Dispensationalism

[Winnie]

Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith
Your post will be answered shortly
Raise a Debate - by posting bait !

by Theo :-
Your apparent dedication to the "Selected Writings" of Dr Bullinger caused me to do a bit of searching to see what they might be about.
Obviously what I gleaned was written by those opposed to 'Bullingerism' so must be taken with a possible 'pinch of salt?' but your comments might help restore any needed balance.

Seven cardinal points of Bullingerism.

1. The Four Gospels are entirely Jewish and have no real message for the church of today.   
2. In the Book of Acts the word 'ekklesia' (church, or assembly), refers to a different church altogether to that of Paul's prison epistles.
3.  All of the other epistles of Paul, save those written during his imprisonment and the general epistles, are relegated to an earlier dispensation of the Book of Acts,
     and have no permanent value for us, but were for the instruction of the so called Jewish church of that time.
4. The entire book of Revelation has to do with the coming age and has no reference to the church today.
5. The Christian ordinances, including Baptism and Communion, have no real connection with the present dispensation, are relegated to the past, but may again have
    a place in the future Great Tribulation.
6. The 'great commission' has no current relevance to the church of today, and the work predicated will not begin until taken up by the remnant of Israel in the days of
    the Great Tribulation (Matt. 28:16-20).
7. The signs, miracles, paranormal gifts, tongues, healings etc., ceased and are no longer available to present day disciples.

'All scripture is given by inspiration of God,
and is profitable
.. for doctrine,
.... for reproof,
...... for correction,
........ for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect,
throughly furnished unto all good works.
(2 Timothy 3:16-17)   

Hello there,

This entry is in response to the post quoted above, written by @Theo to myself, in the thread entitled 'The Spirits in Prison' (reply#5).  Rather than derail the thread by answering it there I thought it may warrant a thread of its own.  The points raised have been unkindly headed by persons unknown as, 'Bullingerism': but as Dr E.W. Bullinger was labelled by his critics an 'Ultra-dispensationalist': as well as being a renowned Biblical Scholar and Clergyman, I thought it would be more respectful to discuss it under the heading of 'Dispensationalism'.

* If anyone would like to discuss any of the points raised in @Theo's entry, then I would be happy to take part.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

[Winnie]

Hello there,@Theo,

When I was first confronted in a forum, many years ago, and called a dispensationalist for the first time, I can honestly say that I had no idea that was what I was.  It had become apparent to those taking part in the forum with me that what I was saying placed me in this category; but I did not consider myself in that light at all.  It caused me to look online at what was said there about dispensationalism, and I was shocked by what I read.  The critical nature of the entries I read, and the varying nature of some of the doctrines ascribed to dispensationalism made me realise what a minefield it was out there on the internet in regard to this subject.  Those who had confronted me, were fierce in their attack, and I found myself having to justify the various aspects raised to me, which at the time was a trial by fire, but something which looking back I can thank God for.

To know Christ and be found in Him (Philippians 3:9), was, and is my goal, so any man-made label attached to me was and is of no account. 'The Chapel of the Opened Book', of Wilson Street in London, whose audio tapes and books I was privileged to read and listen to, was run by a charity called, 'The Berean Publishing Trust' and the Berean principle of Acts 17:11 and that given to Timothy by Paul in 2 Timothy 2:15, were their guiding principles.  So I considered myself a Berean, the word dispensationalist not entering my head.

Following that encounter on a forum so many years ago, my eyes were opened to the fact that I was indeed a dispensationalist, not one as described by many of the critics online, but none-the-less one who took into account the changes of dispensation in the word of God, and the changes of administration in each one, in order to determine what God's purpose and will was in regard to the present dispensation in which we now live.

I was twelve years old when I first acknowledged the Lord Jesus Christ as my Saviour, and it was in my thirties that I came into a knowledge of dispensational truth, I will be 72 next month, so this has been a long journey, and a joy of discovery and blessing in the knowledge that He is not only my Saviour and Lord, but my Head, as a member of the Church which is His Body,' the fulness of Him that filleth all in all'. (Ephesians 1:22-23)

May God's will be done, and His Name be glorified.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

[Theo]

@ Winnie, what you describe is a "minefield" indeed.
To quote the immortal words of Guardian I thought I was simply presenting 'bait' in order to raise a 'debate'.
But if the subject is as hurtfully divisive as is becoming apparent then we best drop it and concentrate on non controversial thoughts that uplift and edify one another.
My bad for being so obsessed with courting and promoting controversy by "presenting bait'.
Let us rather "love one another for love is of God". (Where's the 'hugs' emoticon?)

[Theo]

Before I went to sleep last night I spent a lot of time thinking "why should Winnie worry so much about the 'tags' people attach to her beliefs"?
Bullingerite, ultra dispensationalist, cessationist, so what? they're still nothing more than 'tags'.
Conservative, conservationist, pacifist, adulterer, humanist, they still do nothing more harmful than 'tag' whatever it is that sets one person apart from another.
Every Christian presumably believes in the 'Old' and the 'New' covenants and is thereby a 'dispensationalist', but none surely are offended by the 'tag'.
Winnie clearly places more reliance than most on the "studies by Dr Bullinger entitled Selected Writings" and even started a topic entitled 'New Birth' which is another of Dr Bullinger's teachings that set him apart from evangelical mainstream convictions.
On that basis I think it fair comment to consider Winnie to be a 'Bullingerite' in the kindest and most sympathetic way.
Whilst doing my Google searches I came across an article by someone named O'Hare (or something similar) where, just like Winnie, he too reckoned to have come to some of the same theological conclusions long before he had even become acquainted with Dr Bullinger's views.
Personally, although my agnostic uncertainty prevents me from firmly nailing my colours to any particular theology, I too have inclinations (nothing stronger than that) towards cessationism and annihilationism, without in any way have been drawn there by Bullingerism.
So, dear Winnie, please don't take offence by my 'kind and sympathetic' convenient tagging of you as a Bullingerite Ultra Dispensationalist simply because such theology seems that it might pervade your postings.
In kindness I reckon your sensitivity to be the product of knowing that theologically you stand virtually 'alone'; rather like the sensitivity that Catholics feel when posting in predominantly Protestant forums.

[Christianna]

Hi Theo,

Its strange you say that, for I was thinking of the same thing last night, but had a different result. I felt God promoting me to post but I didn't. I should have done.

Of course you didn't mean to offend and I'm not trying to make you feel guilty in any way and don't want you to.  Just to continue to participate in the forum. For its great you are here and making good contributions.

Just labels can put people into a set of  categories of characteristics that do not apply them, just because they have one of two points of views in common.

In Christ, we are God's children, known as the Salt and light of the world, and a Royal Priesthood. We all have our own place In the Body of Christ to function together.

It somewhat undoes that vision, in placing a person away from that and putting into a theological category.

If that grieves the Holy Spirit, then it will grieve a child of God. What the world calls oversensitive, may not be the same for God.

The world will give us all sorts of names and labels that we need to be resilient too but it's different when it comes from the brethren.

[Theo]

Hi Theo,

Its strange you say that, for I was thinking of the same thing last night, but had a different result. I felt God promoting me to post but I didn't. I should have done.

Of course you didn't mean to offend and I'm not trying to make you feel guilty in any way and don't want you to.  Just to continue to participate in the forum. For its great you are here and making good contributions.

Just labels can put people into a set of  categories of characteristics that do not apply them, just because they have one of two points of views in common. (I hope that I wouldn't do so in respect of those who only hold "one or two points of view in common" ~ Theo)

In Christ, we are God's children, known as the Salt and light of the world, and a Royal Priesthood. We all have our own place In the Body of Christ to function together.

It somewhat undoes that vision, in placing a person away from that and putting into a theological category.

If that grieves the Holy Spirit, then it will grieve a child of God. What the world calls oversensitive, may not be the same for God.

The world will give us all sorts of names and labels that we need to be resilient too but it's different when it comes from the brethren.

I thank God that this forum has you, Deborah, and Serenity to counter me and my blunt contributions which, in times past, have got me banned from a few more strictly moderated forums.

[Winnie]

Hi @Theo, and @Christianna,

I thank you both for your concern, but please know that I am not offended, not by your original post Theo or subsequent ones, for I know that you are well-meaning.  I would be happy to talk about any of the points you have raised in the OP.

The only disadvantage with having a label attached to you, is that it can take away from your main purpose in being on a forum, which is to share the things of Christ with others.  It can also attract hostility from those who are opposed to what the label stands for, and that can also be a shame, but not a hindrance necessarily, as long as the hostility does not take a personal form, it is possible to discuss the various points at issue by allowing the word of God to be the arbiter.

Yes, I usually find myself alone in regard to this, but that is not a problem, for I am used to it now.  I am not sensitive to being called a dispensationalist, for I know that it is true.
 
With love in Christ Jesus
Chris

[Serenity]

I have so many labels in my life i outdo a new pad of sticky post it notes! 
Mum, wife, carer, follower of the way, pet owner, forthright, spades a shovel kinda lass...the list goes on n on n on, just no room for offence where labels are concerned really. 

Only ones ya wanna be worried about are those that are given in a court of law, stuck to ya car if parked somewhere shouldn't have..oh and of course those in my clothes!!