mfblume
04-25-2003, 12:24 PM
After noting response to various prophecy issues, I now understand the major difference between futuristic interpretation and partial preterism and the sort.
The following points shows what I consider to be the missing factor in dispensationalistic bible prophecy, and the overall differentiating factor, demanding "dispies" (not to mock, but to abbreviate) to teach to propose a physical restoration of the natural nation of Israel to the physical locale of the Middle East in Palestine, and the return of Jesus to sit upon a earthly throne of David. I agree that Jesus has yet to return in the resurrection for the Church, however, I propose He will not sit on an earthly throne.
Let me explain.
The Old Testament was entirely a foreshadow of the spiritual Kingdom of God. God's entire goal and point was to first bring in that which is natural, and afterward, and permanently, that which is spiritual. And that includes everything! A new heaven and earth, the throne of David, the New Testament, the New Israel, the New Temple and the New Jerusalem. All old things pass away and all become new.
WHAT SORT OF COUNTRY DID ABRAHAM SEEK AS A RESULT OF THE PROMISE?
Notice:
It is summed up in this thought.
Hebrews 11:8-10 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. (9) By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: (10) For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
Hebrews 11:14-16 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. (15) And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. (16) But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
Abraham was within the Promised Land! But he dwelt there as a "stranger" in a strange land. And we read that he sought for a city whose builder and maker was God. This is the Promised Land that dispensationalists think that God will ultimately bring Abraham's Seed, to fulfill Abraham's promises. But Abraham was already in that land, and is there as though its not his goal, still seeking a heavenly Country! Should dispensationalism be correct, Abraham would have never sought for a heavenly country in fulfillment of his promise from God. If the earthly land of Canaan was the fulfillment of the promise to him, where else was he told of a heavenly country for which he waited, looked and manifested faith in?
There he was in temporal tents in the Promised Land, declaring he was not intending that earthly land to be his goal due to God's promise! He was not looking for an earthly city, or else he would have built one. But God would build him a spiritual city! And that city would not be upon the earth, for he considered that earthly country a foreign land to him, and not his home. Hebrews 12:22 says we, the seed of Abraham, have already come to the city, the heavenly Jerusalem.
If the Promised Land in the Earth was the ultimate goal for Israel, then why did Abraham live there as though a stranger in a strange land?
The point I believe dispensationalists miss, to their severe detriment, is that God spoke using natural elements, including natural land and earthly thrones, in the days of the Old Testament, that were fulfilled completely spiritually in the New Testament.
Where does the Bible say that God cannot prophesy of Christ using the natural throne of David on earth and fulfill that prophecy with the true spiritual throne? Where does the Bible say that God cannot foretell of a spiritual gathering into a heavenly world by stating that He will regather Israel to a natural land in Canaan? Where does the Bible say that prophesying anything, using earthly terms and elements, is not fulfilled spiritually in the New Testament?
Of course there are some issues that can only be dealt with in physical fulfillment. Prophecies of Christ's first coming were fulfilled while still under the law. he literally was born in Bethlehem and literally was born of a virgin. He literally was pierced in hands and feet. Destruction of the earthly Jerusalem could only have been fulfilled physically. However, the gathering to the Promised Land can certainly be fulfilled spiritually in Christ. And the entire issue of the country, or land, was noted in Hebrews 11 quite plainly. After the cross, the spiritual aspects for mankind came into being, and the church was born, the heavenly Israel.
LAW AS OPPOSED TO GRACE AND TRUTH
Notice that John told us how Law came by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ (John 1:14, 17). Why does John distinguish Christ's ministry using the terms grace and truth, as opposed to Law? Was law untrue? Of course not. It was true. But the sense of the term truth is contrasting what was temporary and physical with that which was permanent and spiritual. Christ brought the true, which was the fulfillment and anti-type of all that was of the Old Testament in the Law.
He brought the true Sabbath rest in Him, and the True sacrifice for sins, and the True Temple and True Israel. Etc. etc. Absolutely everything beneath law was shadow of the truth.
Abraham's story in Heb 11 proves this out. Abraham never did look for an earthly city or earthly land. He dwelt in the earthly land as a stranger!
He was looking for a spiritual country.
Hebrews 11:14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
He was in the country of Canaan, and still sought another country! And it was not another earthly country, either! It was heavenly, or spiritual. That can only mean one thing.
Hebrews 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
In this light, what world was Abraham going to inherit?
Romans 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
Read Hebrews 11:16 to find out! A Heavenly world! It could not be earthly because he had been in the promised land, and yet regarded it not as the heavenly country he actually sought.
SARAH OR HAGAR?
The two worlds are those of either Ishmael or Isaac. Galatians 4 shows a huge allegory of Hagar vs. Sarah, and Ishmael vs. Isaac. And it is very much minimized in dispensationalism. Paul said that Jerusalem in this world was Hagar. And the people of Abraham through flesh were Ishmael.
Galatians4:21-31
He said that Jerusalem above (heavenly) is Sarah and the people of Abraham through faith are Isaac.
Is God going to establish Ishmael and Hagar? That is, will God establish earthly Jerusalem and earthly and fleshly people of Abraham who were never born again? No. It cannot be.
continued...
The following points shows what I consider to be the missing factor in dispensationalistic bible prophecy, and the overall differentiating factor, demanding "dispies" (not to mock, but to abbreviate) to teach to propose a physical restoration of the natural nation of Israel to the physical locale of the Middle East in Palestine, and the return of Jesus to sit upon a earthly throne of David. I agree that Jesus has yet to return in the resurrection for the Church, however, I propose He will not sit on an earthly throne.
Let me explain.
The Old Testament was entirely a foreshadow of the spiritual Kingdom of God. God's entire goal and point was to first bring in that which is natural, and afterward, and permanently, that which is spiritual. And that includes everything! A new heaven and earth, the throne of David, the New Testament, the New Israel, the New Temple and the New Jerusalem. All old things pass away and all become new.
WHAT SORT OF COUNTRY DID ABRAHAM SEEK AS A RESULT OF THE PROMISE?
Notice:
It is summed up in this thought.
Hebrews 11:8-10 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. (9) By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: (10) For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
Hebrews 11:14-16 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. (15) And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. (16) But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
Abraham was within the Promised Land! But he dwelt there as a "stranger" in a strange land. And we read that he sought for a city whose builder and maker was God. This is the Promised Land that dispensationalists think that God will ultimately bring Abraham's Seed, to fulfill Abraham's promises. But Abraham was already in that land, and is there as though its not his goal, still seeking a heavenly Country! Should dispensationalism be correct, Abraham would have never sought for a heavenly country in fulfillment of his promise from God. If the earthly land of Canaan was the fulfillment of the promise to him, where else was he told of a heavenly country for which he waited, looked and manifested faith in?
There he was in temporal tents in the Promised Land, declaring he was not intending that earthly land to be his goal due to God's promise! He was not looking for an earthly city, or else he would have built one. But God would build him a spiritual city! And that city would not be upon the earth, for he considered that earthly country a foreign land to him, and not his home. Hebrews 12:22 says we, the seed of Abraham, have already come to the city, the heavenly Jerusalem.
If the Promised Land in the Earth was the ultimate goal for Israel, then why did Abraham live there as though a stranger in a strange land?
The point I believe dispensationalists miss, to their severe detriment, is that God spoke using natural elements, including natural land and earthly thrones, in the days of the Old Testament, that were fulfilled completely spiritually in the New Testament.
Where does the Bible say that God cannot prophesy of Christ using the natural throne of David on earth and fulfill that prophecy with the true spiritual throne? Where does the Bible say that God cannot foretell of a spiritual gathering into a heavenly world by stating that He will regather Israel to a natural land in Canaan? Where does the Bible say that prophesying anything, using earthly terms and elements, is not fulfilled spiritually in the New Testament?
Of course there are some issues that can only be dealt with in physical fulfillment. Prophecies of Christ's first coming were fulfilled while still under the law. he literally was born in Bethlehem and literally was born of a virgin. He literally was pierced in hands and feet. Destruction of the earthly Jerusalem could only have been fulfilled physically. However, the gathering to the Promised Land can certainly be fulfilled spiritually in Christ. And the entire issue of the country, or land, was noted in Hebrews 11 quite plainly. After the cross, the spiritual aspects for mankind came into being, and the church was born, the heavenly Israel.
LAW AS OPPOSED TO GRACE AND TRUTH
Notice that John told us how Law came by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ (John 1:14, 17). Why does John distinguish Christ's ministry using the terms grace and truth, as opposed to Law? Was law untrue? Of course not. It was true. But the sense of the term truth is contrasting what was temporary and physical with that which was permanent and spiritual. Christ brought the true, which was the fulfillment and anti-type of all that was of the Old Testament in the Law.
He brought the true Sabbath rest in Him, and the True sacrifice for sins, and the True Temple and True Israel. Etc. etc. Absolutely everything beneath law was shadow of the truth.
Abraham's story in Heb 11 proves this out. Abraham never did look for an earthly city or earthly land. He dwelt in the earthly land as a stranger!
He was looking for a spiritual country.
Hebrews 11:14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
He was in the country of Canaan, and still sought another country! And it was not another earthly country, either! It was heavenly, or spiritual. That can only mean one thing.
Hebrews 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
In this light, what world was Abraham going to inherit?
Romans 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
Read Hebrews 11:16 to find out! A Heavenly world! It could not be earthly because he had been in the promised land, and yet regarded it not as the heavenly country he actually sought.
SARAH OR HAGAR?
The two worlds are those of either Ishmael or Isaac. Galatians 4 shows a huge allegory of Hagar vs. Sarah, and Ishmael vs. Isaac. And it is very much minimized in dispensationalism. Paul said that Jerusalem in this world was Hagar. And the people of Abraham through flesh were Ishmael.
Galatians4:21-31
He said that Jerusalem above (heavenly) is Sarah and the people of Abraham through faith are Isaac.
Is God going to establish Ishmael and Hagar? That is, will God establish earthly Jerusalem and earthly and fleshly people of Abraham who were never born again? No. It cannot be.
continued...