "State of Israel" created by the Rothchild Banking empire has nothing to do with the Israel of God. Here is the proof:

a. The Bible says that Christ will rule Israel:

Matthew 2:(6) And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

The Jews are not ruled by Christ, and are not Israel. The "State of Israel" is not ruled by Christ and is not Israel. Rev 2:9, Rev 3:9

b. The New Covenant is made with Israel:

Hebrews 8:(8) For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

The Jews are not under the New Covenant, and are not the "Israel" that God chose. They are the false Israel. Rev 3:9

c. God promised David while Israel was in Palestine that God would create a new home for Israel, outside of Palestine:

2 Sam 7:(10) Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime,

And there are many, many other verses that prove the Jews of today who reject Christ are not Israel. Rev 2:9



2. Christ said there is no Rapture of the righteous, only the wicked - the opposite of what Darby teaches.

Matt 13:(40) As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

(41) The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

(42) And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

(43) Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

This is the Kingdom when the wicked are taken and burned, and fulfills Christs promise that "the meek (or self disciplined) shall inherit the earth). There is no rapture of the righteous.




3. The "Millennium" is is not a literal period of time.

Otherwise, you need a literal "bottomless pit", a literal chain, and a literal key. And the Adversary is some literal reptile creature from the dinosaur age:

Rev 20:(1) And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

(2) And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

This is all "figurative language" and is not reality. And the reality is, there is no 1,000 year reign, it is a symbol.



Darby, Scofield, and all of the rest of these charlatans have us looking at some obscure verse, when we should be following Christ's doctrines, like taking in the stranger, feeding the hungry, and clothing those that are naked. Matt 25:31-46

The "New Testament" Canon was created by Constantine and his wicked priests, like Athanasius. Adding the books written "after the Gospels" to the NT Canon so that these books are esteemed to be of equal or of more importance than the 4 Gospels - this has splintered the "One Church" that Christ prayed for in the garden. (John 17:21-22) All by design.

If every "New Testament" in the entire world consisted of only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, then the Church would be "one" in Christ, with Christ as our only teacher and instructor. Matt 23:8,10. Christ said we should teach His doctrines, He never authorized any other teacher. Matt 28:20

And for those of us that hold the 4 gospels to be superior over all other books, we have a completely different religion, the religion "of" Christ, and not a religion "about" Christ that Darby and others have sold us.

Darby is a hireling (John 10:13), and careth not for the sheep. Darby escaped obscurity and made himself "famous" to many by creating a theory that no one had ever seen until the 1850's.

If Dispensationalism is really "from God", then why did God hide it from us for over 1,800 years? Because it is from man, not God.

[JohnHurt]

I know people don't love videos posted but this happened to come across my transom this morning and I thought it was good and relevant to the topic:

That is one evil looking man. Look at those eyes. Darby's face looks like the Devil himself.

[cmbl]

It seems worth reiterating at this point that not all of us pre-mill types are wholesale Dispensationalists, nor do we all pin all of our hopes and dreams on particular dates and exactly assumed timeline, even if we see a chronological order suggested in Scripture.

I concur that it is good to remember that (historic) premillenialism is different from Dispensationalism.

There have been some unfortunate generalizations and misrepresentations of various positions in a couple previous posts in this thread. Probably the one fundamental one I would note is the idea that "Dispensationalists" (and we have admittedly had our share among our particular strain of Plain folk) do NOT necessarily discount the teachings of Jesus as having been given under the Old Covenant (as opposed to the teachings of Paul under the New Covenant) - that would be "Hyper-Dispensationalists". Even from the Dispensationalist-leaning ministers I grew up under in our Brethren groups, none ever went to the "Hyper" extreme. And you have to bear in mind, we ARE only half-breed Anabaptists after all, lol. But that's probably a post in its own right - it just seemed worth pointing out that there is indeed a difference in Ds & HyperDs.

I'll wade in...
It is a good thing that Dispensationalist - leaning Anabaptists do not discount the teachings of Jesus as having been given under the Old Covenant. However, that belief was indeed part of the ordinary, run-of-the-mill, mainstream, classic Darby-Blackstone-Brookes-Scofield Dispensationalism in the early 20th century. It was not "Hyper"-Dispensationalist. It was just Dispensationalist.

The Scofield Reference Bible, which defined Dispensationalism for generations of Americans, has this to say regarding Matthew 6:12 - "And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors."

This is legal ground. Cf. Eph 4:32 which is grace. Under law forgiveness is conditioned upon a like spirit in us; under grace we are forgiven for Christ's sake, and exhorted to forgive because we have been forgiven. Mt 18:32 26:28

In Fundamentalism and American Culture, George Marsden summarizes (Classic) Dispensationalism and writes,

Even Christ’s ministry was set in the era before the church age began. Thus his teachings in the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer proclaim righteousness on legal grounds (being still part of the Jewish “dispensation of law”) rather than on a doctrine of grace (which characterizes the church age or “dispensation of grace”). The church age is thus a historical “parenthesis.”

What of Mennonites and Brethren who are influenced by Dispensationalism? I can't speak to the Brethren context, but I would assume something similar happened there as happened with the Mennonites. When (some) Mennonites adopted Dispensationalism, they modified it to at least retain some place for Jesus' teachings today. In Building on the Gospel Foundation, Burdge and Horst write,

Beginning in the 1890s, a cadre of young Mennonite activists picked up dispensational premillenialism, some like A.D. Wenger, while attending Moody Bible Institute. Few of them accepted the entire dispensationalist package. Keeping to their native Mennonite theological tradition, which made a distinction between the Old and New Testaments, they telescoped the first five dispensations into one. They adopted the last two dispensations, the church age and the millenium, wholesale from mainstream dispensationalism, with the significant exception that they believed the Sermon on the Mount was also for the church age. In their Bible conference work, these young activists promoted their modified dispensationalism. As a result, premillenialism and some of the attendant dispensationalist doctrines gained an increased following in the Mennonite church during the first three decades of the twentieth century.

I'm always in favor of people believing that Jesus' teachings are for today, so in a sense it's a good thing that the Mennonites who adopted dispensationalism modified it to not do away with the Sermon on the Mount. It's a good thing that your Dispensational-leaning Brethren ministers have done the same. But as a matter of history, that doctrine was part of the typical (non-Hyper) Dispensationalist system.

[Sudsy]

A thread to discuss... Dispensationalism, John Darby, etc... and how this compares with other millenialist and non-millenialist views over the centuries.

Please keep partisan comments/debates out of this thread - avoid comments that reflect negatively on either right-leaning or left leaning political persuasions. Please keep this thread focused on the topic.

Dispensationalism was invented in the 1800's by Darby, Scofield, and promoted by Dwight Moody and others. Its purpose is to "dispense" with the doctrines of Jesus Christ and replace them with the doctrines of men.

Dispensationalism rests on the idea that God changes his mind in each "age', yet God said "I change not". (Malachi 3:6).

The Dispensationalists try to convince us that whatever Christ said before His Death was while He was under the "Old Testament", and so almost everything that Christ said is no longer valid.

Yet after His Death, Christ said that we should teach everyone to follow ALL of His doctrines, and only His doctrines, and no other:

Matthew 28:20 "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:"

Christ never authorized any of us to teach the doctrines of Paul, Peter, James, or John, or to rigorously follow the mistakes that various men made in the Book of Acts. Christ said that we are to teach others to observe all things whatsoever Christ has commanded, and no one else.

So why did Darby invent Dispensationalism?

Dispensationalism was a result of the rise of Protestantism over Catholicism.

The Catholic church had always taught that the Pope speaks as God, and that since the Catholic church has the power to change the Sabbath from the 7th day to the 1st day, then it has the power to replace the doctrines of Christ with the doctrines of the church, that is, men.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath#S ... _First-day

This doctrine held until the 1800's when the Catholic church began to lose its grip over believers, and people started returning to the doctrines of Christ in the Protestant churches.

Without the Catholic church, and with Protestantism fragmenting into many different system, how does the Adversary keep the Doctrines of Christ from being taught?

The answer is Dispensationalism. The Adversary has convinced us to "dispense" with Christ and put Him under the "Old Law" and abolish Him and His Doctrines from our teachings.

What are the doctrines of Christ that men like Darby, Scofield, and Moody have "dispensed" with and abolished for the modern believers?

That Christ said the every part of the Law is relevant as long as heaven and earth stand. Matt 5:17-20.
That those that work "iniquity" or "lawlessness (greek word "anomos) will be rejected by Christ. Matt 7:21-23
That eternal life is only for those that keep the 10 Commandments. Matthew 19:16-19.
That if you don't provide for the needs of other people (clothing, food, shelter) and visit those sick or in prison, you will go to a place prepared for the devil and his angels. Matthew 25: 31-46
That if you are lazy and don't use all of the talents that God gave you, you will be cast into outer darkness Matthew 25: 14-30
And many, many other doctrines that are not popular and not taught today.

Christ taught a completely different religion than the Catholic Church and Darby.

And Darby knew that and the religion "of" Christ had to be suppressed - and replaced with a religion "about" Christ.

Darby and Dispensationalism is the modern suppression of the Doctrines of Christ. That is the purpose of Dispensationalism.

Lots here, imo, to challenge with the ideas and understanding of certain scriptures but I chose to remain a 'Pan-Mill' and the idea of what dispensation I am now living in matters not to me as we have been given the Holy Spirit to guide us into how we are to live and what we need to know now to carry out our role as believers. I believe what I need to understand and apply from the scriptures is to be directed by the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit, and we should seek and be willing to be guided by Him.

I believe all these varied understandings within Christianity must be the result of some source other than the Holy Spirit, or we would be believing the same, would we not ? The way I see it is that we believers, that is, most of us, self included, go off using our brains to piece things together for certain understandings instead of listening to that still small voice saying this is the way that we should go, now believe and walk as such.

My 2 cents.

[Heirbyadoption]

The other problems that "Dispensationalism" has:.....

John I appreciate the fact that you clearly (and now we... ) know what you believe on the subject. Thank you for sharing your perspective!

Interesting. So what are some predictions or chapter/verse assignments to world events that you have heard or heard about in your lifetime that you think were off track or misguided at best?

Ernie - I'm not trying to evade your question, but honestly, I can't think of much in my lifetime, even with the strong pre-mill emphasis and growing up in the congregation that probably had the most eschatological preaching/teaching of any OGBB congregation... The hardcore Dispensationalists have mostly died out with my grandfather's generation, though some of them would have suggested the USSR might rise up back in the day. I don't know of anybody that actually was bold enough to concretely pinpoint them as such though, at least beyond being probable/possible... There has always been an emphasis among our folks to recognize that we don't know for sure and ought to be humble in any speculation. Having said that, there is one chap I know of that is 98% convinced that the antichrist will be Islam (or from among it), but that remains to be seen, obviously.

[Neto]

I just remembered the name of the author I mentioned here some days ago (as one who had just published his book on the Soviet Union as Gog and/or Magog, when it collapsed), Ray Comfort. As I recall, he was quite specific that the prophecies were about 'Russia'. (In the book I am remembering, he of course referenced the USSR.)

[JohnHurt]

Lots here, imo, to challenge with the ideas and understanding of certain scriptures but I chose to remain a 'Pan-Mill' and the idea of what dispensation I am now living in matters not to me as we have been given the Holy Spirit to guide us into how we are to live and what we need to know now to carry out our role as believers. I believe what I need to understand and apply from the scriptures is to be directed by the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit, and we should seek and be willing to be guided by Him.

I believe all these varied understandings within Christianity must be the result of some source other than the Holy Spirit, or we would be believing the same, would we not ? The way I see it is that we believers, that is, most of us, self included, go off using our brains to piece things together for certain understandings instead of listening to that still small voice saying this is the way that we should go, now believe and walk as such.

My 2 cents.

John 14:(26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.