Is Dispensationalism a cult?

In one of my threads, I brought up a good book by a dispensationalist, CR.Stam and was promptly called out by our works required-charged to do your best protestant, jar.. jar has always had a trademark scripture that summarizes his beliefs, taught to him ages ago by his family. Of course we know that the Bible says whatever it is we quote-mine it to say, so there will always be discussion. In this topic, I want to discuss whether or not there is any merit to the teachings of CR Stam and other dispensationalists. The question is whether there is a new requirement for believers(or anybody, really) that is not emphasized by Jesus and/or is a human invention rather than a Biblical Principal.

Salvation is a free gift and is never earned through works. Doing good works, however, can be evidence of a transformed mind. Critics would of course say that a believer would never skate through life without doing good works. The goats may bray otherwise.....

​

Dispensationalism makes sense if one believes that the Bible is more than simply human communication to other humans for a human motive.

​

In this topic, I want to discuss some of the arguments used by dispensationalists and will also bring up what the critics say.

​

Faith & Belief might be best.

​

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Why must everything be "marketing" with you? Are you suggesting that the common understanding for the first 1400-1500 years is the true way of interpreting scripture? Keep in mind that the printing of books had barely begun and that 90% of people were illiterate anyway.I am more interested in examining this so-called marketing ploy....are you suggesting that dispensationalists don't read the Bible?

I am never vindictive with jar...but he does force me to examine my beliefs so i often call him out on certain things....what started my topic was his insinuation that i had joined a cult. The purpose of this topic is to hopefully try and show why its not a cult. My church has a very gifted Pastor who is one of the better preachers out there...he is a literalist to a large degree but at this time i see no problem with literal interpretations of scripture...after all, most christian pastors in the US simply make stuff up....just listen to TBN! As far as my beliefs go, I am more inclined to believe based on biblical scripture rather than simply adopting secular wisdom. I dont really respect most secular wisdom...it has not helped our society. Noted Addictions expert, Patrick Carnes, says that our society is becoming massively addicted and that the next wave of addictions will be a veritable tsunami...fueled in large part by social media and electronic obsession...it all is connected...health care costs, the attitudes of society...so, nwr, I am very much in respect of jar when he challenges my beliefs...and am not attacking him so much as prodding him to challenge me. Lets examine some Bible verses that are used by dispensationalists to show some of their theology......

Yes, lets examine the term....what makes RC the "father church" and Protestants a "cult" for example? surely its not simply the newest step child that gets labled as such....hmmm..lets ask Mr.Dictionary...

You seem to believe that I never think for myself. The church that I belong to now is very community oriented and is not wealthy at all. We are in the heart of the inner city. Good points, both. You are challenging me to think...this is one thing I always liked about you... I am asking what it was that people believed back then that was in any way better or more logical than what is being taught now. Believe it or not, I question many things, but am not so doubtful as others might be. When you ask me if I have ever read the Bible, for example, I can say that I read it regularly now...and much of what it says makes sense to me... Personally, I make no distinction between saved and lost, or unenlightened people. I do believe that Paul was inspired and not simply a Jew in search of building a franchise. The fact that his ideas differ from Jewish ideas only shows me that dispensationalists may be on to something when they talk of the difference between the Kingdom of Israel and the Mystery for the Gentiles. Can we discuss some of the scriptures and question what it is that is taught by these new kids on the block?

Because the bible is explained in a way that makes more sense.I don't like the idea that Jesus was never born of a virgin and is likely not alive. I simply don't accept that. While I may allow that God expects us to question things and think for ourselves, I believe that many people deny the need for Christ or the power. This world will never solve its problems through logic, reason, and reality alone.Thats for starters.

Please show me where the Bible contradicts anything that I believe..there is ample suggestion that Jesus is alive.

To start with, (and it is here that I want participants in this thread to know that I believe the words,phrases,and books that make up the Bibles that I use(KJV,NKJV,NIV,STRONGS CONCORDANCE,ESV,The Message) are not simply ideas that originated in the minds of men.)I am believing that the Bible is inspired teaching. GDR brings up the point that for him, Jesus is the living word and that He defines the book, rather than the book defining Him. I believe that Jesus is alive and that the Word is living and active.Given that, I agree with what is taught--although I DO question it, or I would never start a topic like this. As far as thinking for myself...yes, I DO think for myself within the context of my belief. One of my favorite scriptures is this one: Proverbs 3:5-6~Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight. I don't want to avoid responsibility at all--I simply believe that Gods wisdom is greater than my own wisdom. For the purposes of our discussion, I am willing to ask questions--but keep in mind that I do believe that my beliefs are an answer...otherwise I would be an atheist.

quote:

---

I wasn't going to participate in this thread as, as far as I'm concerned, you're just counting angels on pinheads, but really, do you not think that those two statements contradict each other just a bit?

---

Only if your belief lies in yourself as the source of wisdom and only if God was not real.

When we look at a passage, we ask ourselves the following questions:1) Who said it?2) To whom was it being said?3) Which time period was it in?(for example...before or after the resurrection...)4) Circumstances and context.

Keep in mind that we people here at EvC don't really know each other. All the evidence that we have about one another stems from the statements and posts that we make. I have changed over the years, but you are right that in some ways--ways that you can see--I have not changed. I still believe in God...perhaps now more than ever. Thus, you could rightly assert that my self proclaimed attempts at questioning are a sort of confirmation bias for me. This is , I think, a trait of humanity. Rarely do people dramatically change their opinions or beliefs. Do you have any anecdotal observations to disprove my observation? I mean...come on...we both know jar, for example. Has he changed much in the past ten years? Has Tangle? Ringo? Faith? And again...all that we have is anecdotal evidence...just look at anyones old posts...in fact, Jon...the one whom I have seen change here at EvC is you. You have made more intelligent posts than you used to make. You are still a thorn at times, though you do so with perhaps more noble motives...though I'll let the audience decide.Getting back on topic--as far as my faith and belief go, I am still a Christian and likely won't change. Intellectually, the arguments against my beliefs are somewhat sound. Heartwise and heartfelt, I am unconvinced. And thats the bottom line,really. For me at least. I judge men more based on their heart and soul than I do based on their intelligence. And these feelings come out of longtime posters...you can sense it through the words that they write. At least I do.

how does favoring a scripture confirm lack of thought?

Yes.Here is a better summation of what Mid Acts dispensationalists believe:

quote:

---

Grace Bible College's constituents differ from most other dispensationalists in their understanding of the ministry of the Apostle Paul. Whereas most fundamentalists and dispensationalists regard the ministry of Paul to be an outgrowth of the ministry of Christ and Peter, the college interprets the Pauline mission as a distinct break from the past. In the view of the college and others in the "Grace Movement," Christ and Peter's mission was solely directed to the nation of Israel and sought to fulfill Old Testament promises of a messianic kingdom to Israel. Paul's mission is distinct in that it is directed to the entire world, with no nation or peoples occupying a privileged position, and has as its realization a spiritual and universal "Church, the Body of Christ," which consists of all Christians in the current dispensation (as opposed to the "Kingdom Church" of Christ and Peter). Christ is the "head" of the Church, the Body of Christ, not the "king," as he is for the Kingdom Church.

​

The College teaches that prior to Paul, a mission to the world, with the unification of Jews and Gentiles into one Body, was a "mystery" that had no antecedents in Biblical revelation. As such, the epistles of Paul are of particular importance for the Church, the Body of Christ. All scripture is "for" members of the Body of Christ, but only the Pauline epistles are "to" the Body of Christ. Accordingly, even Christ's and Peter's teachings and practices may not be strictly normative for Christians today, especially if they are not consistent with the teaching of Paul. For example, Christ worshipped on the Sabbath and, prior to the ministry of Paul, Peter continued to regard Jewish dietary regulations as Christian virtues. Instead, Paul rejected the mandatory observance of the Sabbath and Jewish dietary regulations. Particularly important is the sacrament or ordinance of water baptism. The College maintains that Paul never regarded water baptism as necessary for full participation in the Christian community and that, as he continued to receive revelation from Christ, it became obsolete. Instead, "baptism by the Spirit," which brings Christians into the Body of Christ, is the only baptism that is now in effect for this dispensation (though transitional elements are found in Paul's ministry, when Paul still practiced water baptism early in his ministry to the complete cessation of baptism by the end of his ministry). On the other hand, the College still regards the Lord's Supper as a Church ordinance.

---

I was spurred back into this discussion after reading comments about Calvinism in another thread. Upon re-reading the Five Points Of Calvinism I was convinced that I too disagreed with much of Calvinist ideology and yet I was moved to go back to the roots of what I have been taught to see if it made more logical sense. So far it does. Not only is it an issue whether or not people get their ideas from the Bible rather than other like minded believers, it is a definite issue as to how reliable the Bible is as a source versus human wisdom, logic, reason, and reality. I differ from many of my fellow believers in that I am unafraid to use logic, reason, and reality to a point. I do believe, however, that God exists, that He desires to interact with humanity (through Jesus Christ and the words of the Bible) and that He also is rational, logical, and hopefully reasonable. I agree.

And this gets back to the issue of critical thinking versus belief. I have raised the question as to whether a critical thinker could also be a believer. As far as "Father Knows Best", one would think that belief in God presupposes that God knows more than we do, no? Unless of course one studies gods and theology from the bias that humans created all of these entities through literature. I personally do not believe that.

Actually, I recently heard a great sermon on your scriptural quote. The Cross And Our Self-Will - Zac Poonen Zac says that that scripture--your favorite about Lacrosse--is found in all four Gospels. He maintains that while many Christians profess to give their minds and emotions to God...far fewer aspire to give God their will on any consistent basis.A daily decision to follow Christ and deny oneself is not accomplished through impartation nor magic. It is (as you have mentioned) based on what we do. And I readily admit that much of my prayer life focuses on Phat more than others---this is a problem for me and one that I am aware of.