Category Archives: Dispensationalism

CRITIQUE OF DISPENSATIONALISM

Church, Dispensationalism, Israel October 20, 2014 Leave a comment

Hoekema futurePMT 2014-127 written by OPC pastor Shane Lems

Excerpts from Anthony Hoekema’s book, The Bible and the Future

The Bible does not teach a millennial restoration of the Jews to their land. …To understand these prophecies (about returning to the land) only in terms of a literal fulfillment for Israel in Palestine during the thousand years is to revert back to Jewish nationalism and to fail to see God’s purpose for all his redeemed people. To understand these prophecies, however, as pointing to the new earth and its glorified inhabitants drawn from all tribes, peoples, and tongues ties in these prophecies with the ongoing sweep of New Testament revelation, and makes them richly meaningful to all believers today.

Anthony Hoekema (d. 1988) wrote a helpful critique of dispensational premillennialism in his excellent book, The Bible and the Future. Because I think they are helpful, I’m going to summarize and edit them below. I strongly recommend reading the entire 20 page chapter for the full discussion – along with exegesis and detailed explanation. Continue reading →

JOHN’S REVELATION, DISPENSATIONAL CONFUSION, AND GENTRY FRUSTRATION

Dispensationalism, Objections, Revelation April 16, 2014 Comments: 15

How dispensationalists see themselvesPMT 2014-046 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Revelation is a book as fascinating as it is difficult. Unfortunately, it is made more difficult by approaching it in the wrong way and viewing it through out-of-focus lenses. In our day the naive dispensational view is the dominant evangelical approach to eschatology — despite its many and continuing failed predictions of the date of the rapture and its erroneous identitifying of the Antichrist.

So many Christians have been raised in this system that they cannot even understand any other approach. This makes reasoning with them extremely difficult. In fact, reasoning with a populist dispensationalist is a lot like saddling a cow: It is a whole lot of work and there is not much point in it. Continue reading →

DISPENSATIONALISM’S INCONSISTENT LITERALISM (2)

Dispensationalism, Interpretation March 31, 2014 Comments: 2

PMT 2014-039 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In this article I continuing an expose of populist dispensationalism’s claim to consistent literalism. This study was begun in my last blog post (PMT 2014-038). This is an important argument that can be effectively used against dispensationalists. Unless, of course, they simply write you off as figurative, not being a real person. In which case, I don’t know what to tell you.

Continue reading →

DISPENSATIONALISM’S INCONSISTENT LITERALISM (1)

Dispensationalism, Interpretation March 28, 2014 Comments: 3

PMT 2014-038 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.inconsistent

Populist dispensationalism is an immensely successful eschatological construct. Its purveyors have sold tens of millions of books to evangelical Christians. One of the key factors in its success is its naive commitment to an alleged “consistent literalism.”

Besides being naive, the dispensational claim to “consistent literalism” is frustrating due to its inconsistent employment — despite contrary claims. For instance, some dispensationalists do not understand certain Old Testament prophecies about David’s millennial reign literally. Older, but still popular dispensationalist, H. A. Ironside writes: “I do not understand this to mean that David himself will be raised and caused to dwell on the earth as king. . . . The implication is that He who was David’s Son, the Lord Christ Himself is to be the King.” [1] On what basis can a consistent literalist allow this view?

Continue reading →

DISPENSATIONALISM AND DANIEL’S GAP (Part 2)

Daniel, Dispensationalism November 25, 2013 Comments: 3

PMT 2013-031 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Shake handsI am continuing a critique of dispensationalism’s gap theory for Daniel’s Seventy Weeks prophecy. In my last posting I presented four of their arguments with my rebuttals. I will continue now with the fifth and final dispensational argument.

Fifth, the order within the prophecy: “In the record of the prophecy, the destruction of the city [v. 26b] is placed before the last week [v. 27a].” 1 Since this occurs in A.D. 70, we must allow a gap to account for it.

This argument overlooks the peculiarities of Hebrew poetic style. Oriental expression often confounds the Occidental concern for chronological succession; the Western framework may not be foisted upon the passage. This “revelational pattern” 2 allows a parallel rehearsal and expansion of the topic without requiring actual succession in time. Even classic dispensationalists understand that some prophetic passages do not flow chronologically. 3 A better understanding of the relation between verses 26 and 27 is given above. Continue reading →

DISPENSATIONALISM AND DANIEL’S “GAP” (Part 1)

Daniel, Dispensationalism November 22, 2013 Comments: 8

PMT 2013-030 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Broken clockDispensationalism interposes this gap or parenthesis between the sixty-ninth and the seventieth weeks; it spans the entire Church Age from the Triumphal Entry to the Rapture.1 The dispensational arguments for a gap of undetermined length between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks are not convincing. Let us consider the leading arguments for this gap. I will state the argument briefly with some documentation and then respond.

First, the peculiar phraseology in Daniel: Daniel places the cutting off of the Messiah “after the 62 ‘sevens,’ not in the 70th ‘seven.’” 2 This allows for a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. If the cutting off does not occur in the sixty-ninth or the seventieth weeks, there must be a gap wherein it does occur. Continue reading →

DISPENSATIONALISM AND DANIEL’S 70th WEEK

Daniel, Dispensationalism November 20, 2013 Comments: 3

PMT 2013-029 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Prophet writingThis is part 5 of an ongoing series examining Daniel’s prophecy regarding the Seventy Weeks determined for Israel. In this article I will begin focus on the first of  three fundamental errors in the dispensational approach to Daniel’s seventy weeks. These errors involve: (1) The proper understanding of the terminus; (2) the unity of the seventy weeks; and (3) the identity of the covenant of verse 27.

Dispensationalists are pressed by their system to radically re-interpret Daniel 9:24. They place these events in our future, deferring them until Israel’s return to the Lord during a seven year Great Tribulation. 1 Pentecost observes that “this future period is the unfulfilled seven years of Daniel’s prophecy of the seventy weeks (Dan. 9:24-27).” 2 Price agrees, admitting this is a peculiar dispensational approach: “A distinctive tenet of dispensational interpretation is the recognition of prophetic postponement. . . . Daniel 9:26-27 [is] a much contested model for demonstrating time intervals in eschatological passages.”3 Continue reading →