After I Left The Local Recovered Church

After I left the Local recovered church, I spent a lot of time reading church history. I understand that people on here still follow a lot of dispensational theology because that’s what Witness Lee did, and he even went to absolute hyper route that’s beyond any kind of teachings one will find for 1900 years of the existence of the church. I read the current offerings of the sheperdingwords.com, and I could not disagree more with any of their beliefs.

I don’t believe for a second that Witness Lee had anything to add to or to interpret Scripture in any shape or form. He just exaggerated the views that came about in 1800s and the early 20th century from people like Darby and Scofield. Nether is he a trustworthy source for any theological beliefs.

[WitnessMe]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

After I left the Local recovered church, I spent a lot of time reading church history.

Yeah, from what I have seen, most of the people in LC believe dispensational theology. They say that Jews are God's people, and we have to unconditionally support the modern day State of Israel to resotre all its land and defeat its enemies in order to trigger the event of the second coming of Christ. It seems like they think that Jew is superior than other human races. It sounds so racist to me, and that the primary reason I decided to leave LC.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

Yeah, from what I have seen, most of the people in LC believe dispensational theology. They say that Jews are God's people, and we have to unconditionally support the modern day State of Israel to resotre all its land and defeat its enemies in order to trigger the event of the second coming of Christ. It seems like they think that Jew is superior than other human races. It sounds so racist to me, and that the primary reason I decided to leave LC.

There's more to be said,
1. On the point "They say that Jews are God's people" - I agree.
2. On the point "we have to unconditionally support the modern day State of Israel" - I disagree. Something has to be said regarding the USS Liberty. It was sunk by Israeli forces.
https://history.state.gov/historical...964-68v19/d284
3. On the point "resotre all its land and defeat its enemies in order to trigger the event of the second coming of Christ." - I have a different point of view.
Why not expel Israeli settlements and donate the West Bank to the Palestinians as their sovereign land. Thus going forward any action taken against Israeli citizens might prompt Israel to defend itself from another sovereign nation.
4. On the point "they think that Jew is superior than other human races." I have never heard that spoken. They're ordinary people just like everyone else.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

Yeah, from what I have seen, most of the people in LC believe dispensational theology. They say that Jews are God's people, and we have to unconditionally support the modern day State of Israel to restore all its land and defeat its enemies in order to trigger the event of the second coming of Christ. It seems like they think that Jew is superior than other human races. It sounds so racist to me, and that the primary reason I decided to leave LC.

If you still believe that the Old Testament is the Word of God, as most serious Christians do, then you realize that God still has covenant promises with Israel. The OT tells us that those who curse Israel will be cursed, and those who bless Israel will be blessed. Most Christians I know still embrace that, but not to the extremes you mention.

Regarding dispensational theology promoted by JN Darby, the Exclusive Brethren, Scofield Bible, et.al., there is some value with those teachings to understand scripture, but like anything, they can be taken to the extreme.

[WitnessMe]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If you still believe that the Old Testament is the Word of God, as most serious Christians do, then you realize that God still has covenant promises with Israel. The OT tells us that those who curse Israel will be cursed, and those who bless Israel will be blessed. Most Christians I know still embrace that, but not to the extremes you mention.

Regarding dispensational theology promoted by JN Darby, the Exclusive Brethren, Scofield Bible, et.al., there is some value with those teachings to understand scripture, but like anything, they can be taken to the extreme.

Not everyone call themselves Christians are save if they don't have saving faith. The same applies to the modern day state of Israel, if they don't have good works then they are not the true Israel or the people of God. This is common sense and common theme in the Bible. The state of Israel today truely failed to follow this:

Mark 12:31: The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”

Dispensationalism emphasizes a literal interpretation of the Bible, particularly prophetic texts. This approach leads to the belief that promises made to Israel in the Old Testament will be fulfilled literally to the nation of Israel and not allegorically or spiritually through the Church. Dispensationalism is kind of a religious extremism and an exterme way to interpret bible. Dispensationalism has resulted in so many Christian Extremism and Christian extremists, especially Jewish supremacy around the world. Look at what Jesus said in the following verse.

Matthew 7:18: "A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit."

It looks like to me that Dispensationalism is a bad tree.

If you believe in the new Testament, as most serious orthodox Christians do for over thousands years, Israel and the Church are united under Jesus Chirst. The Church is the true Israel, and the ture Jerusalem, and the true Christians are the third temple.

Galatians 3:28-29: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise." This passage suggests a unity in Christ that transcends ethnic distinctions.

Ephesians 2:14-16: "For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility...that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace." This passage emphasizes the unity of Jews and Gentiles in the body of Christ.

[WitnessMe]

When talking about dispensationalism. We need to ansewer some fundamental questions.

1. Is modern Israel is the Biblical Israel?

2. What does Israel actually mean in the New Testament?

3. Does the Bible mandate Christians to support the modern nation of Israel?

4. Who are the true chosen people according the New Testament?

5. Who are true descendant of Abraham according the New Testament?

6. Does God want a political nation on the earth or a spiritual kingdom that is not of this world?

7. What are the common themes in the New Testament?

8. When God gave Israelis the promised land, what were the conditions that came with the promise?

9. Do the modern Israelis believe in Jesus Christ?

Romans is a good book to consider when regarding the matter of the blood descendants of Abraham. I imagine Romans 11 is a key passage used by those who believe Israel has a unique place in biblical prophecy.

[bearbear]

WitnessMe, replacement theology is false and was not held to by the early church. It arrived later in church history during the 4th century by Augustine so it should be treated with suspicion. Paul clearly teaches against replacement theology in Romans 11 and says that even though Israel has hardened it's heart against God, God did not abandon them and will fulfill his promise to them at a later time.

Romans 11:1-2: "I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew."

Romans 11:11-12: "So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!"

Romans 11:17-18: "But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you."

Romans 11:25-26: "Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, 'The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob.'"

However I don't think John Darby's form of dispensationalism is scriptural either. I believe that the church inherits the promises of Israel without replacing it. The church and Israel are distinct but not separate, it's "both", "and". The church is part of the "commonwealth of Israel" which Paul refers to in Ephesians:

Ephesians 2:12-13 "Remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ."

You should also look into Commonwealth or progressive dispensationalism theology which more accurately reflects the writings of the early church fathers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Theology

Advocates of Commonwealth Theology distinguish their position on the Church and the Jews from Supersessionism (Replacement Theology) and Dispensationalism with the phrase, "Yes Distinction; No Separation."[12] The CT view is that Replacement Theology makes no distinction and no separation between the Church and the Jew based on Supersessionism's premise that the Church has subsumed the legacy of Old Testament Israel to become today, in totality, the "Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16) wherein at the cross the Jews were disinherited with all promises and covenants made to the Jews being forfeited as a result of the New Covenant inaugurated by Jesus. Since the Jews rejected Jesus, Jesus, through the Church, has rejected the Jew.[13]

Dispensationalism makes a distinction between the Church and the Jew but separates the two with various apparatus: two ages,[14] two gospels,[15] two brides.[16] The notion that the Jews are a "this-worldly" people and the Christians are an "otherworldly" people is another form of separation that is antithetical from Commonwealth of Israel Theology which asserts that the Church and the Jew remain distinct as represented by the 12 gates bearing the names of the 12 Tribes of Israel (Rev. 21:12) and the foundations of the Holy City bearing the names of the 12 apostles of the Lamb (Rev. 21:14); One Holy City (Rev. 21:2), Two Branches yet One Olive Tree/Root (Rom. 11:16–24); Two Houses – yet One Prince (Isa. 9:6), One King David shall reign over them both (Ezek. 37). Commonwealth Theology acknowledges the difference between the "believers among the nations" (gentiles) and the Jews in the same manner as Paul stated, "there is neither male nor female (Gal. 3:28);" insinuating they are not separate species, but they are still recognizably distinct.[17]

Similar to this view is progressive dispensationalism which there is a separate thread for here: https://localchurchdiscussions.com/v...ad.php?t=12267

[Nell]

Originally Posted by WitnessMe

When talking about dispensationalism. We need to ansewer some fundamental questions.
1. Is modern Israel is the Biblical Israel?
2. What does Israel actually mean in the New Testament?
3. Does the Bible mandate Christians to support the modern nation of Israel?
4. Who are the true chosen people according the New Testament?
5. Who are true descendant of Abraham according the New Testament?
6. Does God want a political nation on the earth or a spiritual kingdom that is not of this world?
7. What are the common themes in the New Testament?
8. When God gave Israelis the promised land, what were the conditions that came with the promise?
9. Do the modern Israelis believe in Jesus Christ?

There is one even more fundamental question regarding dispensationalism, which should be asked and answered first. What is the scriptural basis for dispensationalism? I don't mean the beliefs of certain "church fathers", I mean scripture.

"Dispensationalism is an extra-biblical framework which identifies and names periods of time as ‘ages’ or ‘dispensations.’ When I say, ‘extra-biblical’ I mean that it comes from outside the Bible. I am not implying or suggesting that just because it is extra-biblical that it is wrong. It is based on analytical observations which (divides) various periods of time into ‘ages’ or ‘dispensations.’ In this sense, a ‘dispensation’ is an age, where God is administering His plans differently according to His design for that age or ‘dispensation’. In the simplest terms, it is a phase of time with God’s plan for the world and mankind. So, before Christ’s death and resurrection there was an ‘age’ of Law and after there is an ‘age’ of Grace." -Matt Anderson (Forum member)

I think this is an important distinction when discussing dispensationalism and/or any other biblical topic. That is, what is the source of the teaching? We gave Witness Lee a pass on this matter and ended up in a world of hurt. We also failed to acknowledge that whatever Witness Lee taught was an interpretation of scripture. HIS interpretation of scripture. But as Matt said above, extra-biblical or interpretation doesn't mean it's wrong. What then? Test all things.

Acts 17:10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more [d]fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

Have we learned this lesson? That is, "search the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things are so". Is dispensationalism true/valid/scriptural?

Nell

[Gubei]

Originally Posted by Nell

There is one even more fundamental question regarding dispensationalism, which should be asked and answered first. What is the scriptural basis for dispensationalism? I don't mean the beliefs of certain "church fathers", I mean scripture.

"Dispensationalism is an extra-biblical framework which identifies and names periods of time as ‘ages’ or ‘dispensations.’ When I say, ‘extra-biblical’ I mean that it comes from outside the Bible. I am not implying or suggesting that just because it is extra-biblical that it is wrong. It is based on analytical observations which (divides) various periods of time into ‘ages’ or ‘dispensations.’ In this sense, a ‘dispensation’ is an age, where God is administering His plans differently according to His design for that age or ‘dispensation’. In the simplest terms, it is a phase of time with God’s plan for the world and mankind. So, before Christ’s death and resurrection there was an ‘age’ of Law and after there is an ‘age’ of Grace." -Matt Anderson (Forum member)

I think this is an important distinction when discussing dispensationalism and/or any other biblical topic. That is, what is the source of the teaching? We gave Witness Lee a pass on this matter and ended up in a world of hurt. We also failed to acknowledge that whatever Witness Lee taught was an interpretation of scripture. HIS interpretation of scripture. But as Matt said above, extra-biblical or interpretation doesn't mean it's wrong. What then? Test all things.

Acts 17:10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more [d]fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

Have we learned this lesson? That is, "search the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things are so". Is dispensationalism true/valid/scriptural?

Nell

Obviously, there are some.

Col. 1:26 the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people.

And some expositions…

quote
from ages—"from," according to Alford, refers to time, not "hidden from": from the time of the ages; still what is meant is that the mystery was hidden from the beings living in those "ages." The "ages" are the vast successive periods marked by successive orders of beings and stages of creation. Greek, "Æons," a word used by the Gnostics for angelic beings emanating from God. The Spirit by Paul presciently, in opposition to Gnostic error already beginning (Col 2:18), teaches, that the mystery of redemption was hidden in God's purposes in Christ, alike from the angelic beings (compare Eph 3:10) of the pre-Adamic "ages," and from the subsequent human "generations." Translate as Greek, "the ages … the generations."
Unquote

Jamieson-Fausset_Brown Commentary

Quote
from ages and from generations] Cp. “from the beginning of the world,” Ephesians 3:9; where lit., “from the ages.” Here lit., from the ages, &c., or, as well paraphrased in R.V., from all ages, &c. “From” is here a preposition of time; “ever since ages and generations were;” through all developments of the history of intelligent creation, whether longer (“ages,” æons), or more limited (“generations”). See our note on Ephesians 3:9.
unquote

Epe 3:9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.

An exposition as well…

Quote
from the beginning of the world—Greek, "from (the beginning of) the ages." Compare Eph 1:4; Ro 16:25; 1Co 2:7. The "ages" are the vast successive periods of time, marked by successive stages of creation and orders of beings.
Unquote

Jamieson-Fausset_Brown Commentary

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Gubei

Obviously, there are some.

Col. 1:26 the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people.

And some expositions…
quote
from ages—"from," according to Alford, refers to time, not "hidden from": from the time of the ages; still what is meant is that the mystery was hidden from the beings living in those "ages." The "ages" are the vast successive periods marked by successive orders of beings and stages of creation. Greek, "Æons," a word used by the Gnostics for angelic beings emanating from God. The Spirit by Paul presciently, in opposition to Gnostic error already beginning (Col 2:18), teaches, that the mystery of redemption was hidden in God's purposes in Christ, alike from the angelic beings (compare Eph 3:10) of the pre-Adamic "ages," and from the subsequent human "generations." Translate as Greek, "the ages … the generations."
Unquote
Jamieson-Fausset_Brown Commentary

Quote
from ages and from generations] Cp. “from the beginning of the world,” Ephesians 3:9; where lit., “from the ages.” Here lit., from the ages, &c., or, as well paraphrased in R.V., from all ages, &c. “From” is here a preposition of time; “ever since ages and generations were;” through all developments of the history of intelligent creation, whether longer (“ages,” æons), or more limited (“generations”). See our note on Ephesians 3:9.
unquote

Epe 3:9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.
An exposition as well…

Quote
from the beginning of the world—Greek, "from (the beginning of) the ages." Compare Eph 1:4; Ro 16:25; 1Co 2:7. The "ages" are the vast successive periods of time, marked by successive stages of creation and orders of beings.
Unquote
Jamieson-Fausset_Brown Commentary

"Ages" ..."vast successive periods of time"... obviously exist. That's not the point. The "successive stages of creation" are seen in history, not the teachings of men. "Ages" are defined by the passage of time---not by the teachings of men.

In that vein, is God bound by the non-scriptural dispensational teachings of men?

Nell

[Gubei]

Originally Posted by Nell

"Ages" ..."vast successive periods of time"... obviously exist. That's not the point. The "successive stages of creation" are seen in history, not the teachings of men. "Ages" are defined by the passage of time---not by the teachings of men.

In that vein, is God bound by the non-scriptural dispensational teachings of men?

Nell

Nell,

I’m afraid you are interpreting the word “ages” in the Bible according to your own standard, not by any Bible verses. I haven’t found your definition of “ages” being “the passage of time” in the Bible.
So, is it fair statement that you are extra-Biblical? No, I don’t think so.

We know there are such words as “ages”, “generations”, “administration” etc in the Bible(col 1:26, Epe 3:9), but we cannot find their dictionary-style definitions in the Bible, meaning, anyhow we have to define those words. That kind of action is called “expositions”, “commentary”, or “exegesis” etc. And you are doing that action, a very legitimate thing, just as Jamieson-Fausset_Brown Commentary is doing.

There are a lot of different positions even in the dispensationalism camps, and there have been debate on whether or not those teachings are heretical, but mostly I want to include them in the boundary of “orthodox” unless any sect of them are too extreme to the point that they do not accept other dissenting Christians. If I disagree with them, the reason is not that they believe dispensationalism, but that they are too exclusive.

According to their website declamation, The Moody Church is holding to dispensational thought, but they are welcome other dissenting Christians.

quote
At The Moody Church, we wholeheartedly hold to dispensational thought. These rich, historical doctrines are woven into the very fiber of our church’s teaching. However, in no way do we desire to alienate anyone from worshipping together with us who holds a different view of the prophetic Scriptures. Indeed, it is possible to be member of The Moody Church and hold to some other variation of eschatological teaching.
unquote

Gubei