Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Dispensationalism’s Progressive Death (Part 2)

Dispensationalism’s Progressive Death (Part 2)

by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Th.D., Director, NiceneCouncil.com

My previous blog post reviewed an article by progressive dispensationalist, Dr. Robert Chisholm of Dallas Theological Seminary. In that review I noted that Chisholm’s observations effectively drive a stake in the heart of dispensationalism. But I did not give a complete review of his article. Consequently, one Anonymous respondent wondered if my blog failed of its purpose.

In this follow-up blog I will present a related observation regarding the interpretation of prophecy that serves as the second of the one-two punch Chisholm lands on his own theology. This still falls under the category of “progressive dispensationalism” in that Chisholm favorably cited this material in his own article, though he did not press home the point.

I am referring to the chapter by Dr. Richard L. Pratt, Jr. that appears in J. I. Packer and Sven K. Soderlund, eds., The Way of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Bruce K. Waltke (2000) on pages 180-203.. That chapter is titled: “Historical Contingencies and Biblical Predictions.” So now I will offer a brief summary and review of Reformed theologian Pratt’s article which was endorsed by progressive dispensationalist theologian Chisholm. This article takes an additional important step for undermining the dispensational method of prophetic interpretation regarding Israel’s future.

Pratt’s Point

In Pratt’s article he opens with a lament regarding the naive and reckless enthusiasm of dispensational populists (whom he obliquely refers to as “North American evangelicals”). He complains that their “enthusiasm” for prophecy has caused them to “become monomaniacal in their interpretation of biblical prophecy” (p. 180).

Basically he argues that historical contingencies affect the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. As does Chisholm in his article, he points out that many biblical prophecies do not find fulfillment in the expected literalistic fashion that we often expect. He argues that this “failure” of prophecy to occur according to our expectations does not undermine “the immutability of God’s character and eternal decrees” (p. 181). That is, this “failure” does not prove God a liar nor does it dismiss the eternal nature of his decrees.

He argues from Scripture that “divine providence provides a perspective that complements divine immutability” (p. 183). That is, God is behind both the eternal decree and historical providence, and that one does not contradict, but rather complements the other. He continues:

“Old Testament prophets revealed the word of the unchanging Yahweh, but they spoke for God in space and time, not before the foundations of the world. By definition, therefore, they did not utter immutable decrees but providential declarations. For this reason, we should not be surprised to find that intervening historical contingencies, especially human reactions, had significant effects on the way predictions were realized. In fact, we will see that Yahweh often spoke through his prophets, watched the reactions of people, and then determined how to carry through with his declarations.”

Three Kinds of Predictions

Pratt then outlines and discusses “three kinds of predictions: (1) predictions qualified by conditions, (2) predictions qualified by assurances, and (3) predictions with out qualifications” (p. 183).

1. Predictions qualified by conditions. Of course, everyone recognizes that when a prophecy expressly mentions conditions, those conditions will affect the outcome of the prophecy. Pratt surveys several conditional prophecies, such as Isa 1:19–20; 7:9; Jer 7:5–7; 22:4–5). For instance, Isaiah 7:9 declares: “If you are not faithful, then you will not stand at all.” This is clearly conditional and affects the historical outcome of the prophecy. Of course, the problem for many populist prophecy-enthusiasts (who usually designate themselves “prophecy experts”) is: they almost never admit this truth about prophecy.

2. Predictions qualified by assurances. These prophecies include announcements of inescapable doom or of God’s refusal to reverse himself or of oath-bound prophecies. Samples include: Jeremiah 7:15–16; 11:11, 14; 14:10; Ezekiel 5:11; 14:16, 18, 20; 20:3; 33:27; Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 13; 2:1, 4, 6. Pratt observes that “we must remember that these kinds of predictions are few in number and usually not very specific in their descriptions of the future” (p. 187). The very existence of these few prophecies clearly indicate “that not all predictions shared this heightened certainty,” otherwise these assurances would have been wholly unnecessary to state.

3. Predictions without qualifications. Pratt notes that “the OT abounds with examples of unqualified predictions of events that did not take place” (p. 187). He lists a few samples, such as Jonah 3:10; 2 Chr 12:5–8; 3 Kings 22:16–20. For instance, “what caused these turns of events? Each text explicitly sights [sic] human responses as the grounds for the deviations. The people of Nineveh (Jonah 3:6), the leaders of Judah (2 Chr 12:6), Josiah (2 Kgs 22:18–19), and Hezekiah (Jer 26:19) repented or prayed upon hearing the prophetic word” (pp. 187–88). This shows that prophecies contained implied conditions. This also is not admitted by traditional dispensationalists.

Pratt then cites Calvin’s Institutes (1:17:14): “Even though [the prophets] make a simple affirmation, it is to be understood from the outcome that these nonetheless contain a tacit condition” (p. 188). Pratt then points to the lesson we learned from the image of God as the potter. He argues that “the universal perspective of Jer 18:1–12 strongly suggests that all unqualified predictions were subject to implicit conditions” (p. 189).

Historical Contingencies and Expectations

In his next section (pp. 191–95) Pratt asks the question: “If human responses could affect the way Yahweh directed history afer a prediction, how did prophets or their listeners have any secure expectations for the future?” (p. 191).

To answer this question he points out that “the covenantal parameters surrounding Yahweh and his people provided a basis for many expectations, but they did not settle every question. They set limits, but much latitude existed within these boundaries” (p. 192). Regarding any given prophecy: “Latitude remained. . . . When? How? By whom? How long? These more specific questions remained unanswered for the prophets and their audiences” (p. 193).

I would point out in this regard that when we come to the New Testament and the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel, we discover that “how” God blesses Israel is different from the way that the Jews (and dispensationalists) expected. He blesses her through the salvation of a remnant and by re-constituting Israel by making even Gentiles “Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise” (Gal 3:29). The Church of Jesus Christ is “the Israel of God” (Gal 6:16).

Therefore we must understand what the last great old covenant prophet John the Baptist (Matt 3:9) stated when he warned Israel: “Do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father’; for I say to you, that God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.” And ultimately Israel’s salvation comes on the same terms and in the same manner as the salvation of Gentiles, rather than through their exaltation (as per dispensational theology).

13 comments:

Len said...

An example of this might be the fact that the Jews had hundreds of years to study the prophesies about the coming Messiah. Although, it seems, that they got the idea that the time was ripe for the coming of the Messiah, they totally missed who the Messiah was and what He was to accomplish - their expectations and hopes of how the prophesies about Him were to be fulfilled were totally wrong.

Since we are not omniscient, it is dangerous to be too dogmatic about predicting exactly how a certain prophesy might be fulfilled. Most dispensationalists do not seem to grasp this concept.

Rick Warden said...

Part 1:

Your blog title states "defending Christianity" as if dispensationsionism is non-Christian. Can you prove that or at least make an attempt to back it up?

I am a dispensationalist who believes in Christ as my savior and that the prophecies are true. I work as a missionary and consider myself a true Christian, believe it or not. From what I've read of your blog, it is long-winded, filled with hyperbole and lacking in clear points regarding dispensationalism.

When people freely throw around hyperbole it is a sign that evidence is lacking.

Dispensationalism is not dying and neither are the prophecies. The authoritarian one world government is coming together faster than you may want to believe. Thus, there is probably an extreme sense of denial about this fact.

Rick Warden said...

Part 2:

Just recently, Fox news, mainstream news, began to support the 9/11 Truth movement because the evidence is just too overwhelming. The implications are obvious to anyone who has an open mind and can read the facts: "Geraldo Turns: Has 9/11 Truth Reached the Tipping Point?"

For those who don't have an open mind and need to consider why they won't read the facts: "On 9/11, Gallup Polls Show People Waking Up" 9/11, the "Patriot Act" and the worldwide "war on terror" are significant events which began the dismantling of human rights around the world.

People are complaining about TSA groping at airports this Thanksgiving but don't want to see the connection with 9/11 and what is behind it. It's time to wake up people. The book of Revelation didn't close out in the 1st century. God's kingdom has not been established on Earth. If you think it has, then the TSA gropings and loss of civil rights and democratic freedoms around the world must be a part of that.

Len said...

I wonder if Dr. Chisolm has been reading Patrick Fairbairn's "The Interpretation of Prophecy" (especially Chapter 4 of part 1 which addresses this very topic). It would seem that maybe Dr. Chisolm hasn't come with something new - well, maybe new to him.

Also, I believe that Fairbairn was at one time in the dispensational camp himself at one time, but he got over that.

Len

Len said...

A note to Warden:

One problem with Dispensationalism is the fact that it promotes the false belief that Satan is running amuck, leading the world to complete ruin and ungodliness. Whether or not they intend to promote this belief, this is the impression that most laymen are left with. They need to remember that Satan can’t even spit without God’s knowledge and permission. God has always been sovereign over, not just the universe, but Satan himself. The Father only allowed Satan to attack Job in certain ways. Satan attacked Job with the Father’s full knowledge, permission and limitations on Satan’s actions .

At the cross and His resurrection, the Father transferred His sovereignty to His Son. Therefore, all the ominous things which are happening today which Dispensationalists point to as being confirmation of the “last times” are all being allowed to happen by Christ. Why they are being allowed to happen is one of those “secret things” of the will of God of which we have no knowledge. Events like 9/11, some vaguely defined “one-world government,” and all the other things which Dispensationalists point to as being confirmation that we are living in the “end times” and that Christ’s return is imminent prove nothing except that Christ, for whatever reason, with the Father’s approval, is allowing all these things to happen. God is not in heaven, wringing His hands in helplessness, waiting for a certain level of evil to come upon the world before He chooses to act, as Dispensationalists seem to want us to believe.

Even if the Bible did clearly predict a one-world government which would happen before the coming of Christ, nowhere does it say how many one-world governments there might be before the final one happens – there could be one, or two hundred. Ever since the first century, people have always viewed the great disasters which have occurred (such as the black plague) as being evidence of the “end times,” but, obviously, they were wrong. Also, all these events, all the wars, floods, famines, all the Hitlers, all the Stalins, each and every one occurred with Christ’s full knowledge and permission.

Christ is ruling, reigning and in control of Satan and all the events in this world - including the TSA gropings.

Len

Rick Warden said...

Dear Len,

You wrote:

"One problem with Dispensationalism is the fact that it promotes the false belief that Satan is running amuck, leading the world to complete ruin and ungodliness. Whether or not they intend to promote this belief, this is the impression that most laymen are left with."

I believe you have pinpointed the nature of the problem. dispensationalism actually does not promote the idea that Satan is completely out of control and your lack of references in making this accusation is endemic to the nature of the problem. I certainly have no such belief.

You state "this is the impression that most laymen are left with." I would question whether most dispensationalists believe Satan may do whatever he wishes whenever he wants to.

I would offer, however, that posts like yours and websites like this one are a major reason for such false impressions.

You, Len, are Christian, I presume, and yet you have at least one time in your Christian life probably sinned and hurt another person.

Is it not possible that God allows Satan to hurt other people and to actually establish a godless government while at the same time being in control of the limits of Satan's actions?

May I offer there is a danger of assuming the government system, as a whole, is benevolent, as you and many neocon Christians seem to believe. And that this preconception causes you to completely overlook blatant evidence which shows the opposite.

In believing the US is mainly in a holy war against evil Islam, many Christians have blinded themselves to the facts, simply unwilling to look them, let alone acknowledge them, for example, the fact that explosives were used inside the World Trade Center buildings. Now, however, even the mainstream news is being forced to deal with this reality:

"Geraldo Turns: Has 9/11 Truth Reached the Tipping Point?"

This other article, also at my blog, may help you and others here at this website overcome your mass-media induced hypnotism and deal with reality:

"On 9/11, Gallup Polls Show People Waking Up"

I would urge you and others here to try and avoid sensationalism, hyperbole and baseless "impressions" in formulating your understanding of theology and the end times scenario but, rather, seek to be more objective and analytical.

For truth and love,

Rick

Rick Warden said...

Dear Len,

Part 1:

You wrote:

"One problem with Dispensationalism is the fact that it promotes the false belief that Satan is running amuck, leading the world to complete ruin and ungodliness. Whether or not they intend to promote this belief, this is the impression that most laymen are left with."

I believe you have pinpointed the nature of the problem. dispensationalism actually does not promote the idea that Satan is completely out of control and your lack of references in making this accusation is endemic to the nature of the problem. I certainly have no such belief.

You state "this is the impression that most laymen are left with." I would question whether most dispensationalists believe Satan may do whatever he wishes whenever he wants to.

I would offer, however, that posts like yours and websites like this one are a major reason for such false impressions.

You, Len, are Christian, I presume, and yet you have at least one time in your Christian life probably sinned and hurt another person.

Is it not possible that God allows Satan to hurt other people and to actually establish a godless government while at the same time being in control of the limits of Satan's actions?

Cont...

Rick Warden said...

Part 2:

Len,

May I offer there is a danger of assuming the opposite of what you wrongly assume dispensationalists assume.

That is, Satan is basically innocuous and the world is basically a good place with a benevolent government system. It is this type of general preconception that causes most of the world to see a majority of Americans as blindly patriotic, gullible, gung-ho warmongering Christians.

In believing the US/Iraq war, for example, is mainly a holy war against evil Islam, many Christians have blinded themselves to the facts, simply unwilling to look them, let alone acknowledge them, for example, the fact that explosives were used inside the World Trade Center buildings. Now, however, even the US mainstream news is being forced to deal with this reality:

"Geraldo Turns: Has 9/11 Truth Reached the Tipping Point?"

This. and another article at my blog may help you and others here at this website overcome your mass-media induced hypnotism and deal with reality:

"On 9/11, Gallup Polls Show People Waking Up"

I would urge you and others here to try and avoid sensationalism, hyperbole and baseless "impressions" in formulating your understanding of theology and the end times scenario but, rather, seek to be more inquisitive, objective and analytical.

For truth and love,

Rick

Len said...

I fail to see how the events of 9/11 relate to the discussion of whether Dispensationalism is true or false. Even if George Bush were to go on national TV tomorrow and confess that he concocted the whole thing, this proves nothing with regard to Dispensationalism.

About the only conclusions which can be reached with regard to 9/11 and Scripture is that:

1. God allowed it to happen to reveal His righteousness and Christ’s glory.

2. God allowed it to happen as a call to repentance.

3. Those that God had not chosen to save were entered into the eternal punishment which they richly deserved.

4. Those that God HAD chosen to save were welcomed into the salvation which they in no way deserved.

Len

Rick Warden said...

Dear Len,

You wrote "I fail to see how the events of 9/11 relate to the discussion of whether Dispensationalism is true or false."

People who reject the possibility of a one-world government and the incredible evil of an anti-christ system would tend to be in a state of denial as to the facts pointing to any kind of false flag operation in the US.

Fortunately, there are signs that people are beginning to wake up a little bit, as I outlined in this article:

On 9/11, Gallup Polls Show People Waking Up

http://templestream.blogspot.com/2010/09/on-911-gallup-polls-show-people-waking.html

Your eschatology helps determine your interpretation of (or denial of) key present-day events.

Len said...

Rick,

Even if a "one world" government were established tommorrow, that doesn't prove that we are "living in the last days" as the "left Behind" group constantly touting. Nor does it prove anything regarding dispensational beding true. (Even Scofield thought that he would see the rapture.) If the Bible did say that a one world government would be set up(which I beliefve that it does NOT - the Bible also tells us that the Christians were accused of having turned the WORLD - is this the whole world? Doesn't that suggest that Rome was a "one world government?"- upside down) where does it say that the one world government you make reference to would be the one which would come to power just prior to Christ's return. Does the Bible state, that in the future, there will only be one one world government set up? Maybe, since God has not told us all of His plans, there will be three such governments, or ten, or 250 before He returns. This is similar to all the hoopla about the number of earthquakes and other natural disasters as being "proof" that the end is near and therefore, that dispensational dogma is true. The Bible nowhere refers to numbers of earthquakes or wars or rumors of wars. This, like the one world government does nothing to prove the dispensational claim that we are living in the last times. I'm sure thatin every generation, there were people who could give similar evidences that we were "living in the end times."

Vance said...

It seems to me that the dispensationalists' complicated model eventually becomes their interpretive grid, which, in my opinion, tends to encourage sloppy exegesis. An example is Hal Lindsey's insistence that without dispensationalism we would not be able to reconcile the Sermon on the Mount with Paul's statements about salvation by faith apart from works. I would say that without dispensationalism believers would tend to rely more on the sound principles of exegesis rather explaining seemingly contradictory passages by conveniently fitting them into different "economies."

Anonymous said...

Daniel described the last remaining empires leading right up to the coming of Christ to set up His kingdom. In the writings of Daniel, when God's kingdom (described as a rock) hits and destroys the image of a great man, (the image representing these world empires), the whole image is still standing. Meaning, all those old empires (Rome, Greece, Media-Persia and Babylon) will experience a revival of sorts. The ten toes which the rock (God's kingdom) smashes, are the nations that broke up when the Roman Empire began to decline. Those nations will still exist at the coming of Christ to set up His literal kingdom. The toes of the Roman empire, mixed with iron and clay, represent the "dividing of the empire." Dan. 2:40-43. When did this dividing into independent nations occur? In A.D. 70 ? No. It happened hundreds of years after A.D. 70.

I don't see a one world government being taught in Scripture. But I do see the revival of the old empires. Which were limited in area, but had an influence on the entire world. The ten toes also show that the independent nations will never totally unify. They remain independent. But they will be unified mostly in following the last dictator, who is still to come. I believe the number ten is a symbolic number, and is not to be taken literally. ("You shall have tribulation TEN days"..."He shall come with TEN thousand of His saints")

You can't have an empire without a strong leader. When will this leader appear? Daniel does not say, except to say when "the transgressors have come to the full." The NIV says, "when the rebels have become completely wicked."- Dan. 8:23. Then will this last dictator arrive.

Jesus described the end of the age as the Harvest. This is the same time as Daniel 8:23 above. It's also a time very similar to Noah's day, when evil was all that mankind could think. Meaning evil will reach its limits of growth. Did it reach its limits in A.D. 70. Hardly. Now mankind has the ability to wipe out the entire planet and soon there may be people who would be willing to do the most evil of which cannot be surpassed. Which is attempting to destroy the whole world. We have leaders today, such as the leader of Iran, threatening things like this now. If others like him come to power, we can't be too far away.