Believing All the Prophetic Scriptures
by Rev. G. Lubbers Taken from The Standard Bearer
Chapter 1 (Luke 24-25)
Strange as it may sound to those who have
made a study of the manifold writings of Premillennialists, particularly of
those denominated "Dispensationalists," the real question is not that
the latter, in particular, insist on a literal interpretation of the Bible in the
prophetic writings, but that they do not really believe "all that the prophets have
spoken." Such fail to follow the clear-cut instructions of Jesus to His disciples, and they
do not interpret the Scriptures as did Jesus on the evening of His resurrection day!
To say this requires not only courage but also the
conviction that we are able to show this from the teachings of the Bible itself.
In this series of articles or essays we shall with God's
help attempt to show the Scriptural teaching concerning the doctrine of the
"last things" as the fulfillment of the more sure word of prophecy. This is
not a mere word of man, but it is what holy men wrote being moved by the Holy
Spirit. And this is the Word which shines as a light in a dark place until the day
dawn and the day-star arise in our hearts (II Peter 1:19). And we would emphasize at
the outset that, in this study, we are interested in learning from the Old
Testament prophecy what God promised to the "church" in the Old Testament
Dispensation concerning the greater glory which should be hers when "all nations
will be blessed in thee," that is, in Abraham (Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:18).
For that will be the time of the salvation which God has prepared before the face of
all peoples, a light to lighten the Gentiles and the glory of thy people Israel"
(Isaiah 40:5; 52:10; Isaiah 42:6; 49:6, 9).
We will pray for grace simply to believe all the words of
the prophets through whom God spoke unto the fathers in "sundry times
and in divers manners" (Heb. 1:1). This means that we must allow the
Scriptures to lead us into all the Scriptures. Only thus does the Holy Spirit lead us
into all the truth. An academic argument concerning the proper method of
interpretation and the correct application of the science of Hermeneutics has
great merit in the Seminary, but we are writing and unfolding the Scriptures. We
shall point out what we consider the proper method of interpreting a given passage when
we come to discuss the salient points which must be faced in this study of
Dispensational theology concerning the doctrine of the last things. This doctrine is called
Eschatology. Yes, we do have a doctrinal bias. So does the Premillennialist and the Dispensationalist,
be he a Pre- or Post-Tribulationist. The basic question is: who believes
all the Scriptures as the Old Testament is unfolded and interpreted by Jesus and
the Apostles in the New Testament Scriptures?
In these articles we
will take issue with various proponents of Dispensational theology and with the
position also of what is called historical Premillennialism. The difficulty of a fair presentation of Premillennialism is that there is no
official, ecclesiastic, confessional
statement of the Eschatology which it teaches. Many able writers can be cited, but there is no unanimity
between these writers on certain points of teaching. The Pre-Tribulationisst battles very elaborately with the
teaching of the Post-Tribulationist. This difference is on the question whether
the church of Christ will need to pass through the "tribulation
period" as is taught by the Post-Tribulationist,
or whether the church will be taken up in the "Rapture" before the
Tribulation period, which they call the "seven years" spoken of in
Daniel 9:27.
Now we will not be led astray at this point by entering
into the pro- and con-of the exegesis of Daniel 9:27, for this would entail
some rather basic exegesis of the entire ninth chapter of Daniel. To this we shall give
attention at the proper time and place. We only desire to point out that it is
not so simple to give a compendium view of the various shades of
Premillennialism in this essay.
However, we will need to point out that basic to all
Premillennialism is that the "church" in the New Testament Dispensation is
not the same as "Israel" in the Old Testament. Israel is the Jewish
nation of the Old Testament. And whereas the promises spoken of in the Old Testament
prophecies are given to Israel as a Jewish nation, and whereas these
prophetic promises concerning the restoration of the glory of Israel and of her
triumph over all her foes has not yet been fulfilled to Israel, and, whereas God is
faithful to fulfill these promises to this historic Israel, this fulfillment lies in the
future. That will be the Millennium Kingdom of one thousand years duration. And these
advocates of this view appeal to the teaching of Revelation 20:1-6 to attempt to sustain
this teaching of the future glory of the Jewish nation, the natural Israel. On this point,
all dispensationalists agree as well as historic Premillennialists.
All agree that the prophecies in the Old Testament never
speak of the church as being the "Israel of God." And that the glory
of Christ in the saints in the church is the realization of the restoration of
Israel from Babylon all unitedly deny. There will always be real and essential
differences between the church of God and the Kingdom of Christ. And, sad
to say, the number of those who hold to this position is legion. All agree that the
prophets never foresaw the gathering of the New Testament church among the Gentiles
at all. The "clock of prophecy" stopped at about the time of Pentecost and will
not begin to run again until the time of the Rapture and Tribulation period which is
the time of the ushering in of the Millennium.
All agree that there will be a period of the "Great
Tribulation" which will last seven calendar years. This will be the
period between the "Rapture," when the church will be taken up into
the air with Jesus as taught by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-52, and the second
coming of Christ. (Let it be well understood
that I refer to these passages as quoted and interpreted by the Premillennial writers and teachers.) The first coming of
Christ upon the clouds of heaven, according
to Dispensational teaching, will be sudden and unannounced. That will be the time of the "Rapture". Christ
will return also to assume His Kingdom in Israel on earth. That is then called the "revelation" of Christ as
spoken of in 1 Peter 1:13. Christ will then be revealed as the King in the
Kingdom of Israel, before the thousand years to inaugurate this reiign in earthly Jerusalem, to sit on the
throne of David.
This view of the doctrine of the last things entails
more than one bodily resurrection No less than three resurrections are
posited. First there is the "resurrection" of the righteous,
the church at the time of the "Rapture." Secondly, there is the resurrection of the
"tribulation saints," who are not really in the body of Christ,
according to
some (J. Dwight Pentacost, Scofield). Thirdly, there is the resurrection of the
wicked at
the end of the Millennium period, the final judgment of the wicked. After this there is the ushering
in of the "eternal state". Here in the eternal state the Jews will be the kingdom under
Christ, and the Gentiles, the body of Christ, will be under Christ as their
Head.
As to methodology, what is basic tto this entire rather elaborate view of
the difference
between the Kingdom and the church is that it follows what is purported to be literal
interpretation, particularly of the prophecies. Yet, even so, it is readily
admitted
that we must recognize figures of speech in the Old Testament prophecies
However, even so, always we must keep the "Kingdom" and the
"church" as referring to two different purposes in the plan of God.
Writes Charles Caldwell Ryrie,
...God has two distinctive purposes — one for
Israel and one for the Church. In the progress of revelation there has been no
change in the-meaning of these words, and they are kept distinct. The
"theological" principle of Hermeneutics may allow a blending of the
two, but true progressive revelation does not. After all, the same
hermeneutical principles must be applied to all revelation, regardless of the
time in which it was given.
To pursue the illustration of Israel and the Church further, the amillennialist's hermeneutics allow him to blur
the meanings of the two words in the
New Testament so that the Church takes over the fulfillment of the promises to Israel. In that view Israel is
the Church ... The dispensationalist
studies the words in the New Testament, finds that they are kept distinct, and therefore concludes that when
the Church was introduced God did
not abrogate the promises to Israel nor enmesh them into the Church. This is why the dispensationalist
recognizes two purposes of God and
insists in maintaining the distinction between Israel and the Church. And all this is based on an inductive study of
the use of the two words, not a
scheme superimposed on the Bible. In other words, it is built on a consistent use of the literal, normal, or plain
method of interpretation without the
addition of any other principle that will attempt to give respectability to some preconceived conclusions.
Dispensationalism is the result oof consistent application of the basic hermeneutical
principle of literal, normal, or plain interpretation. No other system of theology
can claim that. ("Dispensationalism Today" Pages 95-96) Such
then is the basic methodology of Dispensationalism. And the cited
quotation contains some very challenging words. I would almost denominate them
fighting words!
And we accept the
challenge cast our way!
But the basic question is, do the dispensationalists
with all their insistence on "literal, normal and plain interpretation" truly believe all
that the prophets have spoken? When Christ
comes to adjudge of our Scripture interpretation, the question will be whether this is really clinging to the
Head Christ and whether it is building upon
the foundation which has been laid by Paul and all the Apostles (1 Cor.
3:11-15) The determining of a method
of interpretation is not the first question. When Jesus talked to the two travelers to Emmaus,
these two men believed the Scriptures, the
prophets. However, they did not believe at that moment that the Christ must suffer all these things and thus enter into His
glory. Yes, they really believed that Israel
would be redeemed Israel, yes, the Israel (Luke 24:21). He would now
come and raise up His kingdom in Old
Testament Israel. However, they are called, "fools and slow of heart to believe all the prophets have
spoken." Had they believed all the
Scriptures in the Old Testament they would have understood that the Messiah
must suffer all these things as a Lamb led to the slaughter, in order to save
Israel, to redeem the people of God with
the precious blood as of a Lamb without spot or blemish. They would
not have stared themselves blind on those Scriptures which speak of the Messiah as
King, but they would have recognized that He is the Great High Priest, the
King-Priest after the order of Melchizedek.
And when all the Scriptures are preached by
Jesus and their eyes are opened to recognize the Messiah in the breaking of
the bread, then their hearts burn within them in holy and spiritual joy (Luke 24:32).
Now, my first objective is not to gainsay and correct
Premillennialists, but that the saints who read these lines may have their hearts
burn in them when all the Scriptures are opened as they were by Jesus on the
way to Emmaus, to Cleopas and the other brother.
Previous Article Winter 2005 Front Page Next Chapter Next Article