1. There is NOT A SINGLE DISPENSATIONALIST who believes the rubbish you have stated above, viz, that "National Israel" is a substitute for Christ. Where did you come up with this nonsense?
Sorry to disagree, but I only mentioned it
because I heard a Dispensationalist state it. Can't remember which one it was. I've been listening to Jack Hibbs, Don Stewart and Tom Hughes the last couple of months, and it was one of them. I remember it quite distinctly, because I thought "how wrong that is, Jesus is the whole point of the bible".
Now...I also think I need to mention, due to your wording above, that I don't think the intent (of the speaker I was listening to or myself), in stating that "Israel was the point, or focus of scripture" meant that Israel was a subsitute for Christ, as you have put it above. In other words, I'm not saying that Israel is able to redeem, and I don't think the Dispensational speaker was meaning that either. I think the point was (and I still think it's incorrect) was that while Christ was Messiah, and therefore Saviour, Israel was still front and centre of the whole story and point of scripture. The OT was about them, and we must therefore understand the future purposes to be about them.
My point is that we need to see Israel as the vehicle God used to bring his purposes in Christ to bear. Yes, he loves Israel due to this, but Israel must still take a back seat. Therefore to state, as I heard this speaker put it, that Israel is "the whole point of scripture" is erroneous and takes the focus off what truly is the most important thing.
2. There is NOT A SINGLE DISPENSATIONALIST who believes in reverting to the shadows when Christ is the reality. More nonsense. So the "folly" is something which you have concocted in your own mind to further disparage Dispensationalists. We have people here mocking genuine Christians as "dispies", when they should be showing some respect to those who have actually searched the Scriptures, instead of simply going along with Catholic doctrines adopted by Protestants without any protest.
Well, what do you call it when you say that the temple will be rebuilt in the Millennium and sacrifices reinstated? I don't swallow the nonsense of it being in 'memory or honor' of Christs true sacrifice. No, his was once for all, and we remember and honor it just fine in his absense with the cup and bread. In his presence going back to killing and blood would be an abomination.
Look, you know I don't disrespect "dispies". But I do have honest questions about their system. If you truly feel it stands up under scrunity, how about simply answering my questions without resorting to the same sort of accusations and cheap shots you feel are being leveled at you? Your implication that I haven't searched the scriptures on my view, and have just shunted along after the RCC on it are, as I said, cheap shots.
Anyone with a fair and open mind can read any book (or article) by any Dispensationalist, and they will see that every one of them believes in (1) the centrality of Christ in Scripture, (2) types of Christ revealed from Adam onwards, (3) the finished work of Christ as the sole basis of salvation, and (4) the New Covenant as having superseded the Old, which means that the types and shadows have now been replaced by the reality of Christ.
Yes, and this is what often confuses me. You (general usage) believe that the shadows and types have been replaced by Christ, and the that old has become new...but when it comes to your eschatological system, there doesn't seem to be a logical follow through on those thoughts. While, yes, we can draw from scripture God's faithfulness and love towards Israel because of his promises to the forefathers, there is also enough scripture to thoroughly paint Christ as fulfilling all the promises and positions that was made to Israel. Christ IS the seed, he IS the true Israel, all promises find their yes and amen IN him. If we know that all scripture points and leads to Jesus, that the old covenant was pointing to our need for him, the new uniting us to him and the people of God become so after only finding salvation in him...then why do Dispensationalists insist that Israel MUST still be front and centre? I agree that God, through faithfullness and to his own glory, will gather the Jews to him again before the end, but there does not seem to be anything in scripture to suggest it is covenantally imperitive.
What Covenant Theology and Replacement Theology (and all other discordant theologies) have done is DENIED THE TRUTH: that God has an eternal plan and purpose for the Church, with Christ as its Head, and that God also has an eternal plan and purpose for redeemed and restored Israel on earth, with Christ as their King (while He is also King of kings and Lord of lords over the whole earth).
The burden of proof is on the naysayers to prove that this is false, strictly on the basis of THE WHOLE BIBLE.
Well, I don't know here. I think with all the verses that show that the people of God are those who are "in Christ", I think the burden of proof must then rest on those who want to claim there is a special distinctive between the "Gentile" believers and the "Jewish"...future believers? Especially after all the work Paul goes to to break down the wall between to two peoples.
