Progressive Dispensationalism

[bearbear]

Many of us who came out of the LCs hold to a traditional dispensational theology which WL inherited from Nee and Darby and which also is the predominant theology in evangelicalism. In this view Israel and the church are viewed as distinct so God's covenants with the Church and Israel are also separate. In most versions this extends even to the New Testament where some would say the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) which contains Jesus' teachings on the second coming applies to Israel and not the church. This always bothered me because Jesus' audience during this sermon are his followers and not unbelieving Jews. Traditional dispensationalists would agree that Messianic Jews like Jesus' disciples who are his audience in Matthew 24 who put their faith and trust in Jesus would presumably be raptured before God's wrath, yet somehow they redirect the Olivet discourse to unbelieving Jews forming a clear contradiction.

In recent decades, a view coined as "progressive dispensationalism" has been gaining ground. Similar to Commonwealth theology this view treats Israel and the Church as distinct but not separate inheriting One New Covenant with an ongoing partial fulfillment and a future complete fulfillment for Israel. I believe this view is closer to what the early church believed. They were premillenialists yet they believed all of Jesus' teachings were applicable to themselves and not unbelieving Israel. Unfortunately Augustine introduced the heresy of preterism and replacement theology into the church around 400AD and the view the early church fathers held faded away until 1400 years later when teachers like JN Darby eventually discovered that the church has not replaced Israel and God's promises still apply to Israel. However I believe he swung the pendulum too far by overly dividing the church and Israel.

In progressive dispensationalism, the Olivet discourse and all of Jesus and the apostles teachings can be interpreted to apply to his followers which compose the Church. Wikipedia has more information on this view and can probably explain it better than I can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progre...pensationalism

Progressive dispensationalists, like Blaising and Bock, argue for one new covenant with an ongoing partial fulfillment and a future complete fulfillment for Israel. Progressives hold that the new covenant was inaugurated by Christ at the Last Supper. Progressives hold that while there are aspects of the new covenant currently being fulfilled, there is yet to be a final and complete fulfillment of the new covenant in the future. This concept is sometimes referred to as an "already-but-not-yet" fulfillment...
..
These differences between traditionalists and progressives show up in how one views the Old Testament texts and promises in the New Testament and how they are handled by the New Testament writers. For traditionalists, who perceive the present dispensation as a parenthesis, the standard approach has been to view Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as applications rather than fulfillment. If an Old Testament quotation is said to have a fulfillment role in the New Testament (outside of the gospels), then that may imply that the present dispensation is no longer a parenthesis, but has a relationship or connection with the prior dispensation. In contrast, progressives, instead of approaching all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as application, attempt to take into account the context and grammatical-historical features of both Old Testament and New Testament texts. An Old Testament quote in the New Testament might turn out to be an application, but it also might be a partial fulfillment or a complete fulfillment or even something else.
...
For example, in Jeremiah 31:31–34, the original recipients of the new covenant were Jews—i.e., "the house of Israel and the house of Judah." Progressives hold that in Acts 2, believing Jews first participated in the new covenant based on Jer 31:31–34. Gentiles were not named as original participants. However, additional revelation came in Acts 9–10 concerning believing Gentiles where God (through Peter and Cornelius) formally accepted believing Gentiles as co-heirs with the Jews. In other words, God used additional New Testament revelation to further expand the participants of the new covenant to include believing Gentiles. God did not replace the original recipients or change the original meaning of the new covenant, He simply expanded it...

This theology is relevant to the second coming because it then allows for a simpler literal reading of Jesus' teachings on his coming which I believe is consistent with the prewrath rapture view. I will introduce the prewrath rapture view in another thread here: https://localchurchdiscussions.com/v...380#post113380

[bearbear]

Out of all the premillennial views, the prewrath rapture may be the most easy to understand in light of scripture with little to no mental gymnastics required. In this view, the rapture happens before God’s wrath and after the tribulation. More specifically it takes place after the sixth seal is opened in Revelation 8:1. During this time there is a silence in heaven, perhaps caused by Jesus and his angels leaving heaven to gather the elect from the four winds of the earth (Matthew 24:31).

Some say that all the seals are part of God’s wrath but if we look at the opening of the fifth seal, the tribulation martyrs ask God “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” (Revelation 6:10). Hence, this fifth seal and the ones prior to it cannot be part of God’s wrath because the martyrs are not blaming their trials on God but instead they are asking God to begin his wrath and avenge their deaths.

God then fulfills his promise to the martyrs during the next sixth seal by beginning the day of the Lord as prophesied by the OT prophets (Jer 46:10, Isaiah 13:9-11). The mighty men of the earth escape to hide themselves in caves and call “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?” (Revelation 6:16-17).

Since the church is not appointed to “wrath” (1 Thess 5:9), God takes away the church before he pours his wrath on earth. On the other hand, Jesus promises his disciples (who are the church by way of believing in the Messiah) that they will be persecuted unto death before his return (Matt 24:9).

Here’s the clincher, in Matthew 24, Luke 21 and Mark 13 the disciples ask Jesus for signs of his coming. If you read the signs that Jesus gives, they line up almost perfectly with the first six seals and none of them match any of the trumpets or bowls!

(Matt 24:5-6) False christs & wars -> 1st seal; white horse & conquesting antichrist (Rev 6:2)

(Matt 24:6-7) Nation vs nation & kingdom vs kingdom -> 2nd seal; red horse & no peace (Rev 6:4)

(Matt 24:7) famines & earthquakes -> 3rd seal; black horse & food inflation (Rev 6:5-6)

(Luke 21:11) disease & pestilence - 4th seal; pale horse & death, plague; (Rev 6:8)

(Matt 24:9) saints persecuted unto death - 5th seal; altar of souls who were slain; (Rev 6:10)

(Matt 24:29) sun & moon darkened - 6th seal; celestial signs; (Rev 6:12)

(Matt 24:30) son of man appears & angels gather elect - 7th seal; silence in heaven; (Rev 8:1)

7a (Luke 21:28) - “... straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

Jesus said he has told us these things in advance so we could be on guard (Mark 13:23) and not fall away. If this view is correct the church may not be prepared to face the antichrist and many may end up taking the mark of the beast and betraying one another after hopelessness and disappointment set in because they have been taught that the church will be raptured before this persecution takes place (Matt 24:9). Paul warns of a great falling away during this time (2 Thess 2:3) echoing Jesus’ warning that many of his followers will fall away and end up betraying one another (Matt 24:10). This would mirror the children of Israel’s apostasy after they became impatient from believing that Moses had died after he took longer than they expected to return from Mount Sinai.

Paul said the rapture would be the blessed hope (Thess 4:13-18) as a comfort to the Thessalonians who were bereaved by the death of their loved ones. In this view the rapture will still remain a blessed hope since it will be a way of escape for Christians suffering the greatest persecution the world has ever known (Matt 24:21).

We also know from church history that all the church fathers up until 250AD who wrote about the end times starting with the Didache (dated to 50 to 90AD, a manual for believers in the early Church) and including Iranaeus who was a 2nd degree disciple of Apostle John, had an understanding that the church would face the antichrist (Joey Schimmel describes this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQoR16TQXVU). It wasn’t until 400AD when Augustine popularized a preterist view of scripture that the understanding of end times prophecy started getting fractured in the church.

For those that want to do more research, Dr. Alan Kurschner also expounds on the prewrath view more here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx6gYJBBSek

[WitnessMe]

Dispensationalism is wrong and unbiblical. It's rejected by denominations that follow covenant theology such as reformed. Augustine of Hippo also rejected it. There is a verse says that even Jesus himself doesn't know his second coming, only the father knows.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

Dispensationalism is wrong and unbiblical. It's rejected by denominations that follow covenant theology such as reformed. Augustine of Hippo also rejected it. There is a verse says that even Jesus himself doesn't know his second coming, only the father knows.

I agree that traditional dispensationalism is flawed however the early church fathers held to a form of it that is similar to progressive dispensationalism which blends covenant theology with traditional dispensationalism. Augustine was the first to popularize Preterism in the church. Prior to that the early church was premillenial.

Irenaeus, disciple of Polycarp, disciple of the Apostle John wrote about premillennialism and the progression of divine covenants in "Against Heresies".

On Premillennialism

Book V, Chapter 33, Paragraph 3:
"For the Lord said, 'Behold, I make the last as the first.' Hence, the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day sanctified by the restitution of all things, which the prophets have announced."

Book V, Chapter 34, Paragraph 1:
"And therefore, when the end of the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, 'There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.'"

Book V, Chapter 35, Paragraph 1:
"The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom when the righteous shall rise from the dead and reign, when creation, renewed and freed from bondage, shall produce a wealth of food of all kinds from the dew of heaven and the fertility of the earth."

On Divine Covenants and Progressive Revelation

Book IV, Chapter 32, Paragraph 1:
"Thus, then, the promise of God, which He made to Abraham, remains steadfast. For through the law, men were continually taught to look forward to the coming of Christ, who, as the fulfilment of the law, accomplished by Himself the salvation of those who obeyed Him."

Book IV, Chapter 33, Paragraph 7:
"Therefore, the law is both Moses' and Christ's; but the points prefigured in it, which were to be fulfilled in Christ, were His alone. For this reason, He exclaimed, 'I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.'"

Book IV, Chapter 34, Paragraph 4:
"For this cause also, Paul declares, 'And so all Israel shall be saved,' but it is not in this present time that they are established, but when the gathering of the Gentiles shall come in."

Justin Martyr explicitly defended the doctrine of a literal thousand-year reign of Christ in Jerusalem, arguing against those Christians who spiritualized or allegorized this belief.

Justin Martyr (100-165 AD) - Dialogue with Trypho
"But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare."

Quotes from other church fathers:

Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60-130 AD)
"There will be a period of a thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth."

Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD) - Against Marcion
"But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem."

[bearbear]

Covenant theology teaches that the church replaces Israel and takes over its covenant and promises. Traditional dispensationalism teaches that the Church and Israel are separate and governed by separate covenants.

Progressive dispensationalism, however, modifies the traditional dispensational view by emphasizing the continuity between Israel and the Church. It says that both entities share in the same redemptive plan of God, which unfolds progressively through biblical covenants. While retaining the distinction between Israel and the Church, progressive dispensationalism suggests a partial fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel in the present Church age, with complete fulfillment expected in the future millennium. This view seeks a middle ground, asserting that God’s covenantal promises to Israel extend to the Church without negating the future national restoration of Israel and the millennial kingdom where Christ reigns.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Covenant theology teaches that the church replaces Israel and takes over its covenant and promises. Traditional dispensationalism teaches that the Church and Israel are separate and governed by separate covenants.

Progressive dispensationalism, however, modifies the traditional dispensational view by emphasizing the continuity between Israel and the Church. It says that both entities share in the same redemptive plan of God, which unfolds progressively through biblical covenants. While retaining the distinction between Israel and the Church, progressive dispensationalism suggests a partial fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel in the present Church age, with complete fulfillment expected in the future millennium. This view seeks a middle ground, asserting that God’s covenantal promises to Israel extend to the Church without negating the future national restoration of Israel and the millennial kingdom where Christ reigns.

All systems of theology fail us. Obviously there are both dispensations and covenants in scripture which are true, and which will be fulfilled. Personally, I do not embrace “systems” but rather the scriptures.

Recently I read Philip Schaff’s legacy work on church history regarding the time Revelation was written. Schaff is a well respected 19th century theologian and historian, a contemporary of Darby, Govett, Spurgeon, Etc. Later in life he changed his view from ~69 to ~95 AD. This created monumental changes in his end time eschatology. Basically he reverted to Preterism, considering that all the prophetic events in Revelation were fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70AD. For example he mentions instruction to John to “measure the temple” (11.1) as his leading item. His thought was that the Temple must still be erected to be “measured.” But John was exiled on Patmos, so this could NOT be literal.

Hence, I do think all systems of interpretation are flawed, and as the Day approaches the church’s understanding of the future will constantly be corrected and fine-tuned. If and when the Temple is rebuilt, Preterist thinking automatically must perish. If Christians then remain on the earth, then Darby pre-trib Dispensationalism must likewise be exposed as false. Unfortunately, and I do says this with great fear for my brothers and sisters in Christ, if this long-promised Great End-times Revival does NOT occur, many Christians will be set up for “The Apostasy” mentioned in 2 Thess 2.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

All systems of theology fail us. Obviously there are both dispensations and covenants in scripture which are true, and which will be fulfilled. Personally, I do not embrace “systems” but rather the scriptures.

Progressive dispensationalism could have flaws but I think it's much less flawed than the two other competing systems because it allows for a more literal reading of scripture.

For example covenant theologians and preterists need to force end times teachings in scripture to match their theology. When they see references to the millennial kingdom they have to allegorize it because it doesn't fit their system.

Traditional dispensationalists also often force problem passages to match their understanding by declaring that those passages apply to different audiences, which is convenient because then if they aren't in that audience, they don't have to obey.

Pretrib dispensationalists will say that the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 applies to unbelieving Israel and gentiles who miss the rapture when the audience is clearly Jesus' followers.

Extreme free grace dispensationalists will also often use this system to declare that passages like Ezekiel 18 apply to "those under the law":

Ezekiel 18:24
But when a righteous person turns away from his righteousness and does injustice and does the same abominations that the wicked person does, shall he live? None of the righteous deeds that he has done shall be remembered; for the treachery of which he is guilty and the sin he has committed, for them he shall die.

Yet both Jesus and the apostles often preached that one had to turn away from sins or perish in the New Testament. And when extreme free grace dispensationalists see these same quotes, they will apply it to a different audience such as "the nations", when the clear context of the audience is Jesus' followers who are the church. This is quite dangerous because it won't allow the word of God to enter their heart so that they can obey.

Acts 3:19 (NLT)
Now repent of your sins and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped away.

Acts 3:26 (NLT)
When God raised up his servant, Jesus, he sent him first to you people of Israel, to bless you by turning each of you back from your sinful ways.

Luke 13:2-3 (NLT)
Do you think those Galileans were worse sinners than all the other people from Galilee?” Jesus asked. “Is that why they suffered? Not at all! And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God.

Under progressive dispensationalism, there's no get out of jail free card for passages that are hard to obey. In this sense the salvation theology of progressive dispensationalists will be more similar to covenant theology which teaches that the same covenant of grace extends throughout the Old and New Testament starting with Moses and that the OT saints were saved by faith in God just as the NT saints were (Hebrews 11) though the sacraments differed.

Progressive dispensationalists will acknowledge we are under the New Testament age of grace but will take the entire scripture into account to interpret this dispensation and not throw out the "problem passages" using Jesus as their guide to determine what is carried over to the New Covenant from the Old.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hence, I do think all systems of interpretation are flawed, and as the Day approaches the church’s understanding of the future will constantly be corrected and fine-tuned. If and when the Temple is rebuilt, Preterist thinking automatically must perish.

One can also argue that Preterism should have died with the establishment of the nation of Israel and Jerusalem in addition to Israel's ability to miraculously defend itself against enormous odds in the wars that followed which was a miracle. Unfortunately many in the Preterist camp have hardened their hearts and given themselves over to anti-semitism in spite of fulfilled prophecy.

If Christians then remain on the earth, then Darby pre-trib Dispensationalism must likewise be exposed as false. Unfortunately, and I do says this with great fear for my brothers and sisters in Christ, if this long-promised Great End-times Revival does NOT occur, many Christians will be set up for “The Apostasy” mentioned in 2 Thess 2.

I lean towards the Great End-times revival not occurring according to scripture. In addition to Paul warning of the great falling away in 2 Thess 2:3, Jesus says that when he comes back, he will find little faith on earth.

Luke 18:8
... Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?”

Even at the end of the 1000 year kingdom of the old creation, the people rise up to rebel against Jesus and the saints. This is both incredibly sad and interesting and speaks to the depravity of human nature. Even when Jesus physically reigns on earth which is what we are all hoping for, the people choose not to join Christ's kingdom in their hearts. The kingdom of God is not only physical but it is inside us.

Revelation 20:8-9
... their number is like the sand of the sea. And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them,

Throughout the bible God has always had to take matter into his own hands and preserve a remnant to be saved. This is true in the NT as well when Jesus confirmed that few are saved and will find the narrow way that leads to life. This could also be true in the millennial kingdom which may get off to a great start when the Jews put their faith in Jesus after "seeing the one whom they pierced", but subsequent generations then regress and rebel against God just like the in OT starting with the overcoming Joshua generation who entered the promised land and arguably like in the NT after the early church got off to a great start and regressed over time.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

Dispensationalism is wrong and unbiblical. It's rejected by denominations that follow covenant theology such as reformed. Augustine of Hippo also rejected it. There is a verse says that even Jesus himself doesn't know his second coming, only the father knows.

Specifically Jesus said He did not know “the day nor the hour.”

But once Daniel’s 70th week begins, we CAN know the month and year of His return to earth.