Dispensationalism (D'ism?) Any one willing to post a definition? Please do so.

[oatmeal]

DISPENSATIONALISM:

An acknowledgement of the obvious Bible fact that God has dealt differently with different people at different times, demanding the conclusion that not all the Bible applies to everyone at all times.

That is clear enough

 

[oatmeal]

In my experience here,many dispensationalists avoid clearly defining their theology, in part because once you have clear definitions of the theology to compare with relevant scripture, this gives an advantage to opponents of the theology in the ongoing quarrels.

I have quoted the founders of the theology, John Darby, C.I. Scofield and Lewis S. Chafer. TOl dispensationalists do not like this at all, claiming that their theology is different from what the founders say it was.

Did those authors use scripture to back up their thinking?

Did it make sense?

Were they the founders or did they see something that made more sense than what they were taught?

 

[oatmeal]

I'm just quoting this one question because it can represent how definitions can be misconceived depending on whether you macro or micro it to death.

In the macro sense, one can say GOD's message never changed, in that He always wanted a relationship with His creation - man.
In in micro sense, we see His instructions for a relationship changes.

Another type of example of micro or macro would be like one saying,
"No man is sinless." (That's macro - in a broad sense).
And another pops up and says,
"Jesus was a man and He was sinless". (That micro - in a very limited sense).
Obviously micro was not the context in which the first statement was made, and makes the second statement border on being a strawman response because it is not dealing with the statement in the same type context the first statement was made.


I know you know this, I was just using your post to give the sentiment a little more detail to further the conversation into a healthier way to discuss with others.

I agree, God did what he did in Genesis so that He could have fellowship with man and man with him.

As the Creator, He has the right to expect to be acknowledged and respected and loved.

That has not changed.

Although "love God with all your heart soul, mind and strength" is not found before Moses, it certainly rings true through all ages past and present and future.

As you say, the details that God revealed as to how to do that developed over time.

And as you say, God modified them at times

 

[oatmeal]

Dispensationalism is basically the method of interpreting the scriptures that sees two distinct peoples of God, with two distinct destinies – Israel and the Church. A dispensationalist is a person who will affirm one or more of the following tenets.


1. The Church is not the continuation of God's Old Testament people, but a distinct body born on the Day of Pentecost.
2. The Church is never equated with Israel in the New Testament, and Christians are not Jews, true Israel, etc.
3. The prophecies made to Israel in the Old Testament are not being fulfilled in the Church, nor will they ever be.
4. The Church does not participate in the New Covenant prophesied in the Old Testament; it is for ethnic Israel, and will be established in a future millennial kingdom.
5. The Old Testament saints were saved by faith alone, on the basis of the Calvary-work of Christ alone; however, the object of their faith was not Christ, but rather the revelation peculiar to their dispensation.
6. The Old Testament saints did not know of the coming “Church Age,” of the resurrection of Christ, or basically, of what we today call the gospel.
7. When Jesus came to earth, he offered the Jews a physical kingdom, but they rejected him.
8. When Jesus proclaimed “the gospel of the Kingdom,” it was the news about how ethnic Jews might enter and find rewards in this physical kingdom, and is to be distinguished from the gospel as defined in I Corinthians 15:3-4, which the apostles later proclaimed to the church.
9. After the Jews rejected Jesus' kingdom offer, he inaugurated a parenthetical “Church Age”, which will be concluded immediately before God again takes up his dealings with his national people, ethnic Israel.
10. During the “Church Age,” Jesus is not reigning from the throne of David; he is engaged instead in his priestly work, and his kingly work will take place in the future millennial kingdom.
11. At some unspecified but imminent time, Jesus will return (but not all the way to earth, just to the air) and rapture his Church, also called his Bride; for the following seven years, they will feast with him at the marriage supper of the Lamb; meanwhile, on earth, he will begin to deal with his national people, ethnic Israel, again, calling them to himself and preserving them in the midst of seven years of great tribulation; at the midpoint of which, the Antichrist will set himself up as god in the rebuilt Jewish temple, and demand worship from the world.
12. After these seven years, Christ will return, this time all the way to earth. He will defeat the forces of evil, bind Satan and cast him into a pit, and inaugurate the physical Jewish Kingdom that he had offered during his life on earth. The Jews who survived the tribulation will populate the earth during this blessed golden era, and the Christians will reign spiritually, in glorified bodies.
13. After these thousand years, Satan will be released and will gather an army from the offspring of the Jews who survived the tribulation. He will be finally defeated and cast into hell. At this time, the wicked dead will be resurrected and judged, whereas the righteous dead had already been resurrected one-thousand-seven years previously, at the rapture. Christ will then usher in the New Heavens and New Earth, and the destinies of all mankind will be finalized. Dispensationalists are divided as to whether or not there will remain a distinction between Christians and Jews in the New Earth.

HT: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/dispensationalism.html

Are we accurate or close from the above? Suggested tweaks?

AMR

Thank you for your reply.

If you look at post 3 and post 4, they present, to my understanding, entirely different concepts. One speaks of, let me call it, a parallel history, the other a sequential history.

Your post leans towards the sequential development of God's laws and policies.

When you say a dispensationalist will agree with one or more of your list, clearly that leaves the option that they do not all agree with all the list.

Thus we have a multitude of dispensationalist denominations!

 

[oatmeal]

One other feature of D'ism is to use the expression 'rightly dividing' as though it had to do with dividing up Scripture commands, or 2P2P, when in fact it is about church admin and about not wasting time on wranglers about genealogies which are no use.

Could you give some examples of what you speak of?

Maybe you could address this question, Since we are not in the garden of Eden, are the laws that God commanded Adam and Eve applicable to us? Do we have access to the tree whose fruit it was forbidden to eat?

 

[Interplanner]

Could you give some examples of what you speak of?

Maybe you could address this question, Since we are not in the garden of Eden, are the laws that God commanded Adam and Eve applicable to us? Do we have access to the tree whose fruit it was forbidden to eat?

If you mean examples of what D'ism is trying to sort out, I don't blame them for trying to figure out ritual, dietary and ceremonial laws from one age to another. But here we are in the age of Christ and it doesn't matter if we have a 'perfect' view of everything that happened in the past. What matters is the contrast between the previous and now. The rituals, dietary and ceremonial laws are part of the old covenant and don't matter. The ethical core matters, for sure.

There is specific overruling of the dietary in the Peter and Cornelius scene of Acts 9-11. Col 2 (the last paragraph) speaks of external regulations that are worthless. Gal 4 calls 'observing days and months and seasons and years' a waste of time along with circumcision. Hebrews says all the old covenant regulations just reminded of guilt! No more of them matter.

So one kind of mistake about all this would be a 'restoration' of things for Israel, where all the ceremonial is back in place, and there is a temple in Jerusalem, Israel. To avoid the ceremonial law angle of this, some of the people who believe in this say but 'they'll be Christians.' Well, if they are Christians, that means Christ is your Passover Lamb! ie, there would be no ceremony. All that kind of thinking is an awkward approach.

 

[Interplanner]

rre the garden,
no there's no access to it. It seemed to be one time symbolism that was destroyed in the world cataclysm anyway. There is some ethical core to it. For ex., on the Hebrew for 'knowing good and evil' Dr. Schaeffer (GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME) shows that 'knowing' means determining, not just being aware of the two. Huge issue, still tangling people up in shades of gray etc. You could say that we are not to be 'determiners' of good and evil in core things, although it is allowed on many cultural things today. An ex. of that would be Romans 14, usually about old covenant Levitical law things again.

Notice what the council of Acts 15 did about the issue in their circular to churches all around that would have had both Jews and Gentiles. Just 4 basic rules. A person would have to know what pagan rituals were like in the eastern mediterranean area, to really grasp 'eating meat from the market' in Rome...

 

[Danoh]

Dispensationalism (D'ism?) Any one willing to post a definition? Please do so.

"Long division," lol

The root of this long word, however, has a very simple meaning, for the word dispense means simply to
deal out. The word dispensation, then, means the act of dispensing or dealing out, or, that which is dispensed or dealt out. There are medical dispensaries, for example, where medicines are dispensed to the poor. Sometimes these dispensations are conducted on a particular day of each week. Now such a dispensation of medicine may take a full twelve hours each week, but it does not follow from this that a dispensation is a period of twelve hours! Yet there are some who, when they think of dispensations, can think of nothing but periods of time! Indeed, one of the greatest Bible teachers of the past generation defined a dispensation as follows: "A dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God."

This is incorrect, for a dispensation is not a period of time but the act of dealing out or that which is dealt out. The Bible teacher above referred to doubtless meant that a dispensation covers a period of time.

The word dispensation is not a mere theological term. It is used many times in the Bible, though not always translated thus. In Eph. 3:2, for example, Paul writes of "the dispensation of the grace of God, which is given me to you-ward."
Just as the dispensation of the law was committed to Moses (John 1:17), so the dispensation of the grace of God was committed to Paul.

The organic meaning of the original word for dispensation (oikonomia) is house management, though its usage conforms closely to the English word dispensation. Sometimes this word is translated stewardship in the Authorized Version. This is interesting because the word steward (oikonomos), rather than meaning servant, as some have supposed, means house manager. The steward was the head servant, the one into whose hands the management of the
house was committed. He dealt out the money for the household necessities, dispensed the food and clothing to the servants and children, paid the wages, etc. All was entrusted to him to dispense faithfully and wisely. He was the appointed dispenser of his Lord's goods and of the business of the household.

Thus we read in Luke 12:42:

"And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward
[oikonomos] whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?"

In Luke 16:1,2, where again the words oikonomos and oikonomia are translated steward and stewardship, we have the same idea:

"And He said also unto His disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

"And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? Give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward."

In I Cor. 9:16,17 this same word is again translated dispensation, but once more it conveys the same idea:

"For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for NECESSITY IS LAID UPON ME; yea, woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel!

"For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward; but [even] if against my will [I MUST do it, for] A DISPENSATION OF THE GOSPEL IS COMMITTED UNTO ME."

Note that in each of these cases the idea of responsibility is involved. It was "a faithful and wise steward" the Lord sought to set over his household. The rich man discharged his steward because he had wasted his goods. Necessity, or responsibility, was laid upon Paul because "a dispensation of the gospel" had been committed to him.

pages 16-17, Things That Differ, 1951, C.R.Stam, The Berean Bible Society.

 

[musterion]

That is clear enough

I agree. So you'll be closing the thread now?

 

[oatmeal]

If you mean examples of what D'ism is trying to sort out, I don't blame them for trying to figure out ritual, dietary and ceremonial laws from one age to another. But here we are in the age of Christ and it doesn't matter if we have a 'perfect' view of everything that happened in the past. What matters is the contrast between the previous and now. The rituals, dietary and ceremonial laws are part of the old covenant and don't matter. The ethical core matters, for sure.

There is specific overruling of the dietary in the Peter and Cornelius scene of Acts 9-11. Col 2 (the last paragraph) speaks of external regulations that are worthless. Gal 4 calls 'observing days and months and seasons and years' a waste of time along with circumcision. Hebrews says all the old covenant regulations just reminded of guilt! No more of them matter.

So one kind of mistake about all this would be a 'restoration' of things for Israel, where all the ceremonial is back in place, and there is a temple in Jerusalem, Israel. To avoid the ceremonial law angle of this, some of the people who believe in this say but 'they'll be Christians.' Well, if they are Christians, that means Christ is your Passover Lamb! ie, there would be no ceremony. All that kind of thinking is an awkward approach.

That is certainly good support for the idea of progressive dispensations or administrations, the term I prefer.

One set of laws was replaced by a new one because God saw it fit to do so.

 

[oatmeal]

I agree. So you'll be closing the thread now?

Not if I find sufficient reason for continuing.

 

[northwye]

Lets go back to the issue of whether dispensationalists regard scripture as Truth and will acknowledge that Truth when they are shown it.

On a thread today I posted this: "Isaiah mentions the Everlasting Covenant seven times, in 42:6; 49:8; 54:10, 55:3, 56:4,6; 59:21, 61:8

"I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;" Isaiah 42: 6

"And they shall be my people, and I will be their God: 39. And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: 40. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me." Jeremiah 32: 38-40

"A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them............Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them...." Ezekiel 36: 26-27. 37:26

Since the Old Covenant was done away with (II Corinthians 3: 7, 3: 11, Hebrews 10: 9), then the covenant which is to be everlasting is the New Covenant. Isaiah 61: 8, supported by Jeremiah 32: 40, Jeremiah 50: 5,Ezekiel 16: 60 and Ezekiel 37: 26.

Hebrews 13: 20-21 talks about The "... blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight" The New Covenant is everlasting, not a temporary "dispensation," which is to give way to another dispensation of law for the people of the physical bloodline in some future time.

Hebrews 7: 22 says "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." And Hebrews 8: 6 says "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises."

The Bible does not say that God will restore Old Covenant Israel in any form. The New Covenant is everlasting. So far dispensationalists arguing for Christ literally sitting on the Throne of David have ignored these scriptures. For them Old and New Testament texts that say the New Covenant is everlasting is not relevant to whether there is to be a restoration of Old Covenant Israel or not. After being taught dispensationalism they regard any scripture with doctrine the opposite of what they have been taught as not relevant. If you consider scripture as being like a fact, then you can see that dispensdationalism is irrational.

 

[Danoh]

DISPENSATIONALISM:

An acknowledgement of the obvious Bible fact that God has dealt differently with different people at different times, demanding the conclusion that not all the Bible applies to everyone at all times.

Nice! :thumb:

Rom. 5:8.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Lets go back to the issue of whether dispensationalists regard scripture as Truth and will acknowledge that Truth when they are shown it.

On a thread today I posted this: "Isaiah mentions the Everlasting Covenant seven times, in 42:6; 49:8; 54:10, 55:3, 56:4,6; 59:21, 61:8

"I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;" Isaiah 42: 6

"And they shall be my people, and I will be their God: 39. And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: 40. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me." Jeremiah 32: 38-40

"A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them............Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them...." Ezekiel 36: 26-27. 37:26

Since the Old Covenant was done away with (II Corinthians 3: 7, 3: 11, Hebrews 10: 9), then the covenant which is to be everlasting is the New Covenant. Isaiah 61: 8, supported by Jeremiah 32: 40, Jeremiah 50: 5,Ezekiel 16: 60 and Ezekiel 37: 26.

Hebrews 13: 20-21 talks about The "... blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight" The New Covenant is everlasting, not a temporary "dispensation," which is to give way to another dispensation of law for the people of the physical bloodline in some future time.

Hebrews 7: 22 says "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." And Hebrews 8: 6 says "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises."

The Bible does not say that God will restore Old Covenant Israel in any form. The New Covenant is everlasting. So far dispensationalists arguing for Christ literally sitting on the Throne of David have ignored these scriptures. For them Old and New Testament texts that say the New Covenant is everlasting is not relevant to whether there is to be a restoration of Old Covenant Israel or not. After being taught dispensationalism they regard any scripture with doctrine the opposite of what they have been taught as not relevant. If you consider scripture as being like a fact, then you can see that dispensdationalism is irrational.

More dialectic game from north?

 

[Interplanner]

Lets go back to the issue of whether dispensationalists regard scripture as Truth and will acknowledge that Truth when they are shown it.

On a thread today I posted this: "Isaiah mentions the Everlasting Covenant seven times, in 42:6; 49:8; 54:10, 55:3, 56:4,6; 59:21, 61:8

"I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;" Isaiah 42: 6

"And they shall be my people, and I will be their God: 39. And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: 40. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me." Jeremiah 32: 38-40

"A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them............Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them...." Ezekiel 36: 26-27. 37:26

Since the Old Covenant was done away with (II Corinthians 3: 7, 3: 11, Hebrews 10: 9), then the covenant which is to be everlasting is the New Covenant. Isaiah 61: 8, supported by Jeremiah 32: 40, Jeremiah 50: 5,Ezekiel 16: 60 and Ezekiel 37: 26.

Hebrews 13: 20-21 talks about The "... blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight" The New Covenant is everlasting, not a temporary "dispensation," which is to give way to another dispensation of law for the people of the physical bloodline in some future time.

Hebrews 7: 22 says "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." And Hebrews 8: 6 says "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises."

The Bible does not say that God will restore Old Covenant Israel in any form. The New Covenant is everlasting. So far dispensationalists arguing for Christ literally sitting on the Throne of David have ignored these scriptures. For them Old and New Testament texts that say the New Covenant is everlasting is not relevant to whether there is to be a restoration of Old Covenant Israel or not. After being taught dispensationalism they regard any scripture with doctrine the opposite of what they have been taught as not relevant. If you consider scripture as being like a fact, then you can see that dispensdationalism is irrational.

Indeed. Claiming to be the most literal, I find that passage after passage is invaded and screwed if any of their parts are missing, if it costs them the doctrines of futurism or D'ism. Or that right where you would expect a passage to INCLUDE A STATEMENT ABOUT A RESTORED KINGDOM OF ISRAEL IN BOLD PRINT there is nothing. Prob 100 of those.

At the most critical, it is the idea that Acts 3's restoration meant something Judaic, where the overall mentality of the apostles was that the end of the world was really close, right after the destruction of Israel, Mt24:29; so the 'world to come of which we are speaking' was really close, that would be the NHNE, the 'great salvation' of Heb 2:4. which in turns reinforces the fact the Christ reigns since the resurrection because it was not going to be that long until that. These facts force the generation from Christ to the destruction of Israel into one of a matter of taking daring risk for Christ (Heb 10:32-39), in which the options are the extreme: you either help Judean terrorists fight for Rome (following an anti-Messiah Mt24:5, 23) or you work in Christ's mission, proclaiming to everyone you see that he is Lord and the Gospel (24:13, 14).

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Indeed. Claiming to be the most literal, I find that passage after passage is invaded and screwed if any of their parts are missing, if it costs them the doctrines of futurism or D'ism. Or that right where you would expect a passage to INCLUDE A STATEMENT ABOUT A RESTORED KINGDOM OF ISRAEL IN BOLD PRINT there is nothing. Prob 100 of those.

At the most critical, it is the idea that Acts 3's restoration meant something Judaic, where the overall mentality of the apostles was that the end of the world was really close, right after the destruction of Israel, Mt24:29; so the 'world to come of which we are speaking' was really close, that would be the NHNE, the 'great salvation' of Heb 2:4. which in turns reinforces the fact the Christ reigns since the resurrection because it was not going to be that long until that. These facts force the generation from Christ to the destruction of Israel into one of a matter of taking daring risk for Christ (Heb 10:32-39), in which the options are the extreme: you either help Judean terrorists fight for Rome (following an anti-Messiah Mt24:5, 23) or you work in Christ's mission, proclaiming to everyone you see that he is Lord and the Gospel (24:13, 14).

Those who say the most, and yet say the least:

1. north
2. IP

 

[Danoh]

I agree. So you'll be closing the thread now?

Yep - end of thread, lol

Eph. 2:11, 13, 7.

 

[csuguy]

Dispensationalism is a non-sensical division of the scriptures that is used to seperate all the blessings from the hardships and responsibilities. The blessings, of course, are reserved for the "true believers." The hardships and responsibilities (example: you must lose your life to save it), these they try to maintain were only meant for the Jews or for those pre- some made up second gospel revelation from Paul. At any rate, it doesn't apply to THEM.

 

[Nihilo]

. . . Future events . . .

. . . rapture . . .

. . . RESTORED KINGDOM OF ISRAEL

Like AMR does in his first reply,¹ I see the primary distinction of Dispensationalism in their view of the future. Starting from there and working backwards is how I see the dispensational approach to biblical interpretation working itself out. :idunno:


¹ - Notice the volume of words in his points 11-13, which deal with future things, as compared with those in points 1-10:

Spoiler

Dispensationalism is basically the method of interpreting the scriptures that sees two distinct peoples of God, with two distinct destinies – Israel and the Church. A dispensationalist is a person who will affirm one or more of the following tenets.


1. The Church is not the continuation of God's Old Testament people, but a distinct body born on the Day of Pentecost.
2. The Church is never equated with Israel in the New Testament, and Christians are not Jews, true Israel, etc.
3. The prophecies made to Israel in the Old Testament are not being fulfilled in the Church, nor will they ever be.
4. The Church does not participate in the New Covenant prophesied in the Old Testament; it is for ethnic Israel, and will be established in a future millennial kingdom.
5. The Old Testament saints were saved by faith alone, on the basis of the Calvary-work of Christ alone; however, the object of their faith was not Christ, but rather the revelation peculiar to their dispensation.
6. The Old Testament saints did not know of the coming “Church Age,” of the resurrection of Christ, or basically, of what we today call the gospel.
7. When Jesus came to earth, he offered the Jews a physical kingdom, but they rejected him.
8. When Jesus proclaimed “the gospel of the Kingdom,” it was the news about how ethnic Jews might enter and find rewards in this physical kingdom, and is to be distinguished from the gospel as defined in I Corinthians 15:3-4, which the apostles later proclaimed to the church.
9. After the Jews rejected Jesus' kingdom offer, he inaugurated a parenthetical “Church Age”, which will be concluded immediately before God again takes up his dealings with his national people, ethnic Israel.
10. During the “Church Age,” Jesus is not reigning from the throne of David; he is engaged instead in his priestly work, and his kingly work will take place in the future millennial kingdom.
11. At some unspecified but imminent time, Jesus will return (but not all the way to earth, just to the air) and rapture his Church, also called his Bride; for the following seven years, they will feast with him at the marriage supper of the Lamb; meanwhile, on earth, he will begin to deal with his national people, ethnic Israel, again, calling them to himself and preserving them in the midst of seven years of great tribulation; at the midpoint of which, the Antichrist will set himself up as god in the rebuilt Jewish temple, and demand worship from the world.
12. After these seven years, Christ will return, this time all the way to earth. He will defeat the forces of evil, bind Satan and cast him into a pit, and inaugurate the physical Jewish Kingdom that he had offered during his life on earth. The Jews who survived the tribulation will populate the earth during this blessed golden era, and the Christians will reign spiritually, in glorified bodies.
13. After these thousand years, Satan will be released and will gather an army from the offspring of the Jews who survived the tribulation. He will be finally defeated and cast into hell. At this time, the wicked dead will be resurrected and judged, whereas the righteous dead had already been resurrected one-thousand-seven years previously, at the rapture. Christ will then usher in the New Heavens and New Earth, and the destinies of all mankind will be finalized. Dispensationalists are divided as to whether or not there will remain a distinction between Christians and Jews in the New Earth.

HT: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/dispensationalism.html

Are we accurate or close from the above? Suggested tweaks?

AMR

 

[Danoh]

As usual, the various individuals who oppose Dispensationalism all prove their same old cluelessness in approach.

Rather than attempt to work backwards from the result that is the Dispensational Bias, to the principle that resulted in said Preferred Bias, every one of them continues to look at said result alone - and that, from within Their Own Theological Bias.

Talk about a failure to walk in another's moccasins for a time - and that "rightly" - before allowing oneself to render a conclusion.

The most lucid of them, proven just as dumb in approach and end result, as any of them.

Fact of the matter?

Dispensationalism is the result of the obvious throughout the whole of Scripture - Distinctions in Identities between various person's, places, and things, and the need to properly discern their respective seasons.

Or as the Lord Himself described all that...

Luke 12:41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all? 12:42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season? 12:43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 12:44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath. 12:45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; 12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

The following also has in mind Distinctions in Identities as to person's, places, things, and the need to properly discern their respective timings...

2 Timothy 2:12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: 2:13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself. 2:14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.

That is all...Dispensationalism basically is...

Note all that again, in the following...

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

And here all those distinctions are again...

Hebrews 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; 3:2 Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. 3:3 For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. 3:4 For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God. 3:5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. 3:7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice, 3:8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:

And in the Apostle Paul's God-given take on such things, as well...

His God-given sense of:

Time Past...

Ephesians 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

...and of a But Now...

2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

...and of The Ages to Come...

Ephesians 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

All that, is a version of this...

Luke 12:42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?

A season, etc., of which is this...

1 Corinthians 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

1 Corinthians 9:16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel! 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. 9:18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

That is all...Dispensationalism is - the RESULT of said Distinctions in Identities within Scripture as to specific person's; places; things; and their respective seasons.

Nevertheless, Romans 5:8 towards each and every one of you anti-Dispys.