Eschatology 1: Covenantalism & Dispensationalism
http://www.xenos.org/classes/principles/cpu1w7.htm
In their basic explanation they say
Dispensationalism is committed to a literal hermeneutic when interpreting biblical prophecy. They have aroused lots of interest in this area of biblical truth.
Which that is the standard argument, that Dispensationalism is more literal.
"That's right! Don't you believe the Bible?
So few of these things in theology are so simple. For one to claim the moral high ground kills the discussion. It is really a straw man. I do believe the Bible so I am trying to line up future prophesies in a way that make sense to me. Each man must study for himself and teach his family what he believes. Differing beliefs on these non-essential issues are part of the family idiosyncrasies that God created. In a worst case scenario, I may need to limit fellowship with an individual or family but that is within my realm of authority.
But anyway, back to literalism. Further down the page they quote Isaiah 65:17-25 to support a pre-millennial view. They make the following footnote:
"New heavens and new earth" here refer (according to the following context) to the millennial kingdom rather than the new universe of Rev. 21,22. In both Isaiah and Revelation the "new heavens and new earth" refer to a new era in God's dealing with humanity. It is not a specific term that relates to only a specific period of history.
So...the Gen 1:1 heavens and earth are literal, and the ones in Rev 21, 22 are but here they are not ....because they don't fit. The Heaven and Earth in Gen 1:1 were literal and refered to a new era. Using the context to justify saying something is not literal is exactly what this site claims "they" do. Reading the whole passage it does not fit the millennium at all. And since Peter tells us this world is going to be destroyed by fire, I hope there will be a literal heaven and earth somewhere since we'll need a place to park our new bodies.
2 comments:
Well said Stephen. Funny how after 10 years, you and I are still thinking about the same things. Check out my blog a while back on similar literalist interpretations. http://dgrespcom.blogspot.com/2008/02/thinking.html
By the way, your blog made me think of Alcorn's book Heaven...have you read?
Stephen,
Your newsletter - which I always enjoy, said you might enjoy a little ego-stroke by our visiting your blog spot.
I read with interest your musings and thoughts on spiritual matters.
For me, dispensationalism often translates into what I, rather irreverently, call "knuckle-headed theology". Often questions to one such about their theology results in an answer beginning with "Oh dear brother...", whereupon, with trembling voice dripping with compassion for such a poor soul as I, an attempt is made to correct my erring theology.
In direct conflict with that theology, I offer that once the Lord defined for me Theology as,
"The study of what Man thinks God is like." I say "in direct conflict" because of a comment I heard from a fundy preacher. "God doesn't speak to us in dreams, visions or revelations anymore."
Hmm, I thought. And for several days I contemplated on that tidbit. Then, my answer came: the only way we would know that God doesn't speak to us by those methods "anymore", is for someone to have had a dream, vision or revelation from God telling him/her of that change. I recall no Scripture telling us that God changed or would change His methods of speaking to us - oh, I forgot about the KJV! Oh, well!
Okay, now I might be becoming arguementative, or lest I become critical...I'll quit. And, for me, I'm led to John 17:3, instead. I'll read the Book closely, seek the Lord earnestly and expect Him to guide me to sound Wisdom. So far, that's working.
Miss you guys,
Uncle Paul
Post a Comment