Below I have listed several questions that I have for any of you dispensationalists out there. My intentions as I have posted this series of articles and as I pose the following questions are as noble as a sinners intentions can be; I have no desire to incite anger, and my writings on this topic, though at times pointed and critical, are purely meant to redeem my own understanding and the understanding of others regarding how we are to read the Bible. I don't claim to have come to a full grasp on this or any theological topic; all we can do is present our theology, "per tendo", in the present. I must admit that I had hoped that this series would have provoked more dialogue but as I am aware, there probably aren't many dispensationalists who visit this blog. Nevertheless, here are the questions:
Several Provocative & Exposing Questions for Dispensationalists
1. Did Jesus come simply to offer His earthly kingdom to the nation of Israel, or instead, did He come to proclaim that His Kingdom was near at hand even then; how do dispensationalists deal with the passages that appear to present the "now" nature of the Kingdom; does the dispensational view force its adherents to claim that Christ presented two different Kingdoms during His incarnate time on earth?
2. What is the nature of the Kingdom offered by Jesus; was it earthly and time bound or was it a spiritual Kingdom; was it both?
3. If the Kingdom offer was "legitimate" (legitimate in the sense which I understand it to be taken by dispensationalists, namely that the nation of Israel could have accepted the earthly kingdom at that time) would the cross have happened or even been necessary if the Jews had received it?
4. Was there a specific point in the ministry of Christ where God considered the Kingdom postponed due to the Jews rejection of it?
5. If the answer to question number 4 is yes, then what are the differences in the Kingdom Christ offered before the Jews rejected it and the Kingdom He offered after they had rejected it?
6. Who are the partakers in the New Covenant; to whom are the promises of the New Covenant made?
7. If the New Covenant was made with the nation of Israel alone , then why do Christians with a dispensational hermeneutic partake of the Lord’s Table?
8. If the promises of the Mosaic Covenant were conditional, and the Jews didn’t live up to those conditions, then on what basis can they charge God with injustice (the hypothetical objection Paul answers in Romans 9) if God doesn't establish a future earthly Kingdom that is primarily Jewish in nature? God was not obligated to fulfilling the promises of the Mosaic covenant after the nation of Israel broken the covenant…so why would they still expect the fulfillment of those promises?
9. Do dispensationalists believe that the promises God made to Abraham were intended to be fulfilled specifically to the nation of Israel, upon their obedience to the commands of the Mosaic Covenant?
No comments:
Post a Comment