Another difference between Dispensationalists and those who espouse Covenant or Reformed Theology is their acceptance of the Analogy of Faith, which is a theological term that broadly states that “Scripture should interpret Scripture”. 

I was surprised to read that most Dispensationalists do not agree wholeheartedly with the Analogy of Faith because it makes perfect sense to me and was how I was taught throughout my entire academic experience, which was wholly Christian from kindergarten through college. My background is Evangelical not Protestant so you can see why I was confused especially when Dispensationalists (Darby-ites) firmly espouse the inerrancy of the Scriptures.  

Note:  Yes, there is a difference.  One can be evangelical, believing God’s Word outside of the established church, and not be a Protestant (which is to say, a protester or reformer of the Catholic faith).  Many non-religious believe if you are not Catholic then you are Protestant, which is not the case.  Even during the Reformation, there were rogues who opposed both systems.  Initially, they were the Anabaptists but other factions existed.

So, why would one disagree on this point that Scripture interprets Scripture?  More on this later…

Another strong argument for the inerrancy of the Scriptures is that ‘God cannot contradict Himself’ which is to say that every Scripture can be qualified or supported with another Scripture usually moving from the Old Testament to the New Testament.  A great example of ‘Scripture interpreting Scripture’ is the Scriptural support given when we answer someone concerning who the head of the ‘church’ or body of Christ is according to Scripture.  The head is Christ – He is the ‘corner stone’ and no other.  How do we arrive at this belief in Christ being the head of the corner, which refutes the Catholic Petrine Theory (the belief that Peter is the head of the Church)? 

²¹I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation.

 ²²The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

 ²³This is the LORD’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes. – Psalm 118:21-23

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? – Matthew 21:42

And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner: – Mark 12:10

And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? – Luke 20:17

This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. – Acts 4:11

⁶Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.

 ⁷Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,

 ⁸And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. – I Peter 2:6-8

Why is it necessary to interpret Scripture with Scripture here?  It is important to show others not that we merely believe Christ is the Head but to prove that He was the head well before He walked the Earth.  To prove that His life, ministry, and resurrection are proof positive that He is the fulfillment of Promise, the stone the builders rejected, who is now ‘the head of the corner’.  We prove this moving from the Old Testament to the New Testament and cross-referencing all Scripture referring to the corner stone, its definition, and who it was to be. 

Then, we view the fulfillment of Promise and the distinction is clear – Christ was, is, and always will be the head of the corner. The Catholics misinterpret the passage to infer that Christ made Peter the head of the church thereby giving a charge for holy men, apostles, to head the church which also gives them what they feel to be ‘divine permission to establish the papacy’.  How could the Catholics draw such a conclusion?  They never took an honest look at Scripture qualified by other supporting Scripture. 

I ask that you read the passage with supporting verses and then ask yourself,

Did Christ make Peter the head of the corner?

By whom is salvation promised? 

How is then Peter the head of the corner, is he God’s Son?  No, Peter is not God’s Son, Jesus Christ, the Divine Incarnate.  Peter himself states that he believed Christ was the Son of the living God. 

Or is Peter just a manifestation of the kingdom on earth because the kingdom of heaven is within you (and in every believer) and Christ was using this example to teach Peter that the Kingdom was within him and not just a future hope, tangible yet intangible as well? 

 ¹³When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

 ¹⁴And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

 ¹⁵He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

 ¹⁶And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

 ¹⁷And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

 ¹⁸And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

 ¹⁹And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

 ²⁰Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

 ²¹From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

 ²²Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

 ²³But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

 ²⁴Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

 ²⁵For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

 ²⁶For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

 ²⁷For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

 ²⁸Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:13-28 KJV)

As all believers represent the body of Christ on Earth then it stands to reason that Peter was like the other disciples, sent to fulfill the Great Commission.  In fulfilling the Great Commission, a commandment for all believers NOT just for Peter to head the body of Christ, we manifest the kingdom of God here on Earth.  Why?  Filling it with believers who live unto Christ (see Galatians 2:19-21).  Now, look at the other Scriptures given plus any others you will find in your studies as I have not mentioned every verse here for the sake of brevity and ask yourself did Christ establish Himself as the chief corner stone in His Life, Death, and Resurrection?  Yes, I believe Scripture tells us that He indeed made it known that HE and only HE was the head of the corner.

This is what it meant by the term “Scripture interpets Scripture” or the Analogy of Faith.  The Bible should be your only source for divine instruction in the Christian faith.  The doctrines of men fail us if they depart from the Word of God.  God tells us in his Word to put the doctrines of men away and cling to His Word alone.

⁶He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

 ⁷Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

 ⁸For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. (Mark 7:6-8 KJV)

¹⁵And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?

 ¹⁶Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

 ¹⁷If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. (John 7:15-17)

¹⁶Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.

 ¹⁷Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

 ¹⁸For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (Romans 16:16-18 KJV)

¹³Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

 ¹⁴That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

 ¹⁵But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: (Ephesians 4:13-15 KJV)

¹Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

 ²Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

 ³Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. (I Tim. 4:1-3).

¹⁵And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

 ¹⁶All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 ¹⁷That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Tim. 3:15-17).

⁸Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

 ⁹Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.

 ¹⁰We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle. (Hebrews 13:8-10 KJV).

Through cross-referencing, we find those Scriptures that directly qualify that Christ is the Head of the body.  Then, we must look at all Scriptures which ‘support’ that qualification (i.e. Christ is our intercessor as He reconciled the Temple, the Priest, and the Sacrifice unto Himself at Calvary).  Suffice it to say, if Christ is continually interceding for the saints, the royal priesthood, a holy nation that we have become as adopted heirs held within the hand of Christ alone, then what need do we have of a man designated to ‘rule’ the established church? 

⁴To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,

 ⁵Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

 ⁶Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. – I Peter 2:4,5,6

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; – I Peter 2:9

¹¹But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; ¹²Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Hebrews 9:11-12).

Scripturally, there is no support but rather support against such a notion.  It is by this simple process that we learn “Scripture interprets Scripture” or “God’s Word interprets God’s Word”.  It is also interesting to note, the very apostle whom the Catholic Church prefers to rest their theory upon refutes their words as he extols that indeed Christ is the head of the corner.

The Dispensationalists, some not all from what I am told, argue however that not all Scripture can be interpreted with Scripture.  Covenant and Reformed theologians almost always espouse the Analogy of Faith.  It is with this basis that they become diametrically opposed to the Dispensationalist.  Why? 

The CT (covenant theologian) will cross reference and show you in the OT and NT that the body of Christ began with the progress of redemption through the patriarchs.  They hold to the covenants of grace and trace them quite simply to the fulfillment of Promise, the Messiah.  It is very straightforward.  The Dispensationalist refutes the progress of redemption via the covenants of God and will tell you that the church began at Pentecost. 

The CTs believe that they were saved looking to the promise of a Messiah just as we look back to the Cross.  All were saved by grace through faith in the OT and NT.  Just as Abraham’s faith that God would send a Messiah was counted to him as righteousness then so is our belief in the finished work of Christ on Calvary the impetus for our own deliverance. 

The patriarchs loved and obeyed the Lord and it was counted them as righteous based on their firm belief in the “promise of redemption”.  Likewise, we are saved by grace through faith through our repentance, love and obedience to the Father look BACK on the “fulfillment of Promise”.  The Cross is always our focus and the mercy and grace of our Father never ceased to be the Balm in Gilead that Abraham and the patriarchs knew it to be.  The Cross never negated the Law; it established the Law and made covenants good.

While the Dispensationalists will also espouse the inerrancy of God’s Word, they depart on God’s program and dissect the covenants thereby proposing there is a separate program for national Israel which, however, does not directly align with Scripture.  Where do I see the fallout?  The Branch Prophecies.  Jesus Christ fulfilled the Branch prophecies.  He is the true vine.  We are the branches.  The Gentiles were grafted into the Promise and here is where the Dispensationalist position departs from the Analogy of Faith.  Meanwhile, they maintain they have not departed from Scripture but I believe they have misinterpreted God’s Word here.

Your mileage may vary but to date this is where I have found the greatest difference lies in these two theological systems. 

Who is Israel?

Who are Abraham’s descendents?

This is where the road divides.  So, is God a covenantal Father or does He dispense love and wrath based on the current ‘dispensation’ or ‘era’ in which we live?  Is he the Christ of Hebrews 13:8 or does He change as Dispensationalism implies that He does?

This issue goes deeper than most understand because it raises yet another question.  What of God’s attributes?  To answer this question correctly, you must thoroughly study God’s attributes according to Scripture.  I cling to the unchanging hand of God, the God of Hebrews 13:8, evident through His unfailing love for His people, his continual pursuit of us, the fulfillment of all covenants established within His Son, the everlasting promise fulfilled in His Son. 

To that end, is God preferential in that He allows the birth of some to blessedness and others to damnation?  The Calvinists believe this and this is part of the reason for infant baptism and believing that “children of Christian parents are holy”.  They indeed have separated themselves believing God’s blessings belong to the elect within that particular dispensation and not others?  In 2 Peter 3:9 that is refuted because God’s Word says that He is not willing for ANY to perish but that ALL would come to repentance.

More to come….What are the Dispensations?

Be blessed!

Moving forward, we have briefly discussed the Reformation, the Reformers themselves, and lightly touched on some of their beliefs.  We will discuss more of those beliefs as they relate to other tenets.  We moved onto the rise of Dispensationalist doctrine in America but have raised a few eyebrows at Darby’s belief in infant baptism and involvement with the Plymouth Brethren (who also espouse infant baptism).  This correlates with our earlier discussions in the Pagan Roots series addressing the distortion of truth that came after the legalization of Christianity.  These Catholic distortions partially bled into Reformation doctrine.  Now, we arrive here.

Let us discuss the differences but more importantly let us lay them against the Light of His Word.  We know that He is the Light and He is the Word.  He is the true vine and upon His Life and Testimony, all things must be measured for He is the Fulfillment of Promise.

John 1 (King James Version)

John 1

 ¹In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 ²The same was in the beginning with God.

 ³All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

 ⁴In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

 ⁵And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

 ⁶There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

 ⁷The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

 ⁸He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

 ⁹That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

 ¹⁰He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

 ¹¹He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

 ¹²But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

 ¹³Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

 ¹⁴And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

 ¹⁵John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

 ¹⁶And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

 ¹⁷For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Dispensationalist:  Can be Arminian or a modified Calvinist, which means they can embrace Calvinism or Free Will but rarely do they espouse what is known as Hyper-Calvinism, which is to embrace Calvin’s Five Points or what is also known as the TULIP.  You can use this link for Calvin’s teaching to also take a look briefly at the Scriptures most Calvinists use to defend their doctrinal positions of Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement (the U and L, respectively). 

Covenant Theology:  Usually embraces Calvin’s TULIP (the same follows suit with New Covenant Theologians). 

Progressive Dispensationalist:  Again, can be either a Calvinist or an Arminian.

What is interesting to note about the differences here is that in most churches today, we do find a blending of the schools of thought.  We have those who espouse free will, for example, that also embrace OSAS (once saved, always saved) theology that Calvin taught.  Yet, they will condemn Calvin not understanding their belief is part of Calvin’s teaching.  The eternal security of a soul has always been debated with the crux of the argument being the delicate balance between works and grace.  What most folks never discuss however is the absolute sovereignty of God, which also has its role.  However, through Scripture we must, as believers, ascertain just what role God’s sovereignty does play in our salvation.

A few days ago, a reader said “Christian is a verb” and I love that statement.  We are not just to be hearers but also doers of His Word.  Paul compliments James when we he tells believers not to frustrate the grace of God (see Galatians 2:19-21) but also implores us not to continue in sin that grace may abound (see Romans 6:1-3).  We have to ask, is Paul talking to a predestined soul if he has to implore you to keep yourselves from indulging in sin? Hmm…

So, which is it? 

Are we eternally secure from the cradle, predestined unto grace and others to damnation?

Are we free will agents with the right to choose the riches of His grace?

If God is mighty enough to save you, is He not capable of keeping you?

Does the truth lie somewhere in between and all of us have missed it, so fixed are we on just specific phrases in the Bible that meet our agenda?

Or…

Is it God’s ability to save and keep that we question?

Should we point the finger the other way first and ask ourselves this:  if I love Him why can’t I obey Him?

If you do not believe God has the power to eternally seal your soul then why do you believe?

If Calvary was not enough, then what would be enough to save and keep you?  Christ said He kept his apostles and asked the Lord to keep all that were His after He departed.  So is that not enough?

Or have we completely misunderstood what it means to choose Christ and be a follower of Him?

God’s Word reads:

John 1:7, ⁷The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.”

And…

John 1:12,13, “¹²But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: ¹³Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”

John 17

¹These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

 ²As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

 ³And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

 ⁴I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

 ⁵And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

 ⁶I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

 ⁷Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.

 ⁸For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

 ⁹I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

 ¹⁰And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.

 ¹¹And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

 ¹²While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

 ¹³And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.

 ¹⁴I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

 ¹⁵I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.

 ¹⁶They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

 ¹⁷Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

 ¹⁸As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

 ¹⁹And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

 ²⁰Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

 ²¹That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

 ²²And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

 ²³I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

 ²⁴Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

 ²⁵O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.

 ²⁶And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

I will refrain from using every Scripture that supports free will and eternal security versus those who espouse divine election to give the reader an opportunity to defend his/her doctrinal position.  Regardless of how we have been taught, we need to resolve this matter.

Why?  Because you can imagine how greatly your viewpoint will change based on how you answer this one question.  However, let’s be mindful that many do not understand how they arrived at their beliefs.  They come to Christ, join a church, and are taught by that body what to believe concerning what the Bible says.  Few venture out to study for themselves.  It intimidates them.  They might not think themselves smart enough to independently study (even if they do not say it!).  Others may just blindly trust that the clergy knows best and they rely on them totally for instruction.

Believers, it is time to do as the Word tells us to do in 2 Timothy 2:15, “Study to shew thyself approved of God.  A workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth.”

If you believed the soul is predestined, then infant baptism would appear Scriptural to you because if your parents are Christians, then God chose you from the cradle, yes?  Maybe and maybe not…

If you determine from your Bible studies, however, that Christ died for all men, wishes all to repent and come to know Him (2 Pet. 3:9), then you cannot accept infant baptism as a proper means for salvation or sanctification of the soul.  Why?  There is the matter of repentance that is not being met here.

So, is infant baptism and confirmation enough or are we free will agents who must accept the finished work of Christ on Calvary, then repent and believe, to become a child of God?

What does God’s Word say?

I look forward to this exchange and ask all those who participate to keep the mind of Christ during this discussion.  As we move through the series, you may find yourself in the Dispensational camp then flip over to the Covenant/Reformed camp on other questions.  As I stated earlier, both schools of thought contain truth but each also contain questionable departures within them.  Let’s seek the heart of the Father here and come with an open heart that we might receive what He wants us to learn from the series.

Then…ask yourself how this one point can effect how you view the world at large?

Be blessed!

Within the Great Deception series, we have discussed the following. 

For those of you who are new to the study, it began Fall 2010 discussing the pagan roots of organized religion versus true Christianity as expressed by the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.  The same faith shared with believers through His disciples, also known as the Twelve Apostles.  The second half of this series discusses doctrinal divisions post-Reformation and how those doctrines have shaped American Christian thought and our belief systems, which not only impact our political views but our thoughts concerning the future of our nation, the world, and how we define the blessed hope.

Thanks for joining the study!

From Genesis to the Gospels

               The Promise, Its Fulfillment, and the Early Church

1.       The Pagan Roots of Organized Religion, an Introduction

2.      A Distant Thunder,  Pagan Roots Lesson 2

3.      From the Diaspora to the Time of Christ

4.      The Crucifixion of Christ:  Whose Fault Is It Anyway?

5.      Reconciling the Temple, the Priest, and the Sacrifice:  What really happened at Calvary?

6.      Approaching the Golden Calf

7.      Early Christian Worship

8.      House Church v. Holy Cathedral, Part One

9.      House Church v. Holy Cathedral, Part Two

10.   Are We a Body or a Building?

HOLIDAY BREAK

From the Reformation to the Rapture

               From Antiquity to Modernity:  How Did We Get Here?

11.    Post-holiday Communication, Lessons in Daniel, Study Resumes

12.   Predominant Schools of Thought

13.   Dispensationalism Defined, an introduction

14.   Dispensationalism, Imminence, and Social Responsibility

15.   Dismantling Dispensationalism, Lesson 1 (A Review of Church History)

16.   Dismantling Dispensationalism, Lesson 2 (Plymouth Brethren, Reformers, and Infant Baptism)

NOTE:  This study began with my subscribers on www.myspace.com.  The links provided here are to the blogs posted on that site.  However, feel free to continue the dialogue here on WordPress.  Questions are the stepping stones of knowledge.  So, don’t be shy and write to me! 

More to come…please feel free to email questions to me at WordPress, MySpace, or directly to tina@wordlover.net.

Be blessed and continue to be a blessing!

In Middle English, the word ‘catholic’ means “general or universal” Christian. 

[Middle English catholik, universally accepted, from Old French catholique, from Latin catholicus, universal, from Greek katholikos, from katholou, in general : kat-, kata-, down, along, according to; see cata- + holou (from neuter genitive of holos, whole; see sol- in Indo-European roots).] Source:  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/catholic

So, in that era it did not denote a specific sect of believers whereas today it defines a specific type of Christianity.  It was difficult for them to completely break from the foundational rhetoric now centuries old.  At this time, however, we are well past Luther’s 95 Theses and his proclamation that ‘the just shall live by faith’.  Even Luther did not dislike the Catholic faith; he only wished to improve upon it which is precisely why Eucharist, the doctrine of transubstantiation, infant baptism, and confirmation is still evident in traditional Lutheran, Presbyterian, and Anglican sects. 

Reform, in truth, brought a smidgeon of grace to Catholic theology and freedom to read God’s Word but missed the finer points.  It also missed the great divide between the Catholic notion of corporate Christianity versus individual belief that the Scripture teaches.  It is the corporate view that also fosters a Calvinistic belief; if the elect are so chosen then by divine orchestration they are also ‘redeemed’ and only need reach the age of confirmation to be true ‘believers’.  So, while they broke from the church the belief in the predestined soul still overshadowed much of the progress made.  It would not be until years later that the free will of the soul would be examined, confessed, and embraced which in turn would open the doors for all to believe that ‘whosoever will, may come’. 

 ³¹Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

 ³²Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

 ³³But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. (Matthew 10:31-33 KJV)

³⁴And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

 ³⁵For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it.

 ³⁶For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Mark 8:34-36 KJV)

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.    (Revelation 22:17 KJV)

How could this happen?

Consider the historical context.  For almost 1500 years, the people have been unable to read God’s Word.  The church told them they could not understand it.  The poor were not afforded the skills by which to read it.  The questioners were condemned as heretics after they were able to read it.  Those educated by the church are flooded with so much conscious and subconscious rhetoric that their fervent interpretations are even flavored with that which holds them captive:  the Catholic doctrinal position.  It is many years hence before the masses actually begin reading and interpreting the Word of God for themselves and shake off the tenets of Catholicism.  The Anabaptists are the first to make a bold step that sends even the Protestant Reformers sailing because the idea of adult decisions for Christ and baptism by full immersion of the body derails the foundation of their faith, which is infant baptism, in this era. 

Why is this such a big deal?

To infer that adults make conscious decisions for Christ and are then baptized as the first act of obedience to the Savior, only being a picture of what has already taken place in one’s heart, makes those who have only been baptized as infants – damned and on their way to hell. The act of ‘anabaptism’ or re-baptizing nullifies their own baptism.  To Luther and the other Reformers, this was heretical (and a mortal wound to their self righteousness).  While the Reformers would say in one breath that baptism had no ‘saving power’ they would defend it and uphold its practice as necessary to seal a child from hell.  Read the following letter written to a parishioner from Darby (link provided).

EXTERNAL BLOG LINK:  A letter from John Nelson Darby re: Infant Baptism

Is the picture coming into focus? 

The brave actions of the Anabaptist community shook their Catholic foundations.  The Early Reformers were a group of believers who espoused that “children of Christian parents are holy” and thereby set apart when they are christened that they might grow up in the nurture and the admonition of the Lord. 

By this action, they affirm ‘the elect of God’ if you will and to meddle with this was, to the 16^th century Protestant (and later to Darby), heresy.  However, it was really an affront to Luther, Calvin, and the others.  Their pride prevented a clear view of Biblical truth.  Christ was baptized by immersion; infant baptism was an invention of the Catholic Church.  When folks could read the Bible for themselves, they learned the truth, wished to walk in it, and were martyred for wanting to do what the Bible says.  All Luther was worried about was having to admit that he was not saved via ‘Christian inheritance’ and ‘sealed unto salvation’ by christening – if you catch my drift. 

Here is an excerpt from Luther’s sermon defending Infant Baptism.

“But if you wish to answer then answer thus: –

That the Baptism of infants is pleasing to Christ is sufficiently proved from His own work, namely, that God sanctifies many of them who have been thus baptized, and has given them the Holy Ghost; and that there are yet many even to-day in whom we perceive that they have the Holy Ghost both because of their doctrine and life; as it is also given to us by the grace of God that we can explain the Scriptures and come to the knowledge of Christ, which is impossible without the Holy Ghost. But if God did not accept the baptism of infants, He would not give the Holy Ghost nor any of His gifts to any of them; in short, during this long time unto this day no man upon earth could have been a Christian. Now, since God confirms Baptism by the gifts of His Holy Ghost as is plainly perceptible in some of the church fathers, as St. Bernard, Gerson, John Hus, and others, who were baptized in infancy, and since the holy Christian Church cannot perish until the end of the world, they must acknowledge that such infant baptism is pleasing to God. For He can never be opposed to Himself, or support falsehood and wickedness, or for its promotion impart His grace and Spirit. This is indeed the best and strongest proof for the simple-minded and unlearned. For they shall not take from us or overthrow this article: I believe a holy Christian Church, the communion of saints.” (Link to full sermon here:  http://www.apuritansmind.com/Baptism/LutherMartinCatechismInfantBaptism.htm)

Insomuch as we understand the plan of salvation today, Luther’s eternal destination may be in question.  If he never repented of his sins as an adult then Luther may have missed heaven.  The Bible tells us “without repentance there is no remission of sin”.

I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. (Luke 5:32)

I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance. (Luke 15:7)

⁴²And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

⁴³To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

⁴⁴While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (Acts 10:42-44 KJV)

¹⁷And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

 ¹⁸Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

 ¹⁹Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, (Hebrews 10:17-19 KJV)

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

Baptism is only an outward picture of what has taken place in a person’s heart.  It is a means by which one can openly profess Christ but it does not, in and of itself, possess spiritual power.  It is a proclamation and nothing more.  You can repent, live in the desert, and never stir the waters of a baptismal pool, and obtain Heaven.   Consider the thief on the Cross, deathbed prayers, and those in desolate parts of the world following Christ outside of the established churches of civilization.  Are their souls lost for lack of tap water?  Nothing could be further from the truth.  There is nothing holy about water regardless of who blessed it.  My prayer is that Luther repented.  His Biblical views on baptism do leave a question mark in my mind.

It’s not in the dipping but the doing – we must accept the finished work of Christ on Calvary for our soul to find peace and rest within Him.  And that peace is available to all not just a few called ‘the elect’.  This term has been misused for quite a long time.  Later on, we will discuss who ‘the elect of God’ really is according to Scripture. 

Consider the theology behind predestination and infant baptism.  Couple that with the tenet of Dispensationalism, which adheres to a separate program for Israel and the church.  Yes, I realize no one has ever laid these doctrines side by side in such a way before but to unearth ‘why’ we have to look at ‘what, when, who, where, and how’ to see the tapestry take shape. 

Then, lay upon it the notion that the Church will be raptured leaving the Jewish people behind to suffer tribulation thereby creating two sets of chosen, not one as Scripture tells us. 

How do we Scripturally arrive there?  Is it doctrinally the right place to be?  Did the roots of predestination take us there?  If you espouse the free will of the believer, perhaps it may serve your soul well to take a closer look.  You be the judge as the tapestry comes together.  I am only recounting history and relating Scripture.

More to come…be blessed!

To each era fresh insight is given.  The Lord tells us in His Word that things will come into focus as light is given.  That light is given when it is needed.  Some 2000 years post-Resurrection today’s believer is blessed with a whole Bible, has access to an incredible amount of extra-biblical literature providing historical foundations and proof for many things, most enjoy religious freedom, can worship, and can read.  Illiteracy is just one reason why those early years after the Ascension are called the Dark Ages.  The church leaders and the affluent of society in this time period were the only ones afforded an education. 

So, the unwashed masses relied on them for Biblical instruction.  Many were taught in rote.  This continued through the Middle Ages.  Literacy slowly increased but instruction was usually given by a priest or nun.  The Church provided the education that you received and there was no separation between church and state.  Those who rose in protest were martyred: burned at the stake like John Huss, imprisoned like John Bunyan, massacred like the Anabaptists.  

Whole colonies of protesters were taken.  Their pregnant wives hung in trees by their hair.  Their unborn children sliced from their wombs and left to die.  Villages were burned.  History records that Protestants and Catholics alike took part in these atrocities across Europe, especially toward the Anabaptist (‘ana’ meaning “again” and Baptist to be “baptized”).  Martin Luther was even cited as believing it was not a sin to persecute one who had been re-baptized as an adult so intent were both sects on retaining infant baptism as a church sacrament and impetus for the salvation of a man’s soul.  The Anabaptists (now known as the Mennonites) were the only fervent Reformers that espoused baptism by immersion in adulthood after one had made a decision concerning Jesus Christ.  And they were brutally massacred for their ceremonial dipping, three times in honor of the Trinity, and straightway coming out of the water. 

Even the Anglican turned Anabaptist Martyrologists John Foxe wrote to Queen Elizabeth, pleading, although in vain, for a “milder form of punishment” than burning at the stake. He admits the unreasonableness of their opinions, but says: “As to these fanatical sects…it is certain they are by no means to be countenanced in a commonwealth, but, in my opinion, ought to be suppressed by proper correction. But to roast alive the bodies of poor wretches that offend rather through blindness of judgment than perverseness of will, in fire and flames, raging with pitch and brimstone, is a hard-hearted thing, and more agreeable to the practice of Romanists than the customs of the Gospeller” . (Source:  http://www.theanabaptistschurch.com/)

When settlers hit Plymouth Rock in the 1600s, there were two groups:  Puritans and Pietists or Separatists’.  Both sects, however, were Calvinistic in their approach.  The Puritans endorsed a theocratic style of government, that which does not separate church and state, but that mandates holiness through both the civil system and the church.  The idea for a blended church-state comes from the words of John Calvin reminiscent of his early Catholic foundations.

“From these things one can gather … the function and the use of the law…. While showing God’s righteousness, that is, what God requires of us, it admonishes each one of his unrighteousness and convicts him of sin. All men, without exception, are puffed up with insane confidence in their own powers, unless the Lord proves their vanity. When all this stupid opinion of their own power has been laid aside, they must needs know they stand and are upheld by God’s hand alone. Again since by righteousness of their works they are aroused against God’s grace, it is fitting that this arrogance be cast down and confounded that, naked and empty-handed, they may flee to God’s mercy, repose in it, hide within it and seize upon it alone for righteousness and merit. For God’s mercy is revealed in Christ to all who seek and wait upon it with true faith.15” ( John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1536 Edition (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company), 34.

These belief systems, carried from England birthed of a priest turned Protestant who believed in divine election of the saints and the depravity of the human soul in his Five Points of Calvinism is what fuels the fervor of the Christian Right in America to return to this pseudo-theocratic model.  Yet, most of them condemn Calvin’s doctrine of divine election but they will absolutely uphold his ideal of a blended church-state government model that basically whips a person into holy submission through whatever means available that he might come to himself and repent of his sin. 

Recall in my earlier blogs that I mentioned Calvin’s obsession with the absolute sovereignty of God?  His thoughts concerning a blended church-state sprout from his preoccupation with the former….” When all this stupid opinion of their own power has been laid aside, they must needs know they stand and are upheld by God’s hand alone.”  And where do you think Calvin gets his idea for a Christian city-state (i.e. New Jerusalem) from?  Rome.  Who supported this same ‘City of God’ concept:  Augustine.  From whence did this distortion arise?  From the belief that the Kingdom of God was manifesting itself here on Earth and we must “build it” for Christ to return.  Who proffered this theology as well:  Augustine.  What faith did Augustine practice?  Catholicism.

Forgive me as I shake my head when I consider all the railing, on the Internet and from the pulpit, concerning the heresies of Calvin only to find we follow in his footsteps when it comes to a notion that we like?  Unfortunately, Calvin’s notion is birthed of Catholic teachings mainly the elect of God and the building up of the Kingdom on Earth.  This leads us into what is called Kingdom Theology.  The two schools of thought blend again right here.

Darby, also a Calvinist, comes about 200 years later with his doctrine of imminence that Americans are flooded with thanks to D.L. Moody and C.I. Scofield.  However, before that arrives we have a basically Protestant group of believers who have been taught that the “kingdom of heaven is within you” and only within you.  They believe in a Second Coming but abide that it is many years hence.  Therefore, they take it upon themselves to build up the Kingdom of God (the New Jerusalem) given to them, and seek to Christianize it, that it might be ‘clean enough’ for Christ when He returns to reign on Earth.  Note that there are folks even today rallying for a return to this original model calling it Neo-Puritanism.  They believe this is the only way to “take the nation back”. 

However, that really begs a question.  To return to a completely Christian constituency means to also re-establish persecution of dissenters, yes?  So, what exactly do we do with 60% of the population that is not Christian, huh?  According to a recent poll conducted by www.religioustolerance.org the United States is only 34% Christian, 7% of which actually claim to be ‘evangelical’.  The entire idea is absolutely ludicrous and the man who dreamed it up should be fined for even suggesting such an injustice and crime against humanity that he might further his unscriptural Kingdom theology.  That, my friends, is an infringement upon the inalienable rights granted to each U.S. citizen. 

In the interim, along comes the men who wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence.  Jefferson himself being a Deist, not a Christian, pens that we have certain inalienable rights among those ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’.  We are also granted freedom of speech, assembly, religion, and of the press.  That is a broad brush stroke and a complete departure from what the Plymouth settlers sought to achieve.  In the years following their settlement, one can see the diverse numbers arriving daily to the New World.  Jefferson and the others noted the varying sects of Christianity and other faiths among them.  The Catholics of Rhode Island were severely persecuted by early settlers, and so forth, which did not preserve the freedom everyone came to this continent to achieve.  Hence, the broad brush stroke is taken and rightly so.  Thank you, Mr. Jefferson.

The Declaration of Independence therefore served to provide rights to all men who came to dwell in America.  They secured freedom, regardless of your religious inclination.  It was the smartest decision ever made too.  We are the last free place there is; regimes have come and gone since our founding but America remains free.  Let us not forget that it is freedom, not the denial of it, that makes us great.  If we limit the religious freedom of the constituency, then we are no longer free but proffer the oppression from which the original settlers ran so many years ago. 

Then Darby springs up.  D.L. Moody is so taken with him and C.H. MacIntosh, a great Darby follower, that he buys every piece written by the author, and soaks it up, as if he’s never read before…stating besides his Bible that he didn’t need anything else to spiritually guide him!

I had my attention called to C. H. M.’s notes, and was so much pleased and at the same time profited by the way they opened up Scripture truth, that I secured at once all the writings of the same author, and if they could not be replaced, would rather part with my entire library, excepting my Bible, than with these writings. They have been to me a very key to the Scriptures.⁽¹⁾ – Ernest Sandeen, Roots of Fundamentalism, (Grand Rapids, MI, : Baker Books,1978), p. 166

Now, we’re off and running in another direction, aren’t we?  The Protestant birthed American constituency is force-fed Dispensational Premillennialism.  This newfound belief and eschatological system is even given a new ‘systematic theology’ penned by Lewis Sperry Chafer aided by C.I. Scofield and others who wish to bring this great news to the people en masse forever changing the face of Christianity in America. 

Christians leave their social responsibility and also brush off the Puritan ideal that they must “love and obey” because Darby’s followers taught “justification by grace alone”.  This gave the constituency impetus to abandon the Old Testament laws because grace was sufficient.  Now, can you see it all coming in to focus?  Can you see the birthing of carnal Christianity in America?  The departure of social responsibility due to the new church-goers belief that salvation by grace through faith meant they could sit down?  However, they are still bound this Calvinistic-inspired ‘New Jerusalem’ concept as well.  The societal implication has played out before us and brings us to the present day.

Now, the Armenians pick up the “grace alone” concept and bring with it the teachings of Erasmus regarding the “free will” of the believer.  However, this begs another question.  If our government is to mimic our view of God’s grace then is it Scripturally lawful to mandate ‘faith’, to enforce what we find criminal within our faith, if the human has the free will to accept or reject Christ?  Or should we retain the Calvinistic system birthed in the confines of Catholicism and continue to push for an oppressive city-state where church and state are indeed synonymous not separate?    

Folks, knowing these details now can you see how important it is to pick a side and stay there?  Calvinism and Armenianism are polar opposites.  Ne’er the twain shall meet.   So, which should it be?  I think we should ‘Render unto Caesar those things which are Caesars and unto God those things which belong to God’ and I do not find anywhere in Scripture where Jesus sought to reform government in His ministry.

There is a trend within theological circles to make some changes.  God’s truth always prevails and we see a departure from traditional Dispensationalism making its way to the mainstream as it should (link to an article posted on the Plymouth Brethren’s website:  http://www.plymouthbrethren.org/article/417). 

Why?  It is time to step out of manmade constructs and just believe what God’s Word tells us.  Within each school of thought (Covenant, Reformed, or Dispensational) departures from God’s Word exist.  Sometimes, I do believe God intends for man to make these doctrinal slip-ups only to prove yet again that He is God, directs the affairs of men, and that man in his finite reasoning cannot comprehend the divine and perfect will of God.  Somewhere along the line, the human will step in and push a precept too far outside the bounds of Scriptural truth.  This is when the interpreter’s agenda begins and God’s will ends. 

In researching, I happened across a man’s blog today where once again, he was putting timelines on Christ.  He claimed himself given to visions, being told to throw off anything he had been told, and hold to the Word.  So far, so good I thought then he proceeded to give detailed predictions of what will occur with a corresponding month and year for its fulfillment.  Mind you, the blog was written in 2007 with dates moving through 2011. 

Nothing came true that I read of his visions.  Folks, you do things like that when the Bible plainly states that ‘no man knows the day or hour when the Son of Man cometh’ rest assured that God will make you into a liar.  He shamed Jack Van Impe and Hal Lindsay a long time ago.  Now, you see these men finally have television programs again right alongside Benny Hinn.  In the 70s, they were laughed off the stage when their predictions failed to come true.  Don’t get caught up in newspaper exegesis and finger pointing but when Dispensationalism is taken to the nth degree this is where we arrive: ludicrosity. 

Who was John Nelson Darby?

“John Nelson Darby, namesake of family friend and famed British admiral, Lord Nelson, was born in London of Irish parents on November 18, 1800. Ireland furnished the backdrop for his earliest years of development and education. In 1819 at the age of eighteen, Darby graduated from Trinity College Dublin as a Classical Medalist.

Brilliant, gifted, and with all the right connections, Darby had been groomed for and was practically assured a successful career in law. But a deep spiritual struggle gripped the budding young barrister in his eighteenth year and caused him to abandon that profession after only one year of practice between 1822 and 1823. Darby’s spiritual odyssey lasted until 1825 when he received ordination as deacon in the Church of England. The following year, he was elevated to the priesthood and assigned a curacy in remote County Wicklow, Ireland.

Taking up residence in a peasant’s cottage on a bog, Darby covered the great untamed expanse of his ecclesiastical responsibility on horseback in the manner of John Wesley. His gentleness of spirit and saintly bearing and conduct quickly earned him a place in the hearts of his poor parishioners. So committed was Darby to the instruction of the peasantry in the Word of God that he was seldom found at his own humble dwelling before midnight. His labors did not go unrewarded. Although he expended most of his modest wages and personal inheritance on the local schools and charities, by Darby’s on account Catholics were “becoming protestants at the rate of 600 to 800 a week.”2 Darby’s standard of reward and gain was always in terms of souls won for the kingdom, never silver added to the purse.

For some time the young circuit-riding cleric had been troubled by the condition of the established church, but his demanding duties had prevented any decisive action. He was to receive time for undisturbed reflection on the issue, however, when his horse bolted during one journey through the parish, throwing its rider with tremendous force against a doorjamb. The ensuing lengthy convalescence from the required surgery in Dublin, served as an incubator for Darby’s discontent.

Darby says, “During my solitude, conflicting thoughts increased; but much exercise of soul had the effect of causing the scriptures to gain complete ascendancy over me. I had always owned them to be the Word of God . . . the careful reading of the Acts afforded me a practical picture of the early church; which made me feel deeply the contrast with its actual present state; though still, as ever beloved by God.”3 After only twenty-seven months with the Church of England and thoroughly dissatisfied with what he viewed as rampant Erastianism and clericalism, Darby sought fellowship and ministry outside the established church. (Source:  http://www.according2prophecy.org/darby.html).”

To be continued….

Be blessed,

T.D.

“Where is Jesus when we’re sleeping?  Can he stay in my room tonight?”

“Mom, I know Jesus’ birthday is Christmas but when is God’s birthday?”

“Mom, how old is God?”

Try explaining the attributes of God to a five year old when it is tough for an adult to grasp Spurgeon’s treatise on the eternity of the Father.  Try to explain time, the rising and setting of the sun, the purpose of the moon, and just why we have those things called ‘days’ within this construct we call ‘time’.  It’s not that easy, is it?  The questions become more probing and tougher to answer with age.  We grow up and add to those questions.   And all of it corresponds to the timing of His will but to comprehend that requires a solid understanding of His Eternity.  Humans will never accurately describe God’s view of time.  It is outside of our mental parameters to understand He who is not bound by this thing we call ‘time’.

Of course, some folks came around with answers.  We listened.  Some made sense.  Others we threw off as nonsense.  Then, there were those questions which remain unanswered.  Which expert should we trust to offer sound advice on God’s future plans?  What does God’s Word say about all this and am I smart enough to find out on my own just what His plan is for me, for everybody? 

The Messianic Promise

At the end of the day, it is all nonsense outside of God’s Word and His plan for humankind.  It started simply and it ends quite simply.  In the beginning, there was Paradise and humankind walked in a right relationship with God as Adam walked with the Lord in the cool of the day.  In the end, we will walk in that right relationship once more established in perfect peace.  What lies between is the greatest love story ever told. One Creator seeks to regain His relationship with His lost Creation.  He ardently pursues us.  Makes provision for our escape.  Then, graciously awaits our return to Him.  It is so simple that folks have spent years complicating His message of Divine Grace and Love, in that, while we were yet sinners Christ died for us (see Romans 5:7-9).   

We argue futurist implications and often forget just how awesome the mere act of salvation really is!  We distance ourselves one from another also forgetting that Christ commanded us to love one another, to greet each other with an holy kiss, and despite how we may doctrinally disagree if we are one in Him then God expects you to love them in return.  

Alive in Him, we should just drip with love.  Not an ounce of harshness should be found within us.  Even when I read Christ’s words to the Sadducees and Pharisees, I envision this calm, cool, and collected Savior.  No one ruffled His feathers.  Jesus never broke a sweat before the Sanhedrin Council.  The only time we see Him irate is when he chased the money changers out of the temple not once but twice.  And if you have an ounce of character, you don’t have to be Jesus to get angry about someone stealing from innocent people.  Christ is our Savior and our example for life on Earth, how we deal with others, how we should display love not just to our beloved but to those who might be unlovely. 

Earthly Dominion & Social Responsiblity

Somewhere down the line we lost the social responsibilities that come with our faith and traded them in for futuristic implications.  The dogma of Dispensationalism told us this world was of no consequence, that our sights should be solely on what lies above.  Be very careful here.  While we are to keep the mind of Christ, our heads have no place in the clouds.  Even the apostle warned early believers who had just decided to sit and wait for the return of our Lord.  This leads us directly to the Dispensationalist doctrine of imminence, which is not listed among the major tenets of the faith even though it is preached and widely held.  Interesting, eh?  More on that later because how we handle such matters as believers impacts our Christian service and place in this world.

(The link provided is John MacArthur’s support for his belief in the doctrine of imminence.  We will examine this closely but for now please read the attached link).

The Doctrine of Imminence & Its Implications

Believers, we should never be so heavenly minded that we are no earthly good.  When those who do not believe upstage us in the areas of charity and brotherly love then what does that say for our quickened spirits?  We look more spiritually dead than those who have never accepted His finished work on Calvary.  When discussing energy conservation or reducing the amount of litter on our highways, I have heard Christians say, “Well, it is of no consequence to me.  I’m going up.  Jesus is coming soon.  So, let carnal man clean those streets.  I’m setting my sights on Glory-land!” 

And I have heard crowds of people cheer the person ON who said these things.  The speech may vary, different examples may be used, but the spirit of that delivery is the same.  “I don’t care about this Earth; it’s gonna burn.”  When witnessing Catholic nuns feeding the poor I have heard Christians say, “Poor things, they think they have to work their way to Heaven.” 

Now, there was an apostle named James.  What does he have to say?

 ¹⁹ My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, ²⁰ because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires. ²¹ Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you.

 ²² Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. ²³ Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror ²⁴ and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. ²⁵ But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it—not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it—they will be blessed in what they do.

 ²⁶ Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless. ²⁷ Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

To the unschooled ear, this might sound really good because this guy is talking about Heaven. (Yay! Not…)  What he really did was this:  he played on your emotion to feed you bad information, the kind that unfortunately sticks with people.  Before you know it, Christians are whipping candy wrappers out the window on the highway, won’t drop a dime in a Salvation Army cauldron, and stop endorsing “green” plans for our planet. 

What does God’s Word say?

²⁷ So God created mankind in his own image,
   in the image of God he created them;
   male and female he created them.

 ²⁸ God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
    ²⁹ Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. ³⁰ And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
    ³¹ God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day. (Genesis 1:27-31 NIV)

God commanded us to care for the planet.  He made it for us; it was His gift to us.  So, how should we regard it?  This warping occurs when we give one precept precedence over another.  While the apostles urged us to live our lives as if Christ was returning today, they never endorsed that we should disregard all things earthly, absolutely forsake them, to look at the sky.  The doctrine of imminence gets us there even though others will decry it does not.

Listen to other believers.  You hear it all the time.  The seeds of Dispensationalism have sprouted among them.  All they talk about is the return of the Lord.  They have all but forsaken the Christian’s role in society, our social responsibilities, because they are ‘Glory-bound’.  Yes, if you are a child of God then you shall see Him.  You have a home in Heaven because, like Abraham, your spirit went in search of a city whose builder and maker was God.

¹⁴ Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— ¹⁵ and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. ¹⁶ For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. ¹⁷ For this reason he had to be made like them,^[k] fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. ¹⁸ Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.  (Hebrews 2:14-18 NIV)

Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. ²⁴ And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, (Hebrews 10:23 NIV)

By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. ⁹ By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. ¹⁰ For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God. (Hebrews 11:8-10 NIV)

 That is awesome but the story does not end there.  Don’t be so heavenly minded that you are of no earthly good.  It does not please God and goes against Scripture.  Forget civic duty because it denotes political involvement.  They exchanged social responsibility that Christ taught for civic duty and political involvement.  Add to this the ‘Christian nation’ construct and you have completely railroaded the Great Commission.  Think about it…

Exchange social responsibility for civic duty.  Where do you arrive?

They seek to control the masses by mandating Christianity through law-based systems and completely ignore the significance of the Great Commission that Christ commanded that we fulfill.  It is from this particular well that nationalist fervor springs (and the government jumped in and whipped your horses good on that one).  Now, you’re off and running.  This led to the Christian community feeding off the ‘one nation under God’ concept thereby creating the notion that the United States is the promised land?  Yep, that is what it winds up being, if you regard it as such.  It is not. 

We are not a theocratic replica of Israel.  We will never be.  Just because the majority of the Christian populace resides in America does not make us recipients of the national blessings God promised to Israel in the Old Testament.  Do you see where this all takes us and how twisted things are becoming?   One distortion leads to other distortions.  We cannot ‘return’ something to a state of being that it never enjoyed.  America is a melting pot, a collection of diverse peoples and belief systems.  Within our present framework, we enjoy religious freedom (and that religion is your personal choice). 

So, why do Christians use this verse as impetus to “heal America”? 

2 Chronicles 7:13-15 (New International Version, ©2010)

 ¹³ “When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people, ¹⁴ if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. ¹⁵ Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place.

 This verse does not, nor can it ever, apply to the United States.  We were never a nation wholly dedicated to God having a completely Christian constituency.  Now, the nation of Israel was a nation wholly dedicated to God at times, would fall into idolatry now and again, then be judged and repent that they might return to their God.  This verse applies to that national system, which was theocratic.  How can this verse apply in the modern Christian life?  Your New Testament cross reference is I John 1:9, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”  It is a promise of redemption when repentance is rendered to the Father.  It is a promise to His children, not to a modern nation.

The USA never fits into this mold.  The notion of mandating Christianity through morally based legal systems does not make us like Israel either.  It only makes us oppressive when life in Christ should offer spiritual freedom.  How are we proffering freedom when we oppress others using a legal system to keep people ‘morally acceptable’?  All we are doing is attempting to clean up the outside and never dealing with the inside.  Christ wanted us to deal with the INSIDE of a man.  If you can get to his inside, the outside will follow suit. 

You will never fulfill the Great Commission by lobbying for political change, imposed salvation by force?  I thought we were passed the Inquisition.  I hope never to return.  Let my freedom end at the tip of the other person’s nose and we’ll be alright.  It has worked this long; let’s not frustrate the matter.  It only causes folks to hate you.

You will only oppress those who do not believe and impress those who do with wrong theology.  At the end of the day, we are to be about His business that is the Great Commission.  He never commanded us to control the masses through legal systems.  He asked us to go, tell, and share that men’s hearts might be changed.

We have little time for that if we are busy concerning ourselves with the laws made by man to govern man.  The whole Christian nation notion has led to more wrong theology than most understand.  And it has completely refocused the Christian and taken our eyes off the social responsibilities given us, the cup in the name of the Lord that we are not giving, and the shining light of His love that we are not showing, the dominion over the planet that we have forsaken, the Great Commission that we are so behind in fulfilling.    

NOTE:  The social “rehabilitation” schema through government intervention, however, is not part of the original Dispensationalist position.  It is an old piece that folks have kept from the Roman Catholic system when Constantine decided to “Christianize” everyone.  How do we arrive at the ‘Christian nation’ construct?  It came from Rome.  Read Augustine’s City of God and you will see how Augustine taught and truly believed that Rome was the New Jerusalem! 

This is where things get confusing.  We will throw off Catholicism but retain its political involvement piece and try to mandate Christian behavior through law-based systems.  Then, we will disregard the planet and its inhabitants in another breath because we’re Glory-bound.  Can you see what a twisted mess this has become?  And it all began with the doctrines of man, not God’s Word.  This is where Satan gets an award for being really slick.  In offering you something that ‘appears’ good, he led us astray that we might not be as successful in the fulfillment of Christ’s command to us, the Great Commission.  When I really think about, it upsets me.  This is just one of the Great Deceptions and doctrine got us here.

There was a time when I too believed these things to be true, to be what God wanted.  Things have changed.  Now, I see where I failed the Lord in fulfilling the Great Commission, how I failed my fellow man, have not cared for the widows and orphans like I should, and have not given enough cups in His name as He commanded me to do.  All my energy given toward repealing certain laws should have been spent counseling unwed mothers, finding homes for unwanted babies, feeding the homeless, teaching the unfortunate how to read, and helping those who needed to see Christ in the flesh.  That fleshly visage could have easily come in the form of my helping hand, if I would have just been about my Father’s business.

Keep the coffee brewing.  I’m just warming up here.  The doctrine of imminence will be dissected in another blog along with other tenets of Dispensationalism.  Thanks for coming to read!

Be blessed!

“Many people are understandably confused by the term Dispensationalism. I’ve met seminary graduates and many in Christian leadership who haven’t the slightest idea how to define Dispensationalism.”

 – John MacArthur, Biblical Answers to Significant Questions

   (Link: http://www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/sf-04.htm)

Yes, they are because they, the body of Christ and unbelievers alike, have never had it explained to them.  It is rarely mentioned or resident in a church body’s statement of faith.  Instead, the church will hand to you an outline of their beliefs (that unbeknownst to the new Christian is a spin-off of Dispensationalist dogma). 

Please remember that what is called a doctrinal position is just that; it is a perspective on Scripture but not the Scriptures itself.  So, deciding there are tenets of a doctrinal position with which you do not agree is not to say that you deny Scripture.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  It simply means you do not agree on the viewpoint the interpreter has taken on the whole.    

1. Dispensationalism has many facets but the most prominent two are a) the literal interpretation of the Scriptures and b) a separate program for Israel versus the Church further suggesting there are indeed two peoples of God, not one.  Dispensationalists note that Israel was the focus of God’s redemptive plan in one dispensation. The church, consisting of redeemed people including Jews and Gentiles, is the focus in another. All dispensationalists believe at least one dispensation is still future–during the thousand-year reign of Christ on earth, known as the millennium, in which Israel will once again play a pivotal role.

   
   

   Dispensationalism teaches that all God’s remaining covenant promises to Israel will be literally fulfilled–including the promises of earthly blessings and an earthly messianic kingdom. God promised Israel, for example, that they would possess the Promised Land forever (Gen. 13:14-17; Exod. 32:13). Scripture declares that Messiah will rule over the kingdoms of the earth from Jerusalem (Zech. 14:9-11). Old Testament prophecy says that all Israel will one day be restored to the Promised Land (Amos 9:14-15); the temple will be rebuilt (Ezek. 37:26-28); and the people of Israel will be redeemed (Jer. 23:6; Rom. 11:26-27). Dispensationalists believe all those promised blessings will come to pass as literally as did the promised curses.

   In general, Dispensationalism understands and applies Scripture–particularly prophetic Scripture–in a way that is more consistent with the normal, literal approach. 

2. 
   

   A dispensation is the plan of God by which He administers His rule within a given era in His eternal program. Dispensations are not periods of time, but different administrations in the eternal outworking of God’s purpose. It is especially crucial to note that the way of salvation–by grace through faith–is the same in every dispensation. God’s redemptive plan remains unchanged, but the way He administers it will vary from one dispensation to another.we believe is God’s design for interpreting Scripture.
   (Adapted from The Gospel According to the Apostles, pp. 219-20) http://www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/sf-04.htm

 

For a more in-depth look at Dispensationalism, click here.  In the next segment, I will seek to identify the areas of the doctrine that do not wholly align with God’s Word.  While literal interpretation is a broad term, the Dispensationalist takes a broad brush stroke and tells us there is no such thing as ‘dualism’ in prophecy nor a ‘spiritual implication’ within this plenary verbally-inspired text.  Plenary verbal inspiration is a high brow theological term that literally means “from the breath of God.”  This is what it means when a Christian tells you that Scripture is “God-breathed”.

The premise is that a man may have pushed the pen to write the books of the Bible but the words were absolutely given of God, breathed through the scribe, and offered to humankind as God’s very Word (and as such it should be regarded).  This particular tenet directly aligns with the Dispensationalist claim that the Bible is the holy infallible Word of God.  It is also one Dispensationalist claim that I will not argue.  I also believe the Scriptures are God-breathed.  However, I do think that Scripture should also be interpreted not just in its literal sense but by also employing the historical-critical method and other proven methods of literary analysis to ascertain the true meaning of the Scriptures.  This “literal” approach has helped and harmed us, in that, when a deeper meaning was to be found and conveyed, the scholars may have overlooked it unable to see the forest for the trees.

The next large pillar of Dispensationalism is the “separate program for Israel and the Church”.  This bleeds directly into the first part of The Great Deception series because God’s plan from Genesis to Revelation had everyone in mind.  Dispensationalism focuses on three or four covenants and back burners the others that they might bring greater focus to the Church.  The impetus for this ‘separation’ comes from hundreds of years of distortion led many times by what the Catholic Church calls the Early Church Fathers and their disdain for the Jewish people.  With Scripture, we will address this hotly debated issue within Christendom because it is of great importance.  While others may use this “belief system” to elevate national Israel others use it to demean Israel and tell the world they are not the Chosen of the new covenant of grace rather they are the underdogs of grace.   Pushing the literalist agenda and under playing other means of literary analysis when we read God’s Message for us the Dispensationalist has even claimed certain chapters of the Bible, such as Matthew 24, do not apply to believers.  And it goes even deeper.  They also separate prophecies and tell us which ones apply “just to Israel” and which ones are for the rest of us. 

Stop!  If at any time, any part of God’s Word does not apply to me we have contradicted our stand that it is the infallible, holy Word of God.  We have denied that these letters are indeed love letter from God to humankind, all of us.  If I have to tell you what does not apply to you when you are a believer then someone grievously erred and I know God does not mistakes.  If I have to play holy hop scotch then God’s Word is not infallible.  Think about it…if there is an error the human made it.

For many years, I have seen people argue the nuts and bolts of this dogma while totally ignoring the fact that there is an entire bridge of thought supported with that nut or bolt.  We argue eternal security, rapture, the second coming of Christ, the millennial reign, the tribulation of the believer, and the salvation plan but few back up to see the whole picture and argue the ‘systematic theology’ at work.  We question patriotism, equate nationalist fervor with our love for God, and then debate whether we should vote or pledge. 

When John Nelson Darby came forward with his theory of Dispensationalism in 1833 no one had ever considered his views before then.  The idea of the imminent return of Christ (i.e. Christ can come at any time) was also Darby’s work.  The separate program for Israel was also Darby.  Spurgeon never preached concerning this and neither did any of the Great Reformers yet most Baptists call C.H. Spurgeon ‘the Prince of Preachers’ but Spurgeon did not believe the way Baptists believe.  Interesting, eh?  Well, it is true.  Even Jonathan Edwards who was known for his “hell fire and brimstone preaching” when he delivered his famous sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” did not hold to this new teaching called the doctrine of imminence. 

I’m just touching the tree tops because we have much to discuss but this should give you an idea as to how these beliefs came to be.  Dispensationalism is a new construct when we look at a faith, a following of our Savior for over 2000 years, whose believers trusted in Him and believed solely on His Word to guide them.  These same believers embraced the covenants of God and did not rely on a man to tell you just how God “dispenses” love and wrath.  Those pre-Darby believers worshiped the God of Hebrews 13:8, which states, “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever.”  He is the God of the Old Testament and the New Testament.  The covenants fulfilled by His Life, Ministry, Death, and Resurrection were the very covenants that He Himself made.  He is our transcendent, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent Redeemer who always had you in mind.  He had you in mind from the foundations of the world! 

The Scriptures tell us exactly how God loves, how He chastens, and that His plan included everyone not just a few.  It tells us that the patriarchs had righteousness applied to their account as they looked to the promise of a Messiah and served their God while the modern believer looks back to the Cross to survey the wondrous redemptive work of our Lord that salvation is made possible for all.  The Cross is ground zero.  The Bible is written as such and tells us that without the Cross, salvation is impossible.  Dispensationalism tells you in a sea of theological mumbo-jumbo that Christ has separate salvation plans, which directly counters Scripture and dilutes the Cross of Christ, ignores the covenants and the gentle progress of redemption throughout the ages, and leaves us with a system of favoritism that God never intended. 

He loves us all the same and is not willing that any perish but all come to repentance.  If salvation does not apply to everyone then the rest of the Bible is a lie.  If the program for the blessed hope varies by nationality, then the ship is lost altogether and we have craftily erased the totality of His sacrifice and the unification made possible through His shed blood on Calvary.  It was not just something that occurred as a result of His Death.  He promised Abraham these things, and then brought it to pass.  It was a fulfillment of the covenants given, which all point to the Cross of Christ, not just a few promises given of a God who plays favorites.  My Bible says ‘whosoever’ and we should abide by those words.  Darby liked to play favorites even with the covenants of God.  Those covenants are legally binding between God and man.  They are not to be overlooked.  When He fulfilled His contract this is precisely why Christ said He did not come to abolish the law (to void the covenants between God and man) but rather He came to (establish the law) make those covenants good, sealing them with His very blood! Amen.

NOTE:

There is a great deal of difference between salvation that is universally offered (which is what Christ has made possible for all who repent and believe on Him) and that which is universally granted or applied.  The Catholic Church endorses a universally applied or granted salvation when you are sprinkled as an infant thereby removing your “original sin”.  That is not my belief. 

I do not espouse universalism, which is the belief that all people are redeemed whether they believe or not.  Catholics are so locked up in this belief that they live in fear for a child who has not been christened.  On the contrary, I do believe that the only way to Heaven is through belief in the finished work of Christ Jesus and to love and obey Him means that you must live life as He lived.  Water does not save you; you just go in a dry sinner and come out a wet one.  It is just a picture of the spiritual cleansing that should have already taken place in one’s heart.  To be like Him (or to strive to be Christ-like) is what pleases the Father.  When we partake of that Love and love Him in return then it should also bring us joy to serve Him.

Next:  Dispensationalism Dismantled, Lesson 1 (the first blog of many in the coming weeks). 

These two points are the major distinctions given.  There are many other tenets of Dispensationalism.  There are so many that the entire Systematic Theology that believers adhered to was rewritten. Charles Ryrie, Lewis Sperry Chafer, and C.I. Scofield were so intent into getting these tenets of Dispensationalism into your head that their doctrine is precisely how your Bible came to have footnotes!  Dispensationalism birthed the Scofield Reference Bible and many others promoted by Charles Ryrie.  Further, Lewis Sperry Chafer and D.L. Moody were instrumental along with the leaders of Dallas Theological Seminary in creating Dispensationalist seminaries that this belief system would permeate American Christian thought and spread throughout the known world.

More to come.  Bring coffee.  We’ll be here awhile but if you really want to know ‘how’ then I am more than prepared to spend the time.

Be blessed!

T.D.

In recent years, however, these belief systems have added dimensions.  There is Progressive Dispensationalism, Classic Dispensationalism, New Reformed Theology, New Covenant Theologians, Kingdom Theology, Kingdom Now Theology, and so forth.  These offspring adhere to the basic tenets of the original schools of thought but have expounded on these theological systems to meet the needs of today’s Modern Christian and attempt to smooth the discontinuity of the Dispensationalist dogma.

Wait…

Have you noticed that for all the barking about the inerrant Word of God that we have been unable to even mention God’s Word yet?  No.  We have been too busy discussing “belief systems” created as vehicles or modes of interpretation for God’s Word designed by man to tell the masses what the Bible really says.  However, ALL Christians will tell you that they believe God’s Word plus nothing, minus nothing.  That is a false statement though when their true foundations are Dispensationalism.  This is not the Christian’s fault!  Yes, this is true.  Very few Christians just read God’s Word and do what it says.  Most adhere to the tenets of the faith as given to them by their pastor whose foundation is Dispensationalism most of the time.

After wading through this pudding of pretension, I decided to just read my Bible.  To my amazement, I found that some of these man-made doctrines do not fully align with God’s Word.  Some tenets are given greater emphasis while others are ignored entirely.  Depending on your school of thought, God’s program has been rewritten, alternatively interpreted, separated, or dismissed entirely.

This is the part that no one tells you.  It is so hidden beneath the layers that unless you study theology in college, the believer may never find out just what these “foundations of the faith” are and all that they entail.  It is also these foundations, their interpretations of Scripture that form our Christian worldview, our definition of social responsibility (or lack thereof), the Great Commission, grace, works, and our futurist perspective (if you have one).  With all that said, a Dispensationalist is also an adherent of premillennialism and pre-tribulational rapture of the Church. 

How did it come about that Christians are instructed without knowing what they have been taught with regard to schools of thought?  A new convert joins a church; they are schooled in the statement of faith for that denomination, and told ‘this is truth’ by the pastor and elders of that body.  However, they never call it Dispensationalism.  They label it as the beliefs of that denomination and leave it there.  Is it because they think these things too deep for most folks to grasp? 

If you had the opportunity to weigh and measure the different schools of thought then choose based on how it aligns with Scripture which one most accurately adheres to the Scripture would you take the time to learn the difference?

If you wish to take that time, I will explain it to you in modern English that everyone might understand.  Leave a comment if you are interested.  The study will continue as another segment in The Great Deception series that others might see how the Christian Right has arrived at the positions they hold today, what is Scriptural (and what is not) in holding a Dispensationalist Premillennialist or Pre-Trib Rapture view of the Christian faith.

Be blessed!

²⁹ But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul. ³⁰ When you are in distress and all these things have happened to you, then in later days you will return to the LORD your God and obey him. ³¹ For the LORD your God is a merciful God; he will not abandon or destroy you or forget the covenant with your forefathers, which he confirmed to them by oath.

               There is more to this verse than the promise given believers concerning the latter days.  Tribulation is not just a split time period at the end of days spoken of in Revelation.  Tribulation also speaks to everyday trials in the Christian experience.  James told us to ‘count it all joy’ (Jas. 1:2 ) when unfortunate events occur, loved ones pass on, and the believer is faced with a different set of circumstances in life than when we left the house that morning.

James 1:12

Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive

the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.

            Today, a friend of mine blogged about the terrible tragedy in Haiti.  We all should pause and pray for those who have survived this natural disaster.  I watched one woman cry as she said to the reporter between her tears, ‘my entire family’.  He talked about how folks will begin a game of ‘pin the tail on the donkey’.  Someone has to take the rap for this; some might want to blame God and others may even blame themselves.

To paraphrase Him, he mentioned in one portion that ‘elevating our voice over the voice of God’ never works.  For starters, we’re listening but not to the right voice.  We’re off and running, in the wrong direction, but believing we are about the Lord’s business and following His will.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  We’re still about the business of doing just what we want, not what God wants, except we have given it different packaging, which brings me to my point.

Things happen.  We live in a fallen world whose prince is the ruler of darkness.  In this life, we will have tribulation.  Every disciple who walked with Christ while He ministered could attest to this truth.  If life was perfect, we wouldn’t need Jesus.  We wouldn’t really need anyone, would we?  In perfection, we have sufficiency.  None of us are wholly sufficient.  On someone or something, all of us rely.  Our lives are based on the premise of scarcity; we have unlimited wants and limited resources. 

At our core lie basic and inescapable needs.  We are human.  Food is necessary to sustain life.  There is a limited supply, which is directly proportionate to the amount of rainfall we receive annually and fluxes in population.  We need shelter; humans were not made to withstand the elements like the beasts of the field.  We need companionship; people need people.  Even the most solitary soul has some family and a few friends.  Even creatures find mates.  These are the basic needs of our species.  If one of them is not met in the time necessary to sustain life the species could become extinct.  Therein lies our flaw; we are imperfect beings in an imperfect world.  And it doesn’t mean God hates us nor does He tempt us.

James 1:13

When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;

It only means we are human and things happen.  Sometimes, those things are unfair.  In this world, we will have tribulation.  And sometimes, we do things of our own volition that appear as tribulation when, in fact, it is not.  It is the consequences of sin playing out in our lives. 

James 1:14-15

When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

It is paramount that we listen for the shepherd.  The sheep know the shepherd.  There is no mistaking His voice when He calls, unless of course, you are a goat.  Then, it is easy to mistake a charlatan for the shepherd.  That charlatan could even be us; if our material possessions and selfish pursuits take God’s place in our lives.  To whom will you listen and to what will you pay homage?  There are folks out there who do these things.  They elevate the Creation over the Creator, every time.  If you ask them though, they will swear to you they only wish to do the will of God.  There’s only one problem; they are listening to the wrong voice and have been for a long time.  They give God limited scope, no room to work, then they expect great things in life.

• God, I’ll follow you if I don’t have to move out of my zip code.
• God, I’ll do what you say as long as it doesn’t involve changing my lifestyle.
• God, I’ll be all you want me to be as long as I don’t have to give up my friends.
• God, I’ll do your will as long as nothing changes in my life.  No one will even know I follow you unless they ask but that’s cool with you, right?
• God, I’ll follow you unless it involves a matter where my right to choose is violated.  After all, I know you’ll forgive me anyway.  That’s what grace is all about, right?
• God, I’ll follow you until it cramps my style.  Then, that’s where you begin to be the kind understanding Abba Father, right? 

Wrong.  Jesus said ‘Pick up your Cross and follow Me’.  It is non-negotiable and binding.  You were bought with a price and no longer your own.

I Corinthians 6:19 KJV

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God,

and ye are not your own?    

We have to keep our sights on the higher things.  If we do not, we stand the chance of being sucked under by life’s trials.  The weight of the load increases the longer we walk alone.  Before long, we’re knee-deep in the Slough of Despond and there’s not a soul in sight.  I was there once; actually, it was the first time I recall that sinking feeling and could not see a hand to grab.  Then again, sinking all the way to the bottom and leaving no evidence of my existence but a few bubbles after I was submerged did not seem like a bad idea.  Depression warps you a little.

April 2001

            No, this isn’t happening.  Multiple flashing lights, cops crawling all over the place, a car smashed into a concrete retaining wall at a great rate of speed, no witnesses, and a man with multiple injuries partially ejected and not thrown clear.  His life hung in the balance.  The safety belt that restrained him also injured him as its reluctance to free him resulted in his head hitting the pavement one too many times.  The ambulance, the phone calls, the ER, the sea of unknown faces rushing to stabilize what was left of this young man.  Paralyzing fear and horror courted stark reality and the ensuing silence that hung like a veil over a man who could not speak for himself. 

How can it be so dark in the middle of the day?  In the court of real life, he was unimportant but in the court of my heart, he was my knight in shining armor.  From the age of 17, I had known no other love.  I was 32 years of age and that reality was slipping.  My mind would not take hold for many months hence.  I just sat and waited for any word, any movement, and a hope that love really does sustain us and conquer all.

            Everyone wanted to lay blame.  It was a hit-and-run driver.  He was clipped.  He was driving too fast for conditions.  There were a million scenarios but the truth would never be known.  It was locked in the injured brain of my beloved and the doctors told us trauma patients never recall the moments preceding or post-impact.  Depending on the extent of his brain damage, he may never be able to tell us anything.  In the four months he was comatose, I became a prolific writer and petitioner of the throne.  Our wedding was scheduled for August 9, 2002.  I stared into the abyss and awaited God’s answer.

            When the answer came, I was still unprepared.  I felt like a failure that for all my prayers, my love, my efforts he was no further along.  His improvement stopped six months after he awakened.  He would never recover, lead a full life, have the mental capacity to be a husband, or a father.  While fathering a child was biologically feasible, he did not have the mental capacity to be a parent.  And I was faced with the worst decision of my life as his guardian. 

            In order to receive the care he needed to receive, he first had to be declared mentally incompetent.  These are papers a person should never have to sign for someone they love.  I “blamed” me, kept the failure cycle going.  I hadn’t prayed enough, loved him enough, and I should have been there.  He should not have been in Phoenix.  We should have married earlier (the other three times he proposed and I delayed). 

I had all these things I wished to accomplish professionally beforehand.  I was such a planner; I planned my way right out of a life.  If, if, if…and he would not have been at that location on that day…without me.  Now, I’m the louse who has to sign this paper stating he is without the capacity to manage his own affairs, that he might receive aid and round-the-clock care, and that care must be inside a facility.   I felt like such a traitor.  Yet, I was the guardian of all his secrets. 

I remembered the man that he was, not what he had become.  I knew how proud he was and how we would have felt, if he had known.  Dear God, give me the strength.  If it took the last ounce of breath in my body, I would protect him from prying eyes and loose lips blathering on about his limitations.  After one visit that did not go well, I determined no one would see him.  I would rather die than stand by while someone made fun of him.

Everyone was so intent on what was right or wrong in his life.  Everyone was a judge and jury convicting him of this, that, and the other thing.  I looked at his sister one day and said, “Folks have this all backwards; the lesson here is not for him.  It is for us, the ones left behind.  What does he learn?  He lacks the mental capacity to absorb an exacted judgment on his life.  The lesson is for the impacted, not the impaired.”

WHAT DO I DO WITH ME?

Until that day, my dreams untrue
Love came alive, when I met you

Those caring eyes saw through me
Touching fate that calmed life’s sea

Dreams unfolded before our eyes
With hope enough to touch the skies

Lost moments in a most tender kiss
Are memories, times I surely miss

Files in your mind are upside down
But I remember and, then I frown

You cannot recall our last vacation
Or the quick kiss in the train station

You don’t recall how you wore your hair
At our pictures, you just sit and stare

I pray for a key to reopen the door
Hope you’ll remember just once more

Touching fate that turned life’s sea
I sit and ask, “What do I do with me?”

Copyright 2007.  Tina Diane “T.D.” Mitchell for Wordlover Writing.  All rights reserved.

* * * * * *

Disengaged, Excerpt (Chapter Two)

Large chocolate eyes consumed the gaunt countenance whose large cheek bones jutted from beneath while the rest disappeared.  Hastily cropped hair clotted with blood from surgery was combed away from the face.  His chest mirrored the cage on his head with a noticeable arch in the center, not an ounce of flesh to be found.   His frame played hide and seek with the sheet, slightness rumored beneath rumples and folds.  A large purple hole lie at the base of his throat where the tracheotomy had been removed.

“Baby boy, you have a visitor,” said his mom.

“A very special visitor too,” said his dad.

“Yeah,” said Joe to the wall, unable to turn and lie flat.

“He had his trach taken out today.  We wanted to surprise you.  He can talk!” said dad.

I stood like a soldier away from the bed, unsure of my next move.  Inside this shell of body, was the heart, which beat with mine.  Would he remember?  Could he?

I stepped forward to his paralyzed side.  The machine prevented standing on his right.  So, I placed my hand on his arm and leaned over, not knowing what to say.

My throat closed with tears and bated breath, leaning until his eyes met mine, nose to nose. I looked into the darkness hoping for light.  His breath caught in his chest, his eyes filled with tears and returned my gaze without words.  The world went away in a hush of screams and cries, unaware the whole family was overcome. 

“I knew you’d come,” he said.

“Was there ever any doubt?” I said.

“No!  I went to heaven you know.”

“You did?”

“Yes, and I saw God.  He talked to me.”

“What did he say, honey?”

“He told me it was time to come home but I said no, you have to let me come back and get my girl.  I promised to never do anything bad again, if I could come back.”

“Really?”

“Yes, I asked God to let me live because we have to get married. And do you know what he said?”

“What?”

“He said it was okay.  And, let me come back.  He told me you would come here. And, you did!  I knew you’d come!”

“God never lies, does He, sweetie?”

“Nope!”

He was still in there somewhere.  He knew me.  And, in that moment, there was not a person on the planet who could have thrown me a negative.

I tore my eyes from his to see the tears of his sister, his father holding his mother as she sobbed.

“They told us his emotions were gone!” cried mom.  “He knows you!”

“Ah, whadda they know anyway, right, honey?” His dad held his mother tight, so glad for this small victory today.

There were more mountains to climb, much road to travel in recovery.  A vacancy remained in his eyes, an innocence to be feared.   I prayed the Lord would fill him once more with clarity and reason.  As the doctor approached for his evening rounds, we had great news.  We held fast and close to that moment for tomorrow offered different fare and a new set of issues came to light, never before known but where there is love, there is always hope.

Copyright 2007.  Tina Diane “T.D.” Mitchell for Wordlover Writing.  All rights reserved.

* * * * * *

January 2010

            Many years have passed but a heart never forgets.  There was a lesson to be learned; it was my job to hear my Father’s voice correctly and walk forward in faith, hope, and love.  Somehow, love remains and it hopes to find another place to ignite.  It finds its own fuel, spreads, and lights in the heart of another until the Earth is aflame with its goodness.  It manifests and keeps recreating itself time and again.  It has no beginning or ending, it just is, and we accept it with open arms.  For those of us fortunate to have had it and held it close, we know its worth.  We thank the Lord for the opportunity to have it even if it was brief because if we had the chance, we’d do it all over again.   Why?  Being loved is the best thing in the world.

* * * * * *

IF I HAD THE CHANCE

 I went to Lake Michigan in my mind today,
Hoped it would wash my cares away.

Instead, I found a moment, a day

When my world stopped, you might say.

Memories called and danced on the breeze.
The cinema rolled on; “Marry me, please.”
Holding hands walking that frosty night,
Frozen tide made pillows of moonlight.

In that moment, love was not mere commodity.
It was hope; joy wrapped in one promise to me.
The love in our hearts warmed that February night,
Rose petals on the floorboards and a Bic for light.

In the heart of the young, love takes flight,
One kiss from you brought on the daylight.
Would I have taken this road again on the sand,
If I thought one day, you couldn’t hold my hand?

Would I have ventured forth and taken a chance,
Knowing you’d be stolen by cruel circumstance?
If I had the chance, would I do it all over again?
Yes, I would, truly would, my love, my friend!

Copyright 2007.  Tina Diane “T.D.” Mitchell for Wordlover Writing.  All rights reserved.

* * * * * *

So, the lesson really is for those left behind.  It is a lesson in LOVE.

* * * * * *

REMIND ME, DEAR LORD

Roll back the curtain of memory now and then
Show me where you’ve brought me from
and where I could have been
Just remember I’m a human and humans forget
So, remind me. Remind me, dear Lord.”
- Dottie Rambo