One of the most important differences between dispensationalism and covenant theology is whether the land promises in the unconditional covenants established by God in the Abrahamic, Palestinian, and Davidic Covenants are meant to be fulfilled literally _(i.e.,_ physically) or spiritually. Dispensationalism recognizes that the land promises are meant to be fulfilled physically, whereas covenant theology is of the view that those promises are to be fulfilled spiritually, symbolically, or allegorically by the Church. Progressive dispensationalism, specifically, posits that there are two aspects to the aforementioned Old Testament covenants: physical promises and spiritual blessings. Progressive dispensationalism, then, is of the belief that the physical _(i.e.,_ land) promises were specifically given and rightfully belong to ethnoterritorial Israel, whereas the spiritual blessings belong to Israel but have been expanded and fulfilled by the New Testament Church.
If you read carefully you will nite there's 2 Covenants. One with Abram, genetic and geographic (physical) and a later with Abraham, spiritual. Covenant theology actually ignores the first time the actual word Covenant was used by God with man: Noah. There's been mane Covenants from God with man, some conditional some not. Classical disp went off the rails when it posited a permanent separation between Jew and Gentile. Even at the time of Moses Rahab and Caleb were clearly made part of the Mosaic Covenant.
To be honest, I let the Bible speak for itself. I'm not afraid of it. I was taught from a Dispositional perspective and passed all the tests but divisions are everywhere.
Good interview! Just want to encourage you and say your time and commitment to this channel and making these videos is worth it. Never know who may stumble across. I’m at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando and my brother just finished up at DTS in Dallas. This was helpful for me thinking through the debate.
One of the biggest concerns with dispensationalism that I have been concerned about is the indwelling of the Spirit, concerning those Jews who are saved during the tribulation. I’ve found that the main passage concerning the promise of the indwelling of the Spirit are followed up with the kingdom promises as well. Also, the indwelling of the Spirit was originally promised to the Jew, not as if Gentiles could not receive the Spirit, but the Jews were officially the people promised the Spirit. I’ve talked to some dispensationalists who state the Jews during the tribulation will not receive the Spirit, because they will not be apart of the Church. They tend to conclude this, because if one does receive the Spirit, technically they’d be baptized into the body of Christ, and be one of His members, and they are trying to hold strong to a pretribulational rapture view, where they conclude the Church, or the body of Christ itself is taken out of the earth. But, I find this hard to conclude when the Spirit was promised to the Jew, and the Jews will turn to Christ eventually in the midst of the tribulation….. infact, it also talks about how they will be sealed in their foreheads, which I believe has a lot to do with the sealing of the Spirit. Does anyone have any answer to this? Also, John the Baptist stated if anyone was not baptized with the Spirit (by implication then they’d be apart of the body), they’d be baptized with fire (which is God’s judgment, and I believe this is ultimately hell). If there were any saint that were not technically redeemed in the body of Christ, being preserved by the life of Christ, by His Spirit, then how could they truly be untouched by the damnation which is to come?
This video triggers my youthful obsession with Hal Lindsay’s fiction, which actually drove me to study the Bible more broadly with a Schofield Ref Bible at age 12 and a Ryrie NIV study Bible in high school. Then I went to a progressive dispensational seminary and studied under Stephen Spencer and David Turned and Carl Hoch and all those Dallas or Grace alumni. The obsession with the ordo salutis of last things is now a little ripe, but I really appreciate a 1922 work entitled Grace by LS Chafer, in which he links sanctification with grace, faith, suffering, fellowship, studying and praying, rather than the old covenant catechisms of Calvin, Luther, and Anglicans which tell the young Christian to abide by the Decalogue to grow in Christ. Old covenant theology drives me nuts with its attachment disorder and codependency with Moses and Sinai! It is as if the reformers just teach Grace only for regeneration and forensic justification then sub-contract the rest of sanctification back to the slave master of the law of Moses. Can you imagine running away from the slave ship of sin and finding freedom in Jesus who puts you back on the galley with its sabbaths, tithes, sacrifices, diet, festivals, priests, temple maintenance, circumcision, ethnic markers, uniform, and unwashed cups? God Forbid! Wretched man that I am who shall rescue me from this body of sin and death? Thanks be to God for our Lord Jesus Christ who fulfilled the law and freed us to offer ourselves to God as living sacrifices not dead ones, with new minds bent on freedom, expediency, love and hope!
Dispensationalists did NOT remove repentance. That false accusation is ridiculous. In fact you can find far more pastors who call themselves Reformed that have removed repentance; for one example most of PC-USA. You can certainly find some especially in every group.
This interview was done very well! Would the view that the land promise is fulfilled physically in the new heavens and new earth, and Gentiles who are saved are actually being allowed to share in that fulfillment since they are "grafted" into Israel (Rom. 11) be more of a Dispensational or Covenantal view of scripture?
I see the rapture as possible but not probable. Either perspective is ok because Christ has prepared me but I hate to see people praying a prayer & than waiting. I firmly believe heaven is coming down. Many take exception to that coming down vs going up. Pie in the sky by & by.
Was Ryrie's sine qua non really the sine qua non of dispensationalism? Progressive Dispensationalists changed Ryrie's sine qua non, which all Traditional Dispensationalists agreed on. Thats the main point of disagreement I think. See Progressive Dispensationalism: An Analysis of the Movement and Defense of Traditional Dispensationalism, edited by Ron J. Bigalke
What in the world does he mean, when he said, "specification of the role of Israel as part of the program and future of God, is something that Ladd did not affirm"?
How close would Dr. Bock be to what Dr. Walter Kaiser believes with regard to the Promises. It would perhaps seem they’re very close with the biggest difference being the Promise that Kaiser talks about is one over arching promise. Whereas Dr. Bock would say that’s one facet of the Dispensations?
Mystery grace vs prophetic grace I can’t even listen to people who don’t understand the difference between these two types of grace revealed in the Bible
John Nelson Darby was a harsh individual that spent considerable time excommunicating those that did not strictly adhere to his system of theology and all newfangled groups that did not believe what he believed in, including both of you. A feature overlooked by the adherents of dispensationalism is its claim that certain prophetic events are yet to be fulfilled in the future which implies that Jesus cannot return at this very moment because these so-called events have not yet taken place. Few people appreciate this fact and as a result when Jesus said, "It is finished" (John 19:30) many believe that He really didn't know what He was talking about.
What exactly do you mean by "excommunicating?" Also, could you give documented examples of the harsh attitude that you claim Darby had? To answer your claim about the Biblical prophecy from a dispensational perspective, there are certain prophecies and promises in the Bible that are yet to be fulfilled. The New Covenant that God promised in Jeremiah 31 and the 70th week of Daniel are both examples of this. However, the prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled do not inhibit Christ's imminent coming. It is clear that Christ could rapture the church up any day. Also when Christ said "it is finished," He was referring to the redemptive work on the Cross, that sin's penalty was paid and God's justice was satisfied. He was not saying all Biblical prophecies were fulfilled. We can be confident of this because once again, the New Covenant given in Jeremiah 31 has yet to be fulfilled. I hope this helps and I would appreciate your feedback.
If prophecies are not fulfilled when Jesus returns then by way of implication the prophets and apostles that made the predictions were lying. That, I submit, is impossible.
Has anyone noticed that the Bible is kind of complicated? Also there are many great men of God who hold very different views eschatologically, is this God's plan? All great men of God say the same thing; and Dr. Block is no exception, whatever is going to happen be taking the Gospel to the ends of the earth in the mean time.
I don’t think it is as complicated as it is made out to be. Covenant theology holds the standard off hermeneutics differently from the Old to the New Testament. Dispensational approach is just read the book the same way from beginning to end, as you would understand any other form of clear communication
We can consider that it’s hard to understand the water one is swimming in it. just like when Jesus came, many Jewish scholars, even John didn’t totally understand who he was because he had didn’t expectations based on his understanding of OT prophecies. Yes, it is all part of Gods plan. Good to study and be Easter to learn, to seek the truth. Also important to hold conclusions with an open hand.
Israel is not "in the land" at the time Paul wrote. They had a sliver of the promise and even that sliver they were not truly governing. Everything else is excellent. I am somewhere between revised and progressive display. The MOST important point he stressed: unlike classical we do NIT place a permanent separation between Jew and Gentile as nations and none ever between individual believers.
Can you fix a man-made doctrine? Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ? (Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30) The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations? 1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? (See Galatians 3:8) 2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ? 3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds? 4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh? 5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers? 6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"? 7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost? 8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.) 9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? 10. Watch the RUclips video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church. Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology. Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church:
“The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107. Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.” Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323. John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated… "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.” John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.) What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16? Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth? Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups? Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Hebrews 8:6-13? Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church?
I don’t think it’s about western or eastern. The New Testament writers, as well as the early church fathers that the eastern church so greatly respects, all were deeply knowledgeable of scripture and had particular views about how to understand it and interpret it. The more you study scripture it’s almost unavoidable, especially if you’re trying to teach things to others. You have to be clear about what you’re saying and not saying. I do understand the frustration though. It’s incredible hard to make sense of all the biblical data and different interpretations. But we just have to accept the life long journey of understanding God’s word
YHVH made a covenant with the children of Israel. That covenant is the contract regarding the behavior of both parties. If Israel obeyed the Law, they would be be blessed. If they disobeyed, they would be cursed. The same covenant applied to any person of any race who wanted YHVH to be their Elohim. Jesus came and redeemed us from the curse. That is the New Covenant. We are not cursed for disobedience, but we can still be blessed for obedience. The Law is STILL the Law. The Law is the instructions in righteous living. It is what identies sinful behavior. That never changes. The Law protects us from paganism. Right now, modern Christianity is engaging in all manner of spiritual adultery. It IS Mystery Babylon. The feasts of pagan gods are renamed and repurposed to accommodate Jesus. That is EXACTLY what Jesus' Father said not to do. The New Covenant is with the houses of Israel and Judah. There are NO Gentiles in the New Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31/Hebrews 8:8 Gentiles become citizens of the commonwealth of Israel. Ephesians 2:11-22 As citizens we are identified by the Law we choose to obey. It is our witness regarding who we truly serve. Romans 6:15-16 Modern Christianity has chosen the man-made doctrines and laws from Roman sun god cultists over the Torah of YHVH. They have completely inverted the message of Scripture and used philosophy and vain deceit to justify their rebellion. The idea of "reintroduction of the Law" is ample evidence that Christianity completely misses the point about what the Law is. Swine eaters and Sabbath polluters will not be Kings and Priests in the World to Come, if they make it at all. Jesus is the Passover Lamb, not the Easter ham. It's time to leave Babylon. Revelation 18:1-6
Dispensation makes sense ..since there was two through Paul .during the acts period after Israel were dismissed .and Paul solo went to the gentiles no longer Jew first .olive tree cut down jer 13.11 . Galations blessed with Abraham . Ephesians blessed with Christ alone in (to the heavenly places .
Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ? (Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30) The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations? 1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? 2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ? 3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds? 4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh? 5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers? 6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"? 7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost? 8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.) 9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) 10. Watch the RUclips video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church. Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology. Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church:
“The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107. Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.” Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323. John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated… "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.” John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.) What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16? Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth? Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups? Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Hebrews 8:6-13? Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church?
One of the most important differences between dispensationalism and covenant theology is whether the land promises in the unconditional covenants established by God in the Abrahamic, Palestinian, and Davidic Covenants are meant to be fulfilled literally _(i.e.,_ physically) or spiritually. Dispensationalism recognizes that the land promises are meant to be fulfilled physically, whereas covenant theology is of the view that those promises are to be fulfilled spiritually, symbolically, or allegorically by the Church. Progressive dispensationalism, specifically, posits that there are two aspects to the aforementioned Old Testament covenants: physical promises and spiritual blessings. Progressive dispensationalism, then, is of the belief that the physical _(i.e.,_ land) promises were specifically given and rightfully belong to ethnoterritorial Israel, whereas the spiritual blessings belong to Israel but have been expanded and fulfilled by the New Testament Church.
Similar to NCT
If you read carefully you will nite there's 2 Covenants. One with Abram, genetic and geographic (physical) and a later with Abraham, spiritual. Covenant theology actually ignores the first time the actual word Covenant was used by God with man: Noah. There's been mane Covenants from God with man, some conditional some not. Classical disp went off the rails when it posited a permanent separation between Jew and Gentile. Even at the time of Moses Rahab and Caleb were clearly made part of the Mosaic Covenant.
Super helpful discussion! You both did great and I learned a lot!
Excellent interview! I appreciate the questions you asked. They helped to clarify the true issues behind the dispensational / covenantal debate.
To be honest, I let the Bible speak for itself. I'm not afraid of it. I was taught from a Dispositional perspective and passed all the tests but divisions are everywhere.
Good interview! Just want to encourage you and say your time and commitment to this channel and making these videos is worth it. Never know who may stumble across. I’m at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando and my brother just finished up at DTS in Dallas. This was helpful for me thinking through the debate.
Great interview!
One of the biggest concerns with dispensationalism that I have been concerned about is the indwelling of the Spirit, concerning those Jews who are saved during the tribulation. I’ve found that the main passage concerning the promise of the indwelling of the Spirit are followed up with the kingdom promises as well. Also, the indwelling of the Spirit was originally promised to the Jew, not as if Gentiles could not receive the Spirit, but the Jews were officially the people promised the Spirit. I’ve talked to some dispensationalists who state the Jews during the tribulation will not receive the Spirit, because they will not be apart of the Church. They tend to conclude this, because if one does receive the Spirit, technically they’d be baptized into the body of Christ, and be one of His members, and they are trying to hold strong to a pretribulational rapture view, where they conclude the Church, or the body of Christ itself is taken out of the earth. But, I find this hard to conclude when the Spirit was promised to the Jew, and the Jews will turn to Christ eventually in the midst of the tribulation….. infact, it also talks about how they will be sealed in their foreheads, which I believe has a lot to do with the sealing of the Spirit. Does anyone have any answer to this? Also, John the Baptist stated if anyone was not baptized with the Spirit (by implication then they’d be apart of the body), they’d be baptized with fire (which is God’s judgment, and I believe this is ultimately hell). If there were any saint that were not technically redeemed in the body of Christ, being preserved by the life of Christ, by His Spirit, then how could they truly be untouched by the damnation which is to come?
This video triggers my youthful obsession with Hal Lindsay’s fiction, which actually drove me to study the Bible more broadly with a Schofield Ref Bible at age 12 and a Ryrie NIV study Bible in high school. Then I went to a progressive dispensational seminary and studied under Stephen Spencer and David Turned and Carl Hoch and all those Dallas or Grace alumni. The obsession with the ordo salutis of last things is now a little ripe, but I really appreciate a 1922 work entitled Grace by LS Chafer, in which he links sanctification with grace, faith, suffering, fellowship, studying and praying, rather than the old covenant catechisms of Calvin, Luther, and Anglicans which tell the young Christian to abide by the Decalogue to grow in Christ. Old covenant theology drives me nuts with its attachment disorder and codependency with Moses and Sinai! It is as if the reformers just teach Grace only for regeneration and forensic justification then sub-contract the rest of sanctification back to the slave master of the law of Moses. Can you imagine running away from the slave ship of sin and finding freedom in Jesus who puts you back on the galley with its sabbaths, tithes, sacrifices, diet, festivals, priests, temple maintenance, circumcision, ethnic markers, uniform, and unwashed cups? God Forbid! Wretched man that I am who shall rescue me from this body of sin and death? Thanks be to God for our Lord Jesus Christ who fulfilled the law and freed us to offer ourselves to God as living sacrifices not dead ones, with new minds bent on freedom, expediency, love and hope!
No Repentance though, dispensationalist removed repentance, turning from sin. Grace abound, sin means nothing.
Dispensationalists did NOT remove repentance. That false accusation is ridiculous. In fact you can find far more pastors who call themselves Reformed that have removed repentance; for one example most of PC-USA. You can certainly find some especially in every group.
I loved his remark about grace.
This is fascinating
The distinction between Bock's view and Ladd's eschatological views is helpful.
Did Darrell Bock's 4-position book ever come out?
This interview was done very well! Would the view that the land promise is fulfilled physically in the new heavens and new earth, and Gentiles who are saved are actually being allowed to share in that fulfillment since they are "grafted" into Israel (Rom. 11) be more of a Dispensational or Covenantal view of scripture?
I loved Heiser on the subject of Escatology. I believe Christ is coming back....
I see the rapture as possible but not probable. Either perspective is ok because Christ has prepared me but I hate to see people praying a prayer & than waiting. I firmly believe heaven is coming down. Many take exception to that coming down vs going up. Pie in the sky by & by.
Was Ryrie's sine qua non really the sine qua non of dispensationalism? Progressive Dispensationalists changed Ryrie's sine qua non, which all Traditional Dispensationalists agreed on. Thats the main point of disagreement I think. See Progressive Dispensationalism: An Analysis of the Movement and Defense of Traditional Dispensationalism, edited by Ron J. Bigalke
What in the world does he mean, when he said, "specification of the role of Israel as part of the program and future of God, is something that Ladd did not affirm"?
How close would Dr. Bock be to what Dr. Walter Kaiser believes with regard to the Promises. It would perhaps seem they’re very close with the biggest difference being the Promise that Kaiser talks about is one over arching promise. Whereas Dr. Bock would say that’s one facet of the Dispensations?
Mystery grace vs prophetic grace I can’t even listen to people who don’t understand the difference between these two types of grace revealed in the Bible
I have no idea what you're talking about BTW.
John Nelson Darby was a harsh individual that spent considerable time excommunicating those that did not strictly adhere to his system of theology and all newfangled groups that did not believe what he believed in, including both of you. A feature overlooked by the adherents of dispensationalism is its claim that certain prophetic events are yet to be fulfilled in the future which implies that Jesus cannot return at this very moment because these so-called events have not yet taken place. Few people appreciate this fact and as a result when Jesus said, "It is finished" (John 19:30) many believe that He really didn't know what He was talking about.
What exactly do you mean by "excommunicating?" Also, could you give documented examples of the harsh attitude that you claim Darby had?
To answer your claim about the Biblical prophecy from a dispensational perspective, there are certain prophecies and promises in the Bible that are yet to be fulfilled. The New Covenant that God promised in Jeremiah 31 and the 70th week of Daniel are both examples of this. However, the prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled do not inhibit Christ's imminent coming. It is clear that Christ could rapture the church up any day. Also when Christ said "it is finished," He was referring to the redemptive work on the Cross, that sin's penalty was paid and God's justice was satisfied. He was not saying all Biblical prophecies were fulfilled. We can be confident of this because once again, the New Covenant given in Jeremiah 31 has yet to be fulfilled. I hope this helps and I would appreciate your feedback.
If prophecies are not fulfilled when Jesus returns then by way of implication the prophets and apostles that made the predictions were lying. That, I submit, is impossible.
Has anyone noticed that the Bible is kind of complicated? Also there are many great men of God who hold very different views eschatologically, is this God's plan? All great men of God say the same thing; and Dr. Block is no exception, whatever is going to happen be taking the Gospel to the ends of the earth in the mean time.
I don’t think it is as complicated as it is made out to be. Covenant theology holds the standard off hermeneutics differently from the Old to the New Testament. Dispensational approach is just read the book the same way from beginning to end, as you would understand any other form of clear communication
We can consider that it’s hard to understand the water one is swimming in it. just like when Jesus came, many Jewish scholars, even John didn’t totally understand who he was because he had didn’t expectations based on his understanding of OT prophecies. Yes, it is all part of Gods plan. Good to study and be Easter to learn, to seek the truth. Also important to hold conclusions with an open hand.
Israel is not "in the land" at the time Paul wrote. They had a sliver of the promise and even that sliver they were not truly governing. Everything else is excellent. I am somewhere between revised and progressive display. The MOST important point he stressed: unlike classical we do NIT place a permanent separation between Jew and Gentile as nations and none ever between individual believers.
If the End of the World, is when Jesus come back, what would that do to dispensational program?
The promise was about Christ. The promise seed.
All those things were shadows and the substance is Christ.
Exactly.
Can you fix a man-made doctrine?
Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ?
(Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30)
The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations?
1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? (See Galatians 3:8)
2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ?
3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds?
4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh?
5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers?
6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"?
7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost?
8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.)
9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis?
10. Watch the RUclips video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church.
Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology.
Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church:
“The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.
Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323.
John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated…
"...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.”
John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.)
What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16?
Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth?
Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups?
Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Hebrews 8:6-13?
Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church?
I have noticed the western mind HAS to systematize things!!! Should we do such to the Bible?
Do you think systems are a bad thing?
I don’t think it’s about western or eastern. The New Testament writers, as well as the early church fathers that the eastern church so greatly respects, all were deeply knowledgeable of scripture and had particular views about how to understand it and interpret it. The more you study scripture it’s almost unavoidable, especially if you’re trying to teach things to others. You have to be clear about what you’re saying and not saying.
I do understand the frustration though. It’s incredible hard to make sense of all the biblical data and different interpretations. But we just have to accept the life long journey of understanding God’s word
I think we need to have a Darby and Scofield book burning. So many crucial mistakes.
I am so hurt and baffled at Dr Bock and his pandering to Liberals. What a shame
Are you thinking that progressive in this means the same as progressive in the political sense?
YHVH made a covenant with the children of Israel.
That covenant is the contract regarding the behavior of both parties.
If Israel obeyed the Law, they would be be blessed.
If they disobeyed, they would be cursed.
The same covenant applied to any person of any race who wanted YHVH to be their Elohim.
Jesus came and redeemed us from the curse.
That is the New Covenant.
We are not cursed for disobedience, but we can still be blessed for obedience.
The Law is STILL the Law.
The Law is the instructions in righteous living. It is what identies sinful behavior. That never changes.
The Law protects us from paganism.
Right now, modern Christianity is engaging in all manner of spiritual adultery.
It IS Mystery Babylon.
The feasts of pagan gods are renamed and repurposed to accommodate Jesus.
That is EXACTLY what Jesus' Father said not to do.
The New Covenant is with the houses of Israel and Judah.
There are NO Gentiles in the New Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31/Hebrews 8:8
Gentiles become citizens of the commonwealth of Israel. Ephesians 2:11-22
As citizens we are identified by the Law we choose to obey.
It is our witness regarding who we truly serve. Romans 6:15-16
Modern Christianity has chosen the man-made doctrines and laws from Roman sun god cultists over the Torah of YHVH.
They have completely inverted the message of Scripture and used philosophy and vain deceit to justify their rebellion.
The idea of "reintroduction of the Law" is ample evidence that Christianity completely misses the point about what the Law is.
Swine eaters and Sabbath polluters will not be Kings and Priests in the World to Come, if they make it at all.
Jesus is the Passover Lamb, not the Easter ham.
It's time to leave Babylon. Revelation 18:1-6
Dispensation makes sense ..since there was two through Paul .during the acts period after Israel were dismissed .and Paul solo went to the gentiles no longer Jew first .olive tree cut down jer 13.11 . Galations blessed with Abraham . Ephesians blessed with Christ alone in (to the heavenly places .
Dispensationalism (progressive) is the most credibal view of the eschatology...
Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ?
(Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30)
The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations?
1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants?
2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ?
3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds?
4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh?
5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers?
6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"?
7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost?
8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.)
9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9)
10. Watch the RUclips video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church.
Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology.
Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church:
“The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.
Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323.
John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated…
"...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.”
John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.)
What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16?
Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth?
Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups?
Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Hebrews 8:6-13?
Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church?
Dispensation is false
Very good interview!