CONFESSIONS OF A (FORMER) DISPENSATIONALIST

I wrote the following post around December of last year, but was hesitant to publish it.  Uni and I had left the church we had attended since moving to Oklahoma.  We were at the time searching for a church home, although I felt I'd be more comfortable staying home on Sundays.  We have since joined a more "traditional" non-dispensational, though still evangelical, church where we feel more at home than we had for a long time.

I was moved to publish this after reading an article by Rachel Held Evans, "Why millennials are leaving the church."  Near the end of the article she stated "these trends are true not only for millennials, but also for many folks from other generations."  This pair of 75+ers can't help but agree.

The following is what I wrote:

Sometimes people grow apart in a relationship, and there are times when this leads to a separation.  For a number of years I have found myself growing more and more distant from a tradition that I have been involved in most of my life.  I have finally separated myself from it, though it has not been easy.

Don't worry; I'm not speaking about my relationship with my wife Uni.  We are if anything, closer to one another than ever.  Rather we have been totally together in this move.  I'm speaking about church tradition.

And don't worry; we're not apostatizing.  We haven't left the faith.  As a matter of fact, I believe our faith has never been stronger.

However, it seems that as we have grown in our faith, we have found ourselves more and more alienated from the church tradition we have been involved in.  We have felt ourselves the objects of discrimination even among long-time friends in that tradition -- and most of our closest friends have been within that tradition.

We have not been the only ones who have moved; we've found that this tradition has been moving as well -- only in the opposite direction.

This tradition is that branch of evangelical Christianity that is known as Dispensationalism - especially as is taught in Bible churches and other closely related churches.

My problem isn't with Dispensationalism as such; I still hold some of its principles as a method of understanding the Scriptures.  My one big disagreement is with its extremes -- especially in the area of eschatology, the doctrine of the last things.  Another disagreement is with where these doctrines often lead to politically.

Dispensationalists believe, as do most Christians, that Jesus is going to return some day to rule on earth in His Kingdom.  However, Dispensationalists have a whole scenario affixed to this belief, some of the details of which can be demonstrated from the Scriptures, some of which are only conjecture and many of which seem pure fiction.  (See the Left Behind series of novels.)

Some of the details which we're told must occur preceding the 2nd coming:

·       The nation of Israel will be back in the land, although in unbelief.

·       A great world ruler -- the Antichrist -- will arise and bring about what is known as "The Great Tribulation" -- a 7 year period during which the nation of Israel will suffer greatly and ultimately be converted.

·       However, before The Great Tribulation, all true believers in Jesus will be "raptured" bodily to heaven and those who have already died will be resurrected.

·       At the end of this period Jesus will return in triumph to reign on earth for a thousand years, followed by His final judgment and eternal Kingdom. 

I am not here trying to dispute these various teachings.  I even agree with some of them, although not with the certainty that I once held.  My problem is the other inferences that are drawn from these, as well as those added to them.

·       A "Christian Zionism" that supports the present nation of Israel and demands that the U. S. government support Israel financially and militarily.  A great part of the pro-Israel lobby is in fact not Jewish but "Christian."  There are even "Christian" organizations that promote sending Jews back to the land.

·       A fear of "globalism," which often demonstrates itself in a sort of pro-American isolationism.  After all, President Obama may not be the Antichrist, but he's setting things up for his coming and acceptance.

·       A hand-wringing fear that our "Christian" nation is sliding downward into a "last days" immorality, which also is setting matters up for The Great Tribulation.

Though many Dispensationalists are rational, educated people, there seems to be an underlying fear among many, promoted by TV preachers and the social media.  Many seem to live in some sort of alternate reality.

All of these beliefs are somehow tied to the politics of the right.  The irony is that if we hold to a core belief that Jesus is coming back we should have nothing to fear.

So I must say goodbye to this tradition.  I still have many friends who are Dispensationalists, with whom I hope to remain friends.  We are brothers in Christ.  However, I also have lost a few friends and feel estranged from some.  What  seems sad to me is that most of this estrangement is not due to my theological views, but to my political views (or lack of the same).

ANOTHER OPEN LETTER TO MY ATHEIST FRIEND

"(The lady) doth protest too much, methinks."

Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III, Scene II, 242

Dear Mike:

I've come to realize that Atheism, as you often express it, is not simply a disbelief in God, but what seems to be a genuine hostility against all things religious, and especially Christianity.  You seem to delight in pointing out our "superstitious" ignorance and the superiority of your beliefs (Oops! lack of beliefs).  Sometimes I wonder if the above quote is applicable to you.

You also delight in pointing out the sins and evils committed by those who claim to be followers of Christ.  I regret that I must agree with you that the church has often been right there with the rest of humankind in perpetrating evils.  I offer no excuses.  When evils are done by those who name the Name of Christ, I believe I feel it more than you, as I feel my own propensity to evil.  I believe that Christ Himself grieves more than I.

I think you said something once on your blog about how we should work to make the world a better place (sorry I can't find the reference).  Perhaps you haven't noticed that many Christians are involved in doing just that, even though we don't regard this world as our permanent home.  Christians around the world are involved -- often taking the lead -- in bringing medicine, education, food and disaster relief to those most in need.  They are involved in fighting human trafficking and in restoring its victims.  Check out the faith of those serving in your local soup kitchen.  When the tornados devastated our area of OK, the churches were some of the first there aiding in the cleanup and rebuilding.

So back to your Atheism, I propose that you think through a simple flow chart.  These seem to me reasonable alternatives to decide on.

1.  Either there is a God or there isn't.  If there isn't, then you can continue in your Atheism correctly and you don't have to waste your time fighting Him and His followers.

2.  But if there is a God, then He has either revealed Himself or He hasn't.  If He hasn't, I would suppose that Atheists would still be reasonably defensible in their attacks on those who believe He has.

3.  But if God has revealed Himself, then I would suppose you'd be under some obligation to examine the various claims made concerning His self-revelation.

I, along with others, happen to believe that God is real and that He has revealed Himself in the Bible and especially incarnated Himself in the person of Jesus.

I consider you still my friend and am hoping for more reasonable dialog.  However, if you persist in snipping line-by-line at everything you find on this blog, I'll not be publishing any more of your comments.

Your friend,

Bill

LET'S TALK ABOUT JESUS

Uni and I have been reading Philip Yancey's book, The Jesus I Never Knew.  Though the book was published in 1995 and I have been an avid reader of Yancey, I had never read this one until I found a copy in a used book store.  I've read excerpts from the book and even recommended it to others, but for some reason unknown to me I have simply overlooked it.  Perhaps it's best that we have waited to read it.  Perhaps at an earlier stage in our Christian life we would have been troubled by Yancey's statements.

[We have not yet finished reading, so this post is not intended to be a thorough review.]

Yancey's thesis in the book is apparently his "rediscovery" of Jesus.  His statement, "The Jesus I got to know in writing this book is very different from the Jesus I learned about in Sunday school.  In some ways He is more comforting:  in some ways more terrifying," informs us that reading this book will be an account of his voyage of discovery.  However, as Uni and I read aloud each morning from the book, we are not often startled by Yancey's claims.  Often we have made similar discoveries with having come from a similar background.  So our reaction to Yancey is a simple "Yes!" or "Amen."  We have read and compared the four Gospels many times and it seems that every reading adds details to our mental portrait of Jesus.

I believe that the typical picture of Jesus in most people's minds is incomplete, whether or not they claim to be His followers.  In my experience I have found that a major factor is ignorance of what the Bible itself, especially the four Gospels, says about Him.  For many the Gospels remain unread or only cursorily read; most of their knowledge comes from secondary sources -- sermons, devotional studies, books claiming to give us the final word on who He was or is.

One incident that spurred me to write this post was a guest interview on The Daily Show (7/17/2013) with the author of a new book about Jesus.  During the interview the author explained about how we really need to know the context in which Jesus lived in order to really understand Him; he talked much about Jesus as a man.  At first Uni and I found ourselves in agreement but I could almost predict what was coming:  Jesus is only a man!  Much of what was written about Him contains moral or spiritual truth, but isn't really fact.  The host was practically drooling with enthusiasm over this new portrait of Jesus, who was not at all similar to the ghost-like Jesus that he had heard of in his youth.

Well, yes, of course.  If our mental portrait of Jesus is of some surreal spiritual being, we might be attracted to this rugged non-conformist portrayed by many modern books.  Who wouldn't be?  The problem is that neither picture is complete.  It seems that many feel that they have to choose one or the other.

I believe that orthodox and evangelical Christianity has often overemphasized Christ as deity while ignoring His humanity.  We may fail to see that.  He lived His life on earth as a man and looked little different from the other Middle Eastern Jews He associated with (although Uni believes He probably looked like our friend Ahmed, a dark handsome Saudi Arabian).  He did not wear a halo.  He did not talk in King James' English or in red letters.

Our one-sided picture is not a new thing invented by 20th century fundamentalist Christians.  As Yancey notes, "The Apostles' Creed hustles through Jesus' life in one paragraph, beginning with His birth and skipping immediately to His death ..."

But Jesus' contemporaries saw Him as a man.  That's what made His claims so scandalous.  It was not a theophany - a ghost-like divine character that said things like:

"You have heard that it was said (i.e., in the Mosaic Law) ... but I tell you ... " ( Matthew 5:21, 22, 33, 34, etc.).

"... anyone of you who doesn't say goodbye to all his possessions is not able to be my disciple" (Luke 14:33).

"... before Abraham came to be, I am" (John 8:58).

"... no one comes to the Father, except through Me" (John 14:6).

It wasn't simply His radical political statements that got Him into trouble; it was His claims to authority, even deity.  His opponents understood Him better than many of our modern day "authorities."

"For this reason then, the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He was not only breaking the Sabbath, but was also saying God was His own Father, making Himself equal with God' (John 5:18).

They caught on!  We can't have Jesus as only a man no matter how we may admire Him.  He didn't leave His contemporaries that option.  If we accept His humanity, His manhood, then we also have to accept His claims.  Either that or reject Him altogether.

WILL GOD JUDGE AMERICA?

My previous post (CHRISTIANITY AND MORALITY?) brought forth comments that spurred my thinking further on some issues raised.

Bob's thoughts on God's judgment of nations were especially thought provoking: "Don't misunderstand; I believe that if a country (or an individual) follows God's principles, it can only benefit them. But God is not in the business of moral reform. He's in the business of creating new creatures in Christ Jesus

Sin surely causes death, and God warns about that. Jonah warned Nineveh that in 40 days their sins would cause Him to destroy them. The Canaanites' sins had reached the point of destruction during the time of Moses. And Sodom and Gomorrah had clearly reached the saturation point (though for reasons other than what we've often been taught).

But what sense would it make for God to prompt a culture to moral reform without the message of eternal life? It seems clear (at least to me) that his warnings were given so that people would remain alive to hear about His grace.

However, we can't warn of impending doom because we're not God. We have no idea, for example, where the United States stands on God's spectrum of sin (though we hear about it all the time)."

Of course Canadian Atheist's comment on Bob's comment was as would be expected: "Sounds extremely superstitious to me."

Bob's parenthetical remark that "... though we hear about it all the time" is so true.  Preachers, especially those on the right and those who fancy themselves as experts on biblical prophecy are often heard ranting on this topic.  Every natural disaster is interpreted as a sign of God's wrath, usually in regard to sexual sins, especially homosexuality.

Of course, those on the secular left often have similar sounding messages, only without God being mentioned.  Global warming, the gun culture, racism are often invoked as signs of the downfall of America.

But does God hold nations accountable?  Does He hold the United States of America accountable?  Will God judge America?  If so, by what criteria will our nation be judged?  I do not believe these are simply "superstitious" questions.  I do not believe they are only on the minds of preachers on the far ends of the spectrum.  Questions like these were on the minds of some of America's great leaders and thinkers.

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just" -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia (1784).

"Fondly do we hope -- fervently do we pray -- that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away.  Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said 'the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.'" -- Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address (1865).

Both were pondering the horrible sin of human slavery.  It is doubtful, of course, that Jefferson's Deistic thinking led him to imagine an apocalyptic judgment on America.  And Lincoln's enigmatic faith seemed to lead him to believe that the Civil War itself could be God's judgment.

The prophets of the Old Testament pronounced judgments on the nations around them, often seeing those judgments worked out by other nations.  Even God's covenant nation of Israel was not exempt; in fact, judgment seems more pronounced against that nation.

The New Testament does not seem as concerned with the nations as with the human race as a whole and with individual human beings.  However, there are a few passages that do stand out, most having to do with the end of this age.

One that I have written on before is Matthew 25:31-46 (SHEEP OR GOATS).  Jesus is speaking of His return in glory to reign on earth.  The nations are to be gathered before Him and are to go either into His Kingdom or into eternal fire.  The criteria are not given as their sexual conduct or their violence; they are judged solely on their treatment of those whom Jesus terms "the least of these" -- the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the unclothed, the prisoner.

Is the good old USA going to be there?  Which way will they (we?) be sent?

So Bob, I agree with your comments.  I'll not attempt to ascertain "where the U.S. stands on God's spectrum of sin."  But I do believe that God holds this nation accountable.

My task, however, as a follower of Christ is primarily to follow Him, to hold myself accountable and not be preoccupied with America's destiny, but the destiny of the people of America that I am in contact with.

See also:  THE TWO KINGDOMS.