Answer to a Dispensational Pastor's Objections

[steve]

Jeff,

I have answered the objections of your friend, point-by-point below. His statements are printed in bold italic. Mine are in normal text.
—Steve

----------------------------------------

If Jesus is King of kings and Lord of lords over the nations, He is doing a terrible job.

Paul referred to Jesus as “He who is…the King of kings and Lord of lords,” and said that this fact will be made manifest to the world when He comes (1 Tim.6:15). It is, today, not yet universally recognized—but neither is His divine status, virgin birth, or His resurrection. Yet, all these things are true of Him right now. The world will be shocked to learn of them at His coming. If Christ is not currently “the Ruler over the kings of the earth,” why did He claim that He is (Rev.1:5)? If He is not their King, on what basis can these earthly kings be held accountable for their disobedience to Him? If “all authority in heaven and earth” does not include authority over all rulers (as Paul and Peter both tell us it does—Eph.1:20-21; 1 Pet.3:22), then perhaps Christ should have chosen less-deceptive language, in Matthew 28:18 and Rev.1:5.

I always cringe when professed Christians criticize the way Jesus is handling His affairs. John the Baptist appears to have been similarly critical of Jesus’ methods (Matt.11:2-3). He lodged his complaint from prison. I suppose dispensationalists can confront Him about their disappointment with His rulership style when He returns—if they have the stomach for it. Repentance for blasphemy will then seem more appropriate than demands for an explanation. Does a dog critique the wisdom of its master—or a clay pot its maker?

Jesus said that His Kingdom would spread like leaven and grow like a mustard seed, or like a field of grain—gradually and through stages (Matt.13:27-30; Mark 4:26-29). Taking the broad view of human history, the Kingdom has followed this very trajectory. If anyone doubts this, a very enjoyable reading of “The Book That Made Your World” (by Vishal Mangalwadi) or “How Christianity Changed the World” (by Alvin J. Schmidt)—among others—will provide all the corrective one may require.

Nothing promised through His reign has been fulfilled.

This opinion has become popular in the past two centuries, but only by people who do not read or follow the New Testament attentively—where one of the most common refrains is, “This happened that it might be fulfilled [insert prophetic passage].” Most theologians through Christian history, in agreement with the New Testament writers (see Mark 1:15; Luke 1:51-55, 68-70;2:29-32; 4:21; 21:22; Acts 3:24; 13:32-34; Rom.11:7; 2 Cor.1:20; etc.), believed that Jesus was, or that He brought about, the fulfillment of all the Law and the Prophets. In fact, if He did not do so, He did not accomplish His stated mission, and we are still obliged to offer animal sacrifices (Matt.5:17-18). Yet, Jesus reported to the Father, at the end of His life, that His mission was indeed accomplished (John 17:4). The Church apparently spent 1800 years in the dark about such things, until J.N. Darby came forward with the brilliant and novel claim that everyone before him was wrong about this.

There is no peace on earth (Isaiah 2:4)

One may speak for oneself. If Jesus brought no peace on earth, then the angels never got the memo. They announced, at His birth, “Peace on earth” (Luke 2:14). If Jesus was not the King who brought us peace, why would the announcement to the contrary have to be proclaimed—even by the rocks themselves, if necessary (Luke 19:38-40)?

Shouldn’t a pastor know that those who are in Christ have received peace (John 14:27; Gal.5:22; Phil.4:7), which is a feature of being in the Kingdom (Rom.14:17). Through Christ, we have:

a) peace and reconciliation with God (Rom.5:1; 2 Cor.5:17),

b) inward peace in tribulation (John 16:33),

c) relational peace with our fellow believers (Eph.2:14-17), and

d) we spread the peace of Christ throughout the world (Matt.5:9; 10:13; James 3:18).

In Isaiah 2:1-4, the described “peace” is said to exist between the “nations” (i.e., Gentiles) who come to “Zion” (as the Bible unambiguously says we have done—Heb.12:22). This refers to those who have submitted to God’s Kingdom instruction (Isa.2:3). “Swords,” “spears,” “pruning hooks” and “ploughshares” are hardly literal tools of modern warfare or farming, so Isaiah (who, like all the prophets, wrote in poetry) was speaking impressionistically, not literally. These terms are no more literal than that John the Baptist leveled the desert topography and built a literal “highway” there (Isa.40:3-5), or that Jesus sprang from the ground like a tender plant (Isa.53:1). The poetic character of the prophets’ language is ignored by dispensational readers. The Kingdom is spiritual (John 3:5), as are the “righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” that comprise it (Rom.14:17).

The peace of the Messianic Kingdom is both spiritual and relational. Disciples enjoy and practice it in all relationships (Rom.12:7-21). This is commanded by the King (Mark 9:50) and obeyed by all disciples (who, by definition, are those who continue in Christ’s teachings—John 8:31). As the Gospel spreads, the Kingdom and its “peace” spread incrementally with it. As we read in Isaiah 9:7, there is no end to its “increasing”(a process described also in Daniel 2:34-35, 44 and Mark 4:26-29).

the curse has not been removed from creation (Romans 8:18-23; Isaiah 11:6-9);

Nor shall it be, until the New Heavens and New Earth have come (Rev.22:3). Paul says this will happen when Jesus returns, at “the redemption [that is, the resurrection] of our body” (Rom.8:20-23). Isaiah 11:6-9 says nothing about this matter, since the passage is not discussing the New Heavens and Earth. Most dispensationalists apply it to the millennium, though the New Testament writers see its fulfillment in their time (comp. vv.8-9 with Luke 10:19; v.10 with Rom.15:12 [a direct quote]; v.16 with Luke 9:31).

The peaceful coexistence of predatory animals with the domestic beasts is very typical symbolism of the peace between Jews and Gentiles, described by Paul (e.g., in Eph.2:11-18). The prophets regularly liken the Jews to God’s “flock” or livestock (e.g., Ps.95:7; 100:3; Ezek.34; Zech.11:4-7; Mal.4:2, etc.), in contrast to hostile Gentiles, who were frequently described as wild predators which threaten the livestock (Jer.5:6; Ezek.34:25, 28; Dan.7:3-6; Hab.1:8). I realize this spoils a favorite image reinforced by Christmas cards and popularly applied to the millennium. However, the very tradition of having this image on Christmas cards reflects the historic Christian belief that the birth of Christ inaugurated the fulfillment of this prophecy.

the earth is not filled with the knowledge of God (Isaiah 11:9)

It certainly is, when compared with the world before the coming of Christ. Fully a third of the global population now knows of the true God well enough to regard themselves as “Christians.” “The knowledge of the glory of the Lord” (the variant of Isaiah’s phrase, used in Hab.2:14) is said to be fulfilled in those who have heard and received the Gospel (2 Cor.4:6). This, like the Kingdom itself, is a growing phenomenon continuing through the present age, which began, obviously, with the giving of the Great Commission.

the church is not reigning with Christ in an everlasting kingdom (Daniel 7:27; Revelation 2:26-27; 5:10);

I agree—though some Christians claim that we are now doing so, as Paul says we “reign in life” (Rom.5:17). I don’t believe that we will actually reign with Christ until Christ returns (1 Cor.4:8). However, this does not mean that Christ is not currently reigning Himself! The most frequently-quoted Old Testament verse in the New Testament (always cited as fulfilled) is Psalm 110:1, where the ascended Christ is said to be reigning at the right hand of God ever since His ascension, until He shall subdue every opponent under His feet (cf., 1 Cor.15:25-26). Former enemies, like ourselves (Rom.5:10) enter His Kingdom through conversion (John 3:5; Col.1:13)—which is the surrender to His lordship. Christ currently reigns over us as His subjects. When He comes, those who have been faithful unto death reign with Him (e.g., Luke 19:17-19; 2 Tim.2:12; Rev.2:10).

Daniel 7:27 speaks of a time (at the coming of Christ) when the saints receive their thrones as co-rulers in the Kingdom. However, earlier (vv.13-14) it has spoken of Christ’s ascension through the clouds into the presence of God (which occurred 2,000 years ago) where He has already been placed over a Kingdom, obligating all people, nations and languages to serve Him. That is the present state of affairs, as Paul states in Phil.2:9-11. Jesus told Caiaphas that “from now on” (the meaning of ap arti, in Matthew 26:64) Caiaphas and his ilk would see, to their chagrin, the evidence of the fulfillment of Daniel 7:13-14. This isn’t rocket science. It is Historical and Apostolic Christian Theology 101.

the Jewish remnant has not been saved which will take place at Christ's return (Zechariah 10:6-9); Isaiah 32:15,44:3); Israel is not the prime nation on earth (Isaiah 60-62).

“The Jewish remnant has not been saved”???? This will be very disappointing to Paul, and the entire Jewish Church, which regarded themselves as the Jewish remnant (Rom.11:1, 5, 7), and certainly thought that they were saved!

This objection is the exact one that Paul answers in Romans 9-11. Having surveyed (in 9:1-5) the advantages and promises given to Israel, the question naturally arises: “If Messiah has come, why have the promises to Israel not been fulfilled, as the prophets said they would (e.g.,Isa.45:17; Jer.23:5-6)?” Paul’s answer is: “Who are you calling ‘Israel’? God’s promises have not failed to come true!” They have come true to those who are regarded by God as Israel (see 9:6; cf., John 1:47; 8:39; Gal.3:7, 29).

From that point forward, he demonstrates that many of those physically descended from Abraham are not the “children of the promise” (vv.7-8). That is, they are not the children of Abraham to whom the promises applied (Paul said Christians are the children of the promise—Gal.4:23, 28, 31). Before the end of Romans 9, Paul insists that only “a remnant” (not all) of the Jews will be saved (9:27). Strange that so many people think Paul changed his mind about this, just two chapters later (11:26)! “All Israel,” in Paul’s context (11:16-25) refers to all who are part of the olive tree (which is Israel, in Jer.11:16). Paul has already described this tree as including believing Jews and believing Gentiles—but no unbelievers. “All Israel” includes “all the branches in the tree”—namely, believing Jews and Gentiles (he already said as much in Romans 9:23-24),

Paul explains that not all Jews are saved, because not all believe in Christ. However, all who do believe in Christ (like himself and the Jewish Church) are the “believing remnant” (11:1-5), to whom the promises were made, and to whom they have been fulfilled. Paul always said he was preaching the Gospel as fulfillment of Israel’s hope (Romans 1:1-2; Acts 26:7; 28:20), and he says, in Romans 11, that the elect remnant, including himself (11:1), have now obtained that hope (v.7). Dispensationalism claims that the hope of Israel was postponed when most of the Jews rejected Christ. Paul did not know this to be the case, and would have been greatly disappointed to learn he had been preaching a contrary message. Paul feared that the Church might fall into preaching “a different Gospel” from the one he preached (2 Cor.11:4; cf., Gal.1:7-8). It seems that his fears for the Church were not unrealistic.

Zechariah 10:6-9 is cited, above, as if it predicts things that “will take place at Christ's return.” Yet the passage makes no reference to Christ’s return. Events of the first coming of Christ are mentioned in its general proximity (9:9; 11:12-13; 13:7), and the Maccabean War is mentioned in Zechariah 9:13ff, which occurred prior to Christ’s birth. Where, exactly, does the passage signal an enormous leap forward to the “end times” or “the second coming of Christ”?

As for the scriptures about the Spirit being poured out on Israel (Isa.32:15; 44:3 [& Zech.12:10]), did this not occur at Pentecost? These very promises are specifically applied to the remnant (see Joel 2:28-31), which was applied, by Peter’s citation of Joel, to the Jewish Church (Acts 2). There is no mention, in any of these passages, of the second coming or the end times. If I am wrong, please identify such.

Furthermore, Satan is called "god of this world," 2 Corinthians 4:4); " the prince and power of the air (Ephesians 2:2) ; Jesus called him "the ruler of this world";

Quite so. Satan is “the god [not the King] of this world”—believers are not of this world, of course, but most people still are, as the “whole world lies in the wicked one” (1 John 5:19). Baal was the god of the Phoenicians, and Dagon the god of the Philistines. This does not speak of their actual deity (nor, certainly, of their ruling this, or any, planet!). They are called “gods’ only because that is what an object of worship is generally called. “The world”—those who hate both Christ and us (John 15:18-19)—worships and serves Satan, whether they know it or not. Israel once worshipped golden calves (at Sinai, Bethel and Dan), but none of these calves was Israel’s “king.” A king is one who is the rightful ruler (who may even sometimes be disobeyed by his subjects). A god is something else—namely, a legitimate or illegitimate object of worship.

“Prince of the power of the air” no doubt refers to Satan’s leadership of the demons (Matt.25:41; Rev.12:7). Amillennialism does not questions this role of Satan.

Jesus did call Satan “the ruler [or prince] of this world” (3x) prior to the crucifixion. However, He spoke of this “ruler’s” immediate judgment and expulsion from power (John 12:31) which took place at the crucifixion (Col.2:15; Heb.2:14; Rev.12:9-10). This is historical Christian teaching (consult commentaries of Patriarchs, Medieval Christianity, Reformed writers). The contrary view (Dispensationalism) is novel, and would have been labeled as heretical by the Church fathers..

and times are only going to get worse before Christ returns ( 2 Timothy 3:1; 1 Timothy 4:1-3; 1 John 5:19).

There is no assertion, in any of the verses referenced above, that things must continually get worse until Christ comes. What is predicted is that there will indeed be much corruption and peril in the world before (until?) Jesus comes—but only evil of such a kind as would describe almost every epoch in the history of the world. Neither Paul, nor John, tells us that these evils will get perpetually worse. There will be a maturing of the wheat and the tares together (Matt.13:30). The tares will mature into the evil people that they are by nature. But after describing these evil people, Paul; says that “they will progress no further” (i.e., than did Jannes and Jambres)—2 Tim.3:9.

Many periods since Paul’s time have become worse—then also improved. If my eschatology is correct, it will get very bad again at the end (Rev.20:7-8). However, we have no way of knowing how many cycles away that time may be. To say “times are only going to get worse” does not represent any teaching of scripture. If one reads history, it will be clear that, since Christ was enthroned, the world has gotten alternately better and worse for transient periods of time, though over two millennia (in terms of justice, humane behavior in warfare, health and general human welfare, compassion for the weak, the poor and the disenfranchised, and general knowledge of the Gospel), the trajectory has been steadily upward. It requires a very naïve and unreflective view of history to deny this.

Christ has been ordained from eternity past to rule over the nations (Psalm 2:6-9; Isaiah 9:6-7; Daniel 7:13-14; Luke 1:32-33; Revelation 11:15; 19:15-16;20:4-6). That mission will be fulfilled when He returns to Earth as King of kings and Lord of lords (Revelation 19:16).

Apart from the references in Revelation all the mentioned passages were regarded as fulfilled by the New Testament writers in their day. The apostles cited Psalm 2:1-2 as fulfilled in the crucifixion of Christ (Acts 4:25-28), and Psalm 2:7 as fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 13:33). The present obligation of even the kings of the earth to bow to Christ, in Ps.2:10-12, is affirmed by Paul in Phil.2:9-11.

Isaiah 9:6-7 does not say a word about the second coming, but plainly speaks of Christ’s birth, 2000 years ago. Does Jesus currently own the titles listed in v.6? If not, which one does He lack? Is the government not upon His shoulder? If not, then what can it mean that “all authority in heaven and earth” has been given to Him (Matt.28:18), or that He is reigning at the right hand of God until His last enemy is vanquished (1 Cor.15:25)? Is His government continually increasing (as in v.7)? The Kingdom has done nothing but increase and expand (like a mustard seed) since its establishment in AD 30.

Is Jesus seated on David’s throne? According to both Peter (Acts 2:30-36) and Paul (Acts 13:32-34), the answer is—Absolutely! In fact, according to Paul (in the scripture last referenced), the present reign of Christ on David’s throne is itself “the Gospel” (the glad tidings = Gr. euangelion, v.32) that Paul was preaching. How tragic that dispensationalists, who deny this truth, are actually denying the Gospel, as Paul preached it!

Is Christ’s Kingdom forever? Isaiah 9:7 certainly says so (not 1000 years, apparently). The angel certainly gave Mary the impression that this prophecy was to be fulfilled in the birth of her son (Luke 1:32-33). Are we told anywhere in scripture that it was not?

I personally believe amillennialism to be, in the words of Pastor Jack Hibbs, "evil," for being the initial cause behind antiSemitism in the world today.

How foolish of Jesus (Matt.21:43; John 8:39-44) and Paul (Rom.2:28-29; Gal.3:16, 29) to teach doctrines that would become “the initial cause behind antisemitism”! We might throw John the Baptist in with them (Matt.3:9), as well as Moses (Deut.28:15ff; 32:21-22), David (Ps.50:16-17), and the prophets (Isaiah 54:1; 65:15; Jer.18:9-10; Hos.1:9). Amazing! The whole Bible must have been written by nascent antisemites!

For the record, there is no logical or organic connection between amillennialism and antisemitism—just as there is no essential connection between premillennialism and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, nor between Trinitarianism and Roman Catholicism. Heretics and evil men often hold some millennial position, and there are a limited number of choices in this realm. Jehovah’s Witnesses hold to Premillennialism, and some antisemites have been known to hold to Amillennialism. Every doctrine must deal with the phenomenon of “embarrassing supporters.” Followers of Jesus do not tolerate antisemitism in themselves. They do not hate anybody (I John 3:15; Matt.5:44-45), including the Jewish people—yet, most Christians have historically held to Amillennialism without being antisemites. Most of my Christian friends believe in the amillennial view (some of them are Jews), but I have never known a Christian who was antisemitic.

Amillennialism is not a racially-interested system (as Dispensationalism is). The amillennialist position is, like the Bible’s, that all races are equal before God. This leaves no room for racism of any kind. If you meet a racist, you are not meeting a Christian whose racism arises from his theology. Racism is irrationality and resides in sick and perverted minds—some of whom, historically have claimed to be Christians. While the same cannot be said of Dispensationalism (i.e., that it is not racially-interested), Amillennialism is the opposite of racism (of which antisemitism is a variety). Dispensationalism agrees that all races are equal—except for the Jews. This, in fact, is the very definition of racism, even when it is not specifically antisemitism.

Of all dispensational teachers I have encountered (I sat under Chuck Smith personally for five years, and many others—and was once a pretty good one myself), Jack Hibbs displays the greatest ignorance of scripture, history and theology (as well as of the Spirit of Christ). Unfortunately, he seems to compensate for his lack of intelligence by a surplus of arrogance. When I was a dispensationalist, I would have been embarrassed by his cock-sure attitude—though I didn’t have to deal with that, since he wasn’t saved at that time. The poor man never had occasion even to learn what amillennialists are before being appointed (by himself) to be their quixotic nemesis.

Though he has no idea what he is talking about, he does not so much as pause to think before declaring the most libelous nonsense against his supposed foes—which includes the majority of Christians throughout history. Unfortunately, though for good reasons, he does not seem to have the courage of his convictions. I posted a friendly challenge to his errors in a two-hour video, several years ago (see www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEgFhaB7hNs), in which I welcomed him to answer my points. He did not. Instead, his church pressured Youtube to remove my video. They did not succeed, so it remains there to be answered.

To try to associate Amillennialism with racism (antisemitism) is to have no idea what that theological camp even affirms. Making such a charge, however, is a great refuge for ignorant and malicious people who have no ability to defend their positions by exegesis of scripture (nor even by coherent logic), and who must retreat to gratuitous slander and name-calling. Way to go, Guys! Way to divide the Body of Christ. We will all see, when Christ returns, what He thinks about those who do such things—though He has already told us (Prov.6:16-19).

Steve Gregg