The End Times: A Confession of a Mini-Dispensationalist
Posted by Rob Ayers in Bible & Theology
Joel Rosenberg is one of my favorite fictional authors. His series of works within a biblical apocalyptic genre is, in my opinion, both sensational and numbing. Sensational in that he can write himself out of a paper bag (unlike LaHaye and Jenkins who in the Left Behind series became moribund, drab, one to two dimensional, and otherwise plain old boring and confusing). Numbing in that, as a believer coming from a Jewish background, he seems to have the biblical background and the numerous contacts to be able to see ahead to the next cataclysmic event in world history. The series of his adventures started with the work The Last Jihad (Carol Stream Illinois:Tyndale House Publishers, 2001) and includes The Last Days (2003), The Ezekiel Option (2005), The Copper Scroll (2006), and the finale du jour, Dead Heat (2008).
The writer makes no claims that his work of fantasy and fiction are on par with Biblical prophecy. He admittedly shares that his works are based on a certain “interpretation” of Biblical truth, of which he forthrightly shares “I hope I am wrong” (Dead Heat, Author’s Note, xii). His presuppositions (written in the non-fictional work entitled Epicenter: Why the Current Rumblings In the Middle East Will Change Your Future [2005]) are based on a “dispensational” interpretation of Biblical prophecy, primarily to the text of Ezekiel 36, 37, 38, 39, 40.
What has fascinated some critics is a certain accuracy portrayed the the fictional events to real life events. Some of the items that occur in the fictional account that happened later in actual world events are:
1)Suicidal attempt with air planes as an terrorist attack
2)The removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime from Iraq
3)The beginnings of an alliance between Iran and Russia
4)The arrival of a President of Iran who threatens world peace and the removal of both the United States and Israel from the world scene by nuclear weapons
5)The death of Yasser Aarafat and the chaos that this event has brought about in Gaza and the West Bank
These are just some of the things that happened in Joel’s fictional account that later, in one form or another, occurred after he wrote about it. Joel is careful to distinguish between Biblical prophecy and his work of fiction: “So far as the [Biblical] prophecies are concerned…the world is destined to see such horrors come to pass. When? I cannot say. How exactly will such events play out? One can only speculate…Only the Lord Himself knows” (Ibid.) Joel refers to his method of understanding prophecy and predicting current and future events from them as a “Third Lens” – using the lens or optic of Scripture, current and future events have meaning as they have been foreseen and foretold as Amos clearly stated (Amos 3:6-7):
Is a trumpet blown in a city,
and the people are not afraid?
Does disaster come to a city,
unless the Lord has done it?
For the Lord God does nothing
without revealing his secret
to his servants the prophets.
Joel Rosenberg, through both his connections and the proceeds of his works has began a visionary missionary/evangelical endeavor in the Middle East entitled, “The Joshua Fund.” Through this emphasis of relief, the poor in Israel and surrounding nations are being reached with support and ministry in the name of Jesus. Many Arabs and Jews are coming to the realization of the truthfulness of the gospel because of folks like Joel Rosenberg who put “their money where their mouth is.” Joel’s website can be found at www.joelrosenberg.com while the Joshua Fund can be found at www.joshuafund.net.
Often many of my fellow servants, Baptists, and compatriots all go apocalyptic whenever dispensational eschatology is broached in one of these popular, best selling works (or any venue for that matter). Popular authors of who are on the forefront of these things from Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, John Hagee, with Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins were tossed about and called in my seminary New Testament class “dispensational pimps.” These folks were lambasted and criticized often because of their “lack of scholarship,” “simpleton beliefs,” “Zionist views,” and the like. There were a few Calvinists among them (although this particular view is not merely related to those who are Calvinists) who called both the teaching of and the resurgence of dispensationalism (at least in the realm of eschatology) as “dangerous” and worthy of scorn and ridicule. The primary emphasis held by both my instructor and the class at large was primarily agnosticism (“it does not matter”) to a segment of a-millennial supporters within in a “replacement” paradigm. Of course the problem I found with the first view was if they truly did not care, why did it matter what some dispensationalist wrote? And with the other, it seemed all they centered their attention was around the current Jewish state and how ungodly it was to support it than not – as if that really mattered at all either – in a world of dictators, is it not important to keep close a democratic friend irregardless if the Jews continue to remain the “Chosen” or not?
While I am comfortable in my mini-dispensational position, I am open to any suggestions and alternatives. I am comfortable in the fact that a majority (maybe not a overwhelming majority, but a majority nonetheless) of both people in the pews and Pastors behind the pulpit in the SBC hold to my view of eschatology – the imminent return of Jesus Christ for His bride the church which will leave the world in cataclysm and tribulation – the Jewish people being given another opportunity to view Him “who they pierced” from the front row seat of the land promised by covenant to the blood descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – a Holocaust of unimaginable proportions upon both Christians and Jews, perpetrated by a dictator of whom the Bible describes as “Anti-Christ” – that if truly if the Lord would delay His return in those days, “no flesh would remain alive” – culminating with the triumphal return of Jesus Christ with His saints, who will then rule and reign with them for 1000 years.
We can have a discussion of this view or any other here. But let us refrain from some major pitfalls as often time comes about when this subject is discussed:
1) If this is a secondary or “tertiary” issue, then no one is ignorant – just a different view – right? You may be rebelling in difference to the teaching of childhood or the “majority”as you see it. You may have come away from Scripture with a different view from mine. That is okay – we can do that. What I have found in both my seminary class as well as on the blogosphere that even though some may claim “this is unimportant” they often spend a lot of time “greasing the skids” of their opponents on this issue. If we can have differing views on spiritual gifts, ecclesiology, and other things (I am speaking to the “reformers” primarily here) then this is as much of a view that deserves your tolerance and respect as all the others;
2)Be forewarned that I have a low tolerance for ad hominems and pejoratives. I particularly abhor the term “Zionism” in deference to my views and “Zionists” to both Jews and Christians. While the word itself is merely the link to the belief of a Jewish homeland in “the Land,” it has also been subverted by the enemies of Jews, in particular to reference those Jews who live in Israel today. It is a pejorative used by Hamas, Al-Qaeda, other Arabs, and virulent Anti-Semitic groups. If you don’t like being accused of being Anti-Semitic when you are not, then refrain from using it here. Sorry, I must insist.
3)If you want to complain about the approach of the “dispensational p____” then please resist. If you want to write a book about your view then by all means take the time and see if anybody will publish it. What is apparent to me is that this genre fills a current niche in current culture. Go look in your bookstores, be it secular or religious. The shelves are stacked a mile thick of apocalyptic “best sellers.” Recent films generally show how popular this genre is from “I am Legend” to the “Terminator” ( a series that has been ongoing on for two decades and has not ended yet). There is a sense in the current culture that humanity is headed for a cataclysmic culmination of world events. What a better way to speak to the culture in agreement with that view, and settle the notion that Jesus is the only way one can be saved from the wrath to come? What should be notable about these works from the dispensational view (to some admittedly more “pure fiction” than to others it seems) is that in each a clear and convincing message of the Gospel is included. Hal Lindsey said that he received at least seven million letters from around the world claiming that a reader came to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ by the reading of the his books – and what is most notable is that many who did so later came out in opposition to his dispensational presuppositions! We can discus the author’s works – that is fair game. But don’t go over the line by bringing up extraneous issues like “John Hagee is non-denominational.” Discussions like “two covenant” theology has merit (none of these authors claim agreement with that concept) but keep it focused please.
Okay, with the warnings in place let the discussions begin!



Brother Rob,
You said: “Be forewarned that I have a low tolerance for ad hominems and pejoratives. I particularly abhor the term “Zionism” in deference to my views and “Zionists” to both Jews and Christians.”
This is understandable. Though I would argue it is an accurate word for the initial movement, it has become an increasingly loaded word. You may want to add the term “replacement theology” as well. This term really bothers some of us non-dispensationalists.
And thank you for realizing this DOES matter and hosting this discussion.
His grace and peace be with all who participate in this discussion,
From the Middle East
Thank you my brother “From the Middle East.” Your service in “the Epicenter” (As Joel Rosenberg refers to it) is commendable, esp since you are doing so “under cover.”
For your sake I will defer in saying “replacement theology” or “Preterism” but will only use “the church has replaced the Jews in God’s plan.”
I think the term “Zion” has a few more contations from it’s beginning than you realize. Of course it has it’s beginnings from the mid 1800′s with a political movement to return to “The land” among some European Jews in opposition to pogroms, ghettos, and resettlements. The Russian Secret Police began to encourage the flames by the printing of that race baiting “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” of which I understand is still a popular best seller in the Middle East. For this reason and others I will encourage all of us to refrain from this loaded word. Thank you for the encouragement.
Rob
Brother Rob,
1. Not sure if you meant to imply that preterism is the same as “replacement theology,” but it is not. Sometimes they co-exist, but someone who believes in “replacement theology” is not necessarily a preterist.
2. Many of us who are viewed as believing the “church has replaced the Jews in God’s plan” actually believe God has EXPANDED Israel to include the non-Jews. The word “replacement” itself is the issue. I would say that God’s people are God’s people no matter what dispensation we are in. No one has been replaced, but a New Covenant has been instituted and all who have been brought near by the blood of Jesus share in the promise of God. Or, maybe another way of saying this is that Jesus Himself is True and Faithful Israel and all who abide in Him are citizens. The point is that I do not believe Israel has been replaced, but expanded!
Thanks again for hosting this discussion.
His mercy be yours in abundance,
From the Middle East
Thank you Middle.
No, I was not implying that “replacement theology” is the same as “preterism.” However I do find that my arguments are in reaction to both systems, so I tend to group those two at least together.
I am not a holder of “dual covenant” theology or “covenant” theology. I do hold to the following simple formula: While the “New Covenant” to both Jews and Gentiles is the promise of eternal life and the “Kingdom of God” as home, the promises made to Abraham, Isacc, and Jacob and their specific blood descendants dealt with specifically “The Land.” I do not claim to know the mysteriousness of God, nor do I claim any super understanding of this promise. The covenant made between Abraham and God was unidirectional (made by God, and not dependent upon the behavior of Abraham or his descendants of “the promise”) and dealt only with the faithfulness and ability of God to sustain it. Is it not interesting that this fight over land is predominantly between the descendants of Abraham, and who specifically has been promised “The Land.” Was Isaac the son of promise, or Ishmael? This fight continues even today. Who better holds the biblical position, and why? Is this position been suspended by the New Covenant? How has it, and what Scriptural proof do you bear?
Peace to you my brother. Are you on furlough?
Grace,
Rob
Brother Rob,
Am I on furlough? Yes and no. Follow this link for more:
http://www.sbcimpact.net/2008/03/05/from-the-middle-east-an-introduction/
More to come on the other questions….
From the Middle East
Sorry man, that is what I get for not reading all of the information on my own site. “Assumptions” are dangerous things – my apologies to you. My only thought was “wow, this guy is talking to me from a few time zones away” and that peaked my interest. I understand you need for “being anonymous.” God bless you in your work – and I look forward to your answers.
Rob
Rob,
Scripture would seem to indicate that God has been at work calling out for Himself a people since long before the covenant at Sinai. Scripture would also seem to inidicate that God has been, since the Fall, relating and responding to those who have been justified by their faith.
Perhapas that is why non-dispensationalists reject the term “replacement”.
Perhaps it is also why non-dispensationalists shudder at the notion of the church as just a “parenthesis” is God’s grand redemption plan.
Stuart,
Thank you for responding! No I would not hold to the church as a mere “parenthesis” in God’s redemptive plan. Nor would I hold that God’s promises to those descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as “revoked” either. God did have a plan to redeem the world – and he used the Jews to get it done – and if Romans 11 is any indication, then no. God not only desires to evangelize “the Jew first, then also the Greek” but God’s final plan (in my view) is to fulfill the promises made to those patriarchs. As a spiritual descendant of Abraham, I appropriate by grace the fulfillment of the promise, and my eternal home is the heavenly Zion. The covenant made to Abraham (Isaac and Jacob and descendants) dealt with a certain set real estate. Yes – No? In terms of the Jewish people in terms of future events, that is the question. Is God done with the Jew as a people and nation? Paul says an emphatic “no.” What do you say?
Rob
Brother Rob,
Your question: Was Isacc the son of promise, or Ishmael?
Response:
Isaac
Your question: Who better holds the biblical position [to the Land], and why?
Response:
Complicated question and there is absolutely not enough room here to go into all the details. If you have not read non-dispensational Christian authors, a few books are recommended in the comment stream at this link:
http://iemissional.com/2008/04/09/hagees-folly/
A simple answer is, the person who owns the land owns it and it is wrong for someone to take if from him without his permission. This is what the whole Palestinian-Israeli conflict is over.
Your question: Is this position been suspended by the New Covenant?
Response:
My answer is that the New Covenant has not suspended Christian ethics which demand that people do not steal. I know this is not what you are getting at, but it is my answer nonetheless.
With regards to the argument that somehow the Land belongs to the Jews via divine decree from God… well, I obviously do not agree. However, I am willing to assume this is the case for a moment. Let’s see how it plays out: Given God’s pattern of dealing with the Jews in the Old Testament and up until the close of the first century AD, I do not think they have a divine right to it until they accept the Messiah. Historically, when they were in rebellion, God did not allow them to possess the Land. Assyrians, Babylonians, Romans… and right now they are trampling underfoot the Son of God rejecting YHWH’s Messiah. This is the ultimate rebellion! Therefore, they have no divine right to the Land until they embrace Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of God, YHWH’s Messiah.
But let us move back to the idea of all the circumcised of heart being God’s covenant people and no longer being excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, having no hope. This is supported throughout the New Testament, but it seems Romans 9-11, Galatians 3-4 and Ephesians 2-3 speak to the issue most clearly. This should answer the last question.
Thanks for the interaction!
May His face shine upon you,
From the Middle East
Rob,
I think we would diverge in our understanding as early as Genesis 12. I tend to take seriously Paul’s interpretation in Galatians 3 of “seed” in Genesis 12, 15, 22 as pointing towards Christ. So I guess you cold say I don’t consider Abraham’s descendents to be only those who are related to him by blood, rather those who have “put on Christ” (Abraham’s seed) in whom their is neither Jew nor Greek. So was Abraham’s covenant revoked? No.
I sincerely regret that I do not possess the theological acumen to really engage you in a thorough discussion of Romans 9-11. All I can really offer in response to your inquiries is that I’m not convinced that the modern geo-political nation-state of Israel since the 1950s is what Paul had in mind in Romans 9-11.
I do thank you, though, for acknowledging that the church isn’t a “parenthesis”. Perhaps your mini-dispensationalism is more akin to Progressive than Classical?
Uh, is it okay to say “I don’t know”, or are stupid people like me even allowed to sit in the classroom of the people with big words?
Middle East,
The answer to your question is: “It’s not that complicated.” Biblical historical precedent must be weighed – in what manner have the Jewish people in the past been given access to the “Land.”
1)Abraham was promised the land on three separate occasions: Genesis 12:1-3; Genesis 15:7;18-21; Genesis 17:1-8 (this last promise said in verse 8 “for an everlasting possession.” Did the Land have inhabitants when Abraham sojourned there? Yes, it did. Did the Land have inhabitants when Joshua and the descendants cross the Jordan into Jericho? Yes, it did. In fact, this was mentioned to Abraham in Genesis 15:13-16 “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years. But I will judge the nation whom they will serve [Egypt - the Exodus] and afterward they will come out with many possessions…then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete.” Of course those inhabitants at the time of Joshua were not given the chance to move, were they? Did David recompense with the Jebusites for Jerusalem when they charged, “You shall not come in here, but the blind and the lame will turn you away” when he captured it and renamed it “the stronghold of Zion – the City of David.”
Did the Land have inhabitants when the Babylonian Disporia was ended by the edict by Cyrus the Great giving the Jewish people the permission to return to the Land? Yes it did. What should be noted about this resettlement is that only a remnant of 40,000 availed themselves to return to “The Land” of promise at that time, rejoining a small leaven left from the conquest to “till the land” – the majority of families desired to remain “at large” throughout the then known world. In fact we see through the persons of Sanballat the Horonite, Tobiah the Ammonite, and Geshem the Arab them questioning the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the wall to Nehemiah. He responded, “The God of heaven will give us success; therefore we His servants will arise and build, but you have no portion, right, or memorial in Jerusalem.” (Nehemiah 2:20). What an arrogant thing for him to say! – seeing that these people he was talking with were “inhabitants of the Land.” Did Nehemiah not know that what he was doing was stealing from them? Probably that is why he set out armed guards, and never went outside the city without a security detail. What also should be considered – the descendants of Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem are disputing the same land and the same city with the same veracity as before.
With the same vein, and in the mantle of biblical precedent, another authoritative body has granted the Jewish people coming out of Holocaust the same right of return as Cyrus did long ago. The U.N. mandate allowed for the formation of two states – both Israel and Palestine. The Jews have been going to Israel from every nation in the world – tired of persecution, tired of ghettos, tired of pogroms, and tired of “the Final Solution” – and in the period of a few short years a land that was wanted by practically nobody is a land blooming and booming. Right? And this should also be noted – a people who only number in a few million in a sea of 300 million enemies has survived and won engagements against their enemies – many times overwhelmingly. During the “War of Independence” of 1949, it was said in some documented instances that bees from the ground came up and sweltered around the Arab troops, while the Israelis grabbed their weapons (otherwise they did not have arms for everybody), and as a result won the war. Coincidence? How did they do that?
Do you concede or no – that G_d, in His divine plan have brought back a people (who in the main are both agnostic and secular) in the attempt to show His glory among the nations, as well as to allow a remnant once again the opportunity to believe in the Lord’s Christ and to fulfill the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? If Christ died for me being an enemy of His, I don’t see how your argument makes much sense – was I required to be in God’s good graces before He opened my eyes to see and understand His grace? The same with the Jewish people. His grace is not dependent upon their faithlessness, but on His faithfulness, and the keeper of promises. Otherwise, how would we know He would keep His promise to us?
A little long (my apologies) but nevertheless important.
Rob
Stuart,
I think you are missing an important point. God chose a people to be the recipients of His message. Abraham was told, “through you, all of the families of earth will be blessed.” Simply this – no Jews – No Jesus – no blessing – no hope. God could have chosen anybody or anything to forge His plan – in this case He chose the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He gave them commands of traditions to remember Him and His work by, reminding them that they and their descendants would remember these things “for all time.” God has a special place in His heart for those descendants – He will keep His promises to them. He has demonstrated His power in protecting them throughout the ages, and His demonstrated Himself and His divine protection upon the current State of Israel – Has He not, or did they just get lucky?
Pray tell what is a “nation” unless it has boundaries, and has a sovereign territory governed by an independent government? With respect my brother, anyone that knows the difference between classical and progressive dispensationalism can have enough acumen to discuss with clarity with me Romans 9-11. I do not believe that these scriptures give your position any help – thus why I suspect an unwillingness to discuss them – but I could be wrong.
For the record I am neither classical nor progressive. The totality of the system I pretty much reject (save in the area of eschatology) – I had to have something to title this post by – thus I use the label “mini-dispensationalist” although I tend to like the term “biblical” (understanding that all of us believe we are biblical, yet failing to agree what “biblical” means in the finer points
Rob
Bernard,
Of course you can – but I hope that is not your final answer – and that you don’t thumb your nose at folks who claim to have settled an answer – also that you are willing to explore and study “to show yourself approved unto God…”
I took a Systematic Theology I class with Milliard Erikson – he wrote the book we “lovingly” called “The Green Monster” – a concise tome of 1300 pages (includes indexes and references) which contained words like “Dichotomism” “Chilaism” “Theonomist theodicy” – well, you get the gist. I sat there with his book, and a dictionary of theological definitions trying to get a grip on these and other “made up” words to get by. Admittedly, I am no more up on it than when I started – but I least I am able to read a theological journal or two and get the gist. If there is something I can help you with, please by all means say so, and I will try.
Rob
Rob – No noses thumbing from me, chief! Just kind of a “I don’t know enough about this to say Howdy” kind of feeling.
I probably will never determine my eschatological thoughts well enough to say “THIS IS HOW IT IS!”, though, because they only people I know who say that are folks who have been taught by others “what to say”. They were rarely, it appears, thinking for themselves or even as the Holy Spirit led. Just repeating what they were told.
Thus, I try to listen and learn, even when you really smart people overwhelm me
Carry on.
Brother Rob,
First of all, I do not pretend to be an expert on this topic. So, I will once again recommend the resources over on Marty Duren’s blog (referenced above). I only referenced the portions of Scripture above as they were the passages that got me to reconsidering dispensationalism several years ago.
Secondly, if you would like to make a political argument for the U.N. giving folks from all over the world a slice of land, go for it. I don’t mind that. My comments were intended to answer the question of whether or not they have a divine right to it. To that question, my answer again is that God judged Israel when Titus annihilated Jerusalem in the first century AD for rejection of His Messiah. I see no change in their attitude towards the Messiah at this point.
You asked, “Do you concede or no – that G_d, in His divine plan have brought back a people (who in the main are both agnostic and secular) in the attempt to show His glory among the nations, as well as to allow a remnant once again the opportunity to believe in the Lord’s Christ and to fulfill the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?”
In the sense that God is sovereign… yes. But I would also have to concede He has appointed Abdullah King of Saudi Arabia. But I doubt that is what you meant ;^)
Do I concede this in the sense of this being fulfillment of biblical prophecy? No. And what really concerns me is that if the modern day nation of Israel falls, we will have a lot of dispensationalists very shaken in their faith. No offense intended, but this is what one popular radio paper refers to as exegesis with “the Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other!”
In terms of God demonstrating His glory among the nations… God does this through His people. This is clearly laid out in the New Testament. Jesus is the exact representation of God. We are Jesus’ ambassadors here on Earth. The glory of God is revealed through the witness of creation, conscience and Church.
You asked, “If Christ died for me being an enemy of His, I don’t see how your argument makes much sense – was I required to be in God’s good graces before He opened my eyes to see and understand His grace?”
I may be missing something here, but I’ll take a shot at it! Good and bad things happen to lovers of God and haters of God. My agnostic neighbor got a new car the other day, but I’m pretty sure it was not his divine right. Brother, Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant and His people will inherit the WHOLE Earth, no just a little slice of it!
You went on to say, “The same with the Jewish people. His grace is not dependent upon their faithlessness, but on His faithfulness, and the keeper of promises. Otherwise, how would we know He would keep His promise to us?”
Right, and the people of His promise have been EXPANDED to include those of the true circumcision. If ethnic Jews accept His grace, they can be part of God’s people, part of the True Vine! And they will inherit the Earth along with His people from every tongue, tribe and nation!!
Thanks again for the dialogue. The day is starting to get a little busy – this response was actually pretty rushed and you have my apologies for that. I will try to keep up, but grace would be appreciated if I cannot!!
His peace be yours in abundance,
From the Middle East
Middle,
I hope that you will be able to “keep up.” Don’t worry – this post will be here for a while, and I will answer you even though it is a few days from now that you answer – or don’t answer at all.
1)Did you get the part about “biblical precedent” – you attacked “divine right” and said no one had the right to take something that they did not possess. I demonstrated that biblically this was not the case. In each instance in the past, the Jewish people took over a land that was previously occupied because they were told to because the title deed to the land was owned by God. The second resettlement occurred by “governmental decree” – did you get that nuance? At what difference is it between the decree by Cyrus and the decree mandated by the U.N.? About 3500 years. I have not made a big deal about that slice of land – the Bible indeed does – and I will concede that this is beyond my pay grade in understanding. Does that count for something? And does it count for something that the world’s attention is solely and squarely placed on this little parcel of land that in some places is only 50 miles wide? Is that another coincidence?
2)I assure you that I have read some of those books you mentioned. They are not unlike some of your arguments that I am joining. One does not need to be an “expert” to read and study “to show yourself approved.” I must concede that I have come about my position honestly and without any help by outside forces.
3)I have had multiple opportunities to “lose my faith” about this: 1949, 1958, 1967, 1973. My faith has held firm each time despite the odds, and it would do so even if State of Israel were defeated in battle. You see, my faith is in the God of Israel, not Israel. I know that God will raise them if necessary from the dead from “a valley of dried out bones” if need be to show Himself. So no, my faith will not be destroyed. I know who Israel’s Redeemer is, and He will remove the blindness from their eyes in due course in His timing.
3)In your comments you have not discussed specifically the promise of God toward those descendants and “the Land” – specifically Genesis 17:8. How does this specific scripture fit in your paradigm?
4)You acknowledge that “every good gift and every perfect gift comes from above, from the Father of lights..” and “…the rains fall on the just and the unjust.” Good. Your neighbor received His car as a gift from a loving Heavenly Father he does not recognize. The difference between the Jews and your neighbor is that while God was not obligated to give your neighbor anything (but did so despite his unbelief), God IS obligated to deal with the Jewish people by His Words that are several millenia old and would be by my argument “from the foundations of the world.” He gives them gifts of grace despite their unfaithfulness, as He has done so for most of recorded history. His moving them around has prepared them for a future work in history, when He would re-graft them in that olive tree again. It is my contention that God has directed the paths of nations to prepare the world for His grace and judgment at the end. This move is one of the last moves on the board – the culmination of the promised final week of Daniel’s 70 week prophecy – when the words of Jesus will come true when He uttered, “the times of the Gentles will be fulfilled” and where the attention of heaven will once again be directed upon that place where both the first and final battle for souls was undertaken (Golgotha) and where the final battle for earth will be fought (Armageddon).
Grace to You as well. I would hope that one day you would do a post on how you have seen God at work in that part of the world.
Rob
Now Bernard, because one is “reasonably” settled does not mean that they are merely parroting off what they have heard. Could they just have studied it enough and lead by the Holy Spirit to be content with their answers? Otherwise could not some say “How can you say Jesus is the only way? You are just telling us something you have heard.”
Rob
Rob – True dat. Caught.
Bernard
Rob,
Spinning wheels and going nowhere….
God has kept His promises to Abraham’s descendents. On that we agree. We just disagree as to how they’re (I would contend “we’re”) defined.
And I’m sorry that you think I was playing semantics, but I really haven’t ever thoroughly studed Romans 9-11, at least not in a way that would allow me to interact meaningfully with a dispensationalist on those texts.
Stuart,
No, I don’t think we agree totally on the first. I agree we are all Abraham’s spiritual descendants. I do not believe we are all Abraham’s blood (literal) descendants. I do believe that some of God’s promises demand a literal interpretation besides a spiritual one in reference specifically to Israel.
Although I am dizzy, I don’t believe I am spinning around too much – unless they are Ezekiel’s “wheels within wheels”
On a more serious note, I am sorry you think this is not going anywhere. But iron sharpening iron is pretty stationary in my opinion…
Let me make a suggestion here. I really do not subscribe to a “system” which I interpret Scripture from. I really do not keep a Ryrie commentary handy. I read and interpret what Scripture says – if it backs up my “system” or not is immaterial. Sometimes it does not, and so I am left to do some introspection and to pray really hard. If there are Scriptures within that portion of Romans that lie in contradiction to what my “system” means, then I am all ears – with I pray an open heart and a willing, listening ear. I hope that you will do the same, and that this conversation will continue to be fruitful. Okay?
Rob
Brother Rob,
My apologies. I did not address “Biblical historical precedent.” I will try to address your question now and tie up some loose ends. Here goes:
My understanding of what you wrote was that since the Jews regained the land by God’s decree in the Old Testament under Cyrus (a government authority), there is precedent for the U.N. to give land to the Jews. In response, let me say again, that when Israel rebelled (both in the wilderness and prior to the Babylonian captivity), God withheld the Land. When they repented, He gave the Land back. Nehemiah’s prayer in the first chapter of Nehemiah shows repentance. After this, God sent the people back to Jerusalem. When they put their faith in God, He protected them in the Land. The Jews are currently in rebellion due to their rejection of God’s Messiah. Thus, they have no divine right to the Land.
You said, “I must concede that I have come about my position honestly and without any help by outside forces.”
Brother, this is a noble desire. However, the truth is that we are all influenced by sources other than God. I do not doubt your zeal and desire to understand God’s mind and heart in this matter, but neither do I doubt the zeal and desire of others who come to different conclusions. Just as you noted that some of the things I type here are things I picked up from others and deemed worthy of repeating, so are the things you are typing. Today I have read nothing radically different than what I have read in dispensational books and articles. We have all been influenced by others.
In response to my concern that some will have their faith shaken if the modern day nation of Israel falls, you made this statement, “I have had multiple opportunities to “lose my faith” about this: 1949, 1958, 1967, 1973. My faith has held firm each time despite the odds, and it would do so even if State of Israel were defeated in battle. You see, my faith is in the God of Israel, not Israel. I know that God will raise them if necessary from the dead from “a valley of dried out bones” if need be to show Himself. So no, my faith will not be destroyed. I know who Israel’s Redeemer is, and He will remove the blindness from their eyes in due course in His timing.”
But how does this square with what you said earlier in our discussion, “The same with the Jewish people. His grace is not dependent upon their faithlessness, but on His faithfulness, and the keeper of promises. Otherwise, how would we know He would keep His promise to us?”
Otherwise, how would we know He would keep His promise to us…? THIS is my point!!
Peace to you,
From the Middle East
Brother Rob,
You said, “In your comments you have not discussed specifically the promise of God toward those descendants and “the Land” – specifically Genesis 17:8. How does this specific scripture fit in your paradigm?”
“Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, ‘As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham, for I have made you a father of many nations. I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”’ – Genesis 17:3-8
“not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, ‘It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.’” – Romans 9:7-8
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” – Galatians 3:28-29
“Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called ‘uncircumcised’ by those who call themselves ‘the circumcision’ (that done in the body by the hands of men) – remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.” – Ephesians 2:11-13
My position is that Abraham’s descendants will inherit the Land according to the promise.
That should about do it for me. I appreciate the dialogue, but doubt I will be responding after this one. The last word goes to you my brother…
May His promise be yours,
From the Middle East
PS – The Genesis 17 covenant was conditional (check out verses 10-14) ;^)
And here indeed is the last word my brother (of course if anyone else wants to dialogue, so be it).
Middle, whose faith? Jesus healed the man lowered down on a mat in Peter’s house, based upon the faith he saw of those who brought him. In those two statements I was not being contradictory. Indeed I believe the miraculous beginning and keeping of the modern State of Israel can be nothing but God’s hand. The faith of believers around the world are sustained by a hope of “praying for the peace of Jerusalem.” So indeed based upon the faith of the church are the unfaithful and unbelieving Jews being brought back into the Land of promise so that the events leading to the return of Christ can be completed – including an opportunity to hear the Gospel message and repent.
The condition in of God keeping the convenant from Genesis 17 was circumcision. I have not heard of many Jewish people failing their sons by not having that ceremony after the eighth day – be they secular or religious. So no, if that is the only condition of God keeping the covenant with them – that’s a pretty weak argument. Genesis 15 is an unconditional covenant.
The difference between our positions is that you want to “hyper-spiritualize” the covenants to make them null and void toward the Jews – that their future is immaterial and has been submerged into and with the “church.” I disagree with that view. But that is okay. The future will confirm or disafirm our positions. God will have the final say.
Can we meet up there and say, “I told you so?” I promise to be humble either way
Rob
Brother Rob,
You said: Can we meet up there and say, “I told you so?” I promise to be humble either way
Indeed we can my brother! And truth be told, we are probably both wrong and will humbled in many ways!!
May you walk in His presence today,
From the Middle East
Great discussion.
I completely agree with you FTME; it’s good to know there is another non-dispensationalist out there. The reason I agree with you is that I came out of dispensationalism once I read my Bible and asked myself one question: Why did God put up with Israel / Judah when there was virtually no period in their history when they as a people were faithful to His covenant.
I’ll dispense with answering for the dispensationalists. The answer that brought me to understand God’s plan was this: the promise God made to Adam and Eve in the Garden, proved with Abel (Heb. 11), continued with Noah, interwove with the history of one man in Abraham, codified in Moses, focused with David, was made manifest and fulfilled in Christ. Christ is the final fulfillment of God’s promises. The Jews were the vehicle through which Christ came, the land was nothing more than the setting for the fulfillment which came in Christ. Once Christ came, the purpose of the land and the purpose of the Jews was fulfilled.
All of the first believers in the church (until Acts 10) were Jews. The Jews, both believers and unbelievers believed that Paul was telling Jews and non-Jews that keeping the Law was unimporant. In fact, Paul’s entire argument was that people are justified by faith, not the practice of the law, even though he agreed to take a Nazarite vow to quiet his accusers (Acts 21:15-40). Judaism has a history of not dealing well with the fact that every tradition that made them unique as a people was rendered unnecessary once Christ came and fulfilled the law. Read Acts in full, and then Romans in full.
So why did God put up with Israel / Judah? They were the vehicle for God to bring His covenant to fruition in Christ.
I would recommend reading, Clarence Bass “The Backgrounds of Dispensationalism” for a good history of the position.
Ben Macklin
Ahh, Dr. Macklin -
I assure you – I have read my Bible. It is from that Word that I recieved my position – not vice versa. It was only after coming to my position that I found that others agreed/disagreed with me. I frankly inferred from your statement that Bible readers such as myself could not honestly hold to my position. You may or may not agree with my inference – I hope you do not. Of course if you do, we have words for that – and we have had them before.
Your argument, while unintended, supports my position. At no time in the history of the Jews have they been consistently faithful to God – and yet He has been faithful to them despite their faithlessness and has restored them over and over again. His work toward them then is not dependent upon massive repentence. Your position is anagolous to picking up one of those throw away phones at Wal-Mart – once your minutes are gone, just throw it away, it’s purpose is over. I believe God’s grace and adherance to His Word is a lot more faithful than the average consumer.
Yesterday was an interesting day. It was the day President Putin of Russia showed up in Libya with Kaddafi to sign various economic and “interest” treaties. Russia has already signed up Iran with the same kind of agreements. While I do not know (nor am willing at this point to make any affirmative correlation) it seems to me that this occurence seems to be aligning with the list of nations in Ezekial 38. And the beat goes on…..
Rob
Rob,
Sorry. I didn’t mean to infer that you were spinning anything. It’s just evident to me that our discussion wasn’t really going anywhere.
But while I was shaving this morning, it occurred to me that the discussion did go somewhere, in that it proves people who dont’ agree on a particular subject can engage in collegial discourse without one ever questioning the other’s salvation, belief in Scripture, or Baptist identity.
Thanks for the discussion, even though it was brief.
Rob -
What God is faithful to is His covenant, His promise. The Jewish people were the vehicle for His promise, not the object of it. Christ is the object of God’s promise (cf. Gen 3:15, 22:18, Acts 3:24-26, Gal. 3:16).
You cell phone argument is not persuasive. God does not continue to sustain anything that does not relate to Him rightly, and that has always been by faith – no matter the “dispensation” (see 2 Kings 13:22-23). The reason God put up with Israel and Judah was because of the promise He made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob! It says that explicitly.
Once the object of faith was made clear by God by being manifested int he flesh, what is there to do with people, tribes, nations, etc. who do not believe? Nothing but preach to them; that’s the content of the book of Acts. The believing Jews considered themselves very much Jews, Paul went to the Jews first in every city because it was they who were expecting the Messiah, the first receivers / believers were Jews, the first converts were confronted with the prospect of having to become Jewish to believe in Christ (see Galatians 3:1-2), and the repeating cycle in Acrts is that it was the unbelieving Jews who instigated persecution of Paul and believers. I do not mean this in a demeaning way, but I would urge you to read Acts all the way through, in one sitting.
As for what happens in Lybia, that is interesting from a news perspective, but I fail to agree that it has anything to do with how God looks at modern Israel, or Judaism in general.
I enjoy our discussion, it is important.
Ben
Thank you Stuart. It is that collegiality that not only stregthens us, but also binds the hearts of the church together – a “building” not made of wood or stone, but from the lives and hearts of the redeemed as Christ is “the Chief Cornerstone.” “They shall know you by your love one for another” I read that my Savior said – and heard Him whisper it in my ear and in my heart as affirmation of this most important quality. It is the quality that was emphasized when this site was started – and sadly is missing among many of the blogging brethren today (and throughout Southern Baptist and Christendom for that matter).
Thank you for your input here (even though brief). I will have to admit that the cosmic ramifications of how that looking in the mirror while shaving brought about your epiphany escapes me. Yet we serve a God who is “mysterious” and “His ways are not our ways”! Besides, one of the greatest revelations that I have ever received was when I was riding the “Mamba” at “Worlds of Fun” in Kansas City. Probably nothing real supernatural – but God surely had my attention as I believed I was soon going to see Him!
Grace and peace my brother,
Rob