Quote:
Originally Posted by bearbear
Thanks for the historical background Ohio and I'm glad I chose my words carefully and didn't lump all the Brethren in one category. George Müller seemed like a genuine man of God and he is listed as one of the primary founders of the Open Brethren based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Brethren.
According to that article, George Müller also did not accept Darby's dispensationalism:
Which I think would imply that the Open Brethren did not hold to the 1000 year purgatory concept for unfaithful Christians living in sin and adopted a view of salvation closer to the traditional Baptist theology of dichotomizing true and false believers. Note that I'm not equating dispensationalism with millennial exclusion but it does seem to be a requirement for it. |
Dispensationalism is a valuable tool in Bible interpretation. I don’t dismiss is merely because Darby popularized it. Granted it, like any other interpretation, can be taken to extremes. Many opposed this parallel track of Israel/Church long before there were any signs of the restoration of the nation of Israel.
As an aside, Preterist teachings on eschatology also developed long before any signs of life were seen in the ancient land of Israel.
The initial clashes between Darby and Newton concerned end time events. Personally I think Darby used his unique teachings to elevate his position among the Brethren. His battles with Newton, and subsequently with Muller, progressed from topic to topic in order to gain footing and develop an upper hand among adherents. Thus theological differences were used as a means to an end, and as a way to identify parties. The end is control. The driving force is the lust for power. Did we not also see this when the Midwest LC’s were expelled?