Scofieldism

[somoprepper08]

Thanks for answering, Rob. I follow no man, only Jesus and Him crucified and raised from the dead.

[Rob_0126]

Thanks for answering, Rob. I follow no man, only Jesus and Him crucified and raised from the dead.

Amen

[dmatic]

forty9er, Could you recommend a study on dispensationalism, that reflects your belief, or start a thread discussing it, because I am not sure what it even is. Thanks

[Off-Grid Organics]

forty9er, Could you recommend a study on dispensationalism, that reflects your belief, or start a thread discussing it, because I am not sure what it even is. Thanks

That sounds like it may be an interesting discussion to partake in.

[Wiskey Reb]

What the early church fathers called dispensations were represented by four divisions of time. The earliest writers utilized combinations of four out of the following five time periods. Adam to Noah. Noah to Abraham. Abraham to Moses. Moses to Jesus. Jesus to the end.

mostly Greeks, they gleened the Jewish breakdown of transference of firstborn / priestly status in a new way. The Jewish perspective was the restoration of status to mankind through the teaching of Torah and the work of messiah. The Christian version was transfer of that authority to the church.

[Forty9er]

forty9er, Could you recommend a study on dispensationalism, that reflects your belief, or start a thread discussing it, because I am not sure what it even is. Thanks

Thanks for your question dmatic, but there is too much involved to present any detail regarding all the doctrines of dispensationalism and I don't think I want to start a new thread for general discussion on the topic because I'm pretty sure I know how that would end.

But let me at least present some selected comments on dispensationalism from L. S. Chafer, the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary:

Chapter I Introduction to Dispensationalism

Author's Note: (a) The title of this thesis has been chosen reluctantly. It is not intended by it to imply that those who hold what are here set forth as dispensational beliefs are abnormal or disproportionate in doctrine. This thesis purports to demonstrate that so-called dispensationalists find the specific meaning of the Scriptures which God intended to impart and are therefore, by the most exacting proofs, found to be both reasonable and normal in their interpretations. This title is used only that this discussion may be identified in its relation to various articles others have written on this theme.

The word dispensation is twofold in its import: (1) It may refer to a dispensing or an administration or (2) to an abrogation of standards or existing laws -- such are the dispensations practiced by the Church of Rome. It is obvious that the controversy among theologians is concerned only with the former. The word dispensation is Latin in its origin, being derived from dispensation -- economical management or superintendence -- and has its equivalent in the Greek _oikonomia, meaning, in this specific usage, 'stewardship' or 'economy' as to special features of divine government in the various ages.

To quote the Century Dictionary bearing on the theological import of the word: "(a) The method or scheme by which God has at different times developed his purpose, and revealed himself to man; or the body of privileges bestowed, and duties and responsibilities enjoined, in connection with that scheme or method of revelation: as the Old or Jewish dispensation; the New Gospel dispensation. (b) A period marked by a particular development of the divine purpose and revelation: as the patriarchal dispensation (lasting from Adam to Moses); the Mosaic dispensation (from Moses to Christ); the Christian dispensation."

What men, then, according to these definitions, should be classed as dispensationalists? The answer to this question might be stated in a variety of ways. Three of these may suffice: (1) Any person is a dispensationalist who trusts the blood of Christ rather than bringing an animal sacrifice. (2) Any person is a dispensationalist who disclaims any right or title to the land which God covenanted to Israel for an everlasting inheritance. And (3) any person is a dispensationalist who observes the first day of the week rather than the seventh.

To all this it would be replied that every Christian does these things, which is obviously true; and it is equally true that, to a very considerable degree, all Christians are dispensationalists. However, not all Christians, though sincere, are as well instructed in the spiritual content of the Scriptures as others, nor have they seen the necessity of recognizing other and deeper distinctions which do confront the careful student of the Word of God.

It should be observed, however, that, apart from extremists who are not now under consideration and mere echo men who appear on either side of a controversy and who have not thought through the problems of interpretation, the instructed dispensationalists of all generations have had as good reason for the distinctions they have made as any Christian might present for trusting only in the blood of Christ apart from all Jewish sacrifices. The worthy dispensationalist does not create problems of interpretation; he rather seeks to solve the problems which penetrating study of the text of Scripture imposes. Naturally, to the person who has confronted no problems, the work of the advanced student seems divisive and superimposed. Such misunderstandings obtain in every field of human investigation.

The 22 questions concluding Chapter IV with the problems they develop might be multiplied many times and extended to all parts of the Sacred Text. Dispensationalists do not create these problems nor do they invent the right divisions of Scripture. For the dispensationalist, these so-called problems are not only solved but, because of the distinctions which the problems demand, the problems become a part of the overwhelming evidence that his method of interpretation is according to truth. Those who pursue an idealism regarding the unity and continuity of the Bible, which idealism is built upon and sustained only by occasional or accidental similarities, must, if sincere, face the problems their method of interpretation generates.

The limited array of evidence about God's specific purposes which this thesis presents is sufficient to demonstrate that dispensationalism, even though it does recognize the divine age-purposes and does departmentalize the message of the Word of God according to its obvious divisions, does also discover the true unity and continuity of the Bible. The outstanding characteristic of the dispensationalist is the fact that he believes every statement of the Bible and gives to it the plain, natural meaning its words imply. This simple plan has changed the Bible from being a mass of more or less conflicting writings into a classified and easily assimilated revelation of both the earthly and heavenly purposes of God, which purposes reach on into eternity to come. He is saved from working at cross purposes with God, and the exposition he gives of the Scriptures, like the uncompromised gospel he preaches, is blessed to the multitudes who are attracted by his understandable message.

[dmatic]

What the early church fathers called dispensations were represented by four divisions of time. The earliest writers utilized combinations of four out of the following five time periods. Adam to Noah. Noah to Abraham. Abraham to Moses. Moses to Jesus. Jesus to the end.

mostly Greeks, they gleened the Jewish breakdown of transference of firstborn / priestly status in a new way. The Jewish perspective was the restoration of status to mankind through the teaching of Torah and the work of messiah. The Christian version was transfer of that authority to the church.

Thanks, Wiskey. First, I'd note that forty9er's guy referred to the time periods as three, I think. Adam to Moses, Moses to Christ, and then "Christian era, or, apparently, dispensation? I have many questions about his introduction and the assumptions therein, but will, hopefully, get to them as time progresses.

One comment on your initial contribution, if I may: you mention "restoration of status to mankind..." What kind of status are you speaking to? Are you talking about who has authority to rule? Thanks

[dmatic]

... but there is too much involved to present any detail regarding all the doctrines of dispensationalism and I don't think I want to start a new thread for general discussion on the topic because I'm pretty sure I know how that would end.

I'm not sure how you know how it will end, but I appreciate the introduction you posted. There is much in it that I would like to inquire about, but may need to take several mornings just to think on some of the things he says in his intro, so I hope no one feels a need to plow through this and add more stuff to think about because I might get overwhelmed! But, Lord willing, I'll strap on anyway. Now I'm curious, forty9er. How do you think it will end?

I don't ask about this to argue, but to get informed. I have heard the term many times before, but don't really remember anyone explaining it. I haven't attended Dallas Theological Seminary either, but it may have been interesting. Theology is the study of God, I think. Theology is good, but may not be complete, for quite a while yet, depending on how much God wants to reveal of Himself. It is His glory to conceal a matter, you know.

Initially, before delving in to some of my questions about his intro, I would like to air the idea that generally, he seems to have an hunger for understanding, because he, apparently, has wrestled within himself and others over seeming contradictions that his lack of understanding causes him to see in the teachings and doctrines of men and how they 'interpret' "conflicting writings". His "simple plan" of just believing every statement of the Bible may prove to be true or not, but I look forward to insight and understanding of this "teaching", to see if it is true or not.

[dmatic]

There are five definitions contained within my little pocket dictionary, of the word, 'dispensation': 1. a dispensing 2. something dispensed 3. an administrative system 4. a release from an obligation 5.Theol. the ordering of events under divine authority

I suppose we can dispense with the reading of the minutes... (number 4?)

To my interest, the definitions for the word "dispense" are: 1. to give out, distribute 2. to prepare and give out (medicines) 3. to administer (the law or justice). ---dispense with 1. to get rid of 2. to do without

So, it seems that dispensationalists study the way God chooses to govern His universe? If that is true then everyone would be a dispensationalist, or should be, when they realize they, themselves, are not in charge.

We know that God does all things decently and in order, according to His divine plan, for all things are of Him, correct? For He created all things.

My suspicion of your seeming fear that you know how this will end, forty9er, is involved with your belief that God has changed His immutable Law? That is a dilemma.

[Wiskey Reb]

[QUOTE]

Thanks, Wiskey. First, I'd note that forty9er's guy referred to the time periods as three, I think. Adam to Moses, Moses to Christ, and then "Christian era, or, apparently, dispensation?

originally everyone kept it to four.

One comment on your initial contribution, if I may: you mention "restoration of status to mankind..." What kind of status are you speaking to? Are you talking about who has authority to rule? Thanks

Not just authority to rule, but authority to lead and occupy the office of family priesthood. Initially it went to the firstborn. If you look at the account leading up to and just after the golden calf, for instance, the firstborn of each family/tribe was intended to be priest. Afterward, the levites were chosen for that role. And part of the role of priests is spiritual restoration, both for Israel as well as the nations....the sort which would ultimately restore that role. Restoring the world to the one true G-d and establishing righteous leadership for the nations from within each nation is a much more comprehensive and foolproof plan than is a one world religion or government. In fact, if you think about it, fundamentalist Christinity claims, on one hand, to be opposed to ecumenicalism and a one world order. Yet, on the other hand, attempts to establish just that very thing.

This is a primary difference between and Judaism and Christianity. Judaism sees G-d's plan, and thus His dispensations, as restorative for the nations, not seeing themselves as perpetually central and domineering. Christianity sees G-d's plan, and the corresponding dispensations, as though Christian governance deserves to reign over all the nations perpetually.