Archive for dispensation of the mystery
Theology For A Rainy Day
Since the Lord saved me by His grace in spring of 2004, I’ve come to a better understanding of my place in the cosmos. I don’t say “in the kingdom,” because I don’t believe the church and the kingdom are the same. But in the cosmos there is a niche for us all, small and insignificant though it may be.
I think that part of the secret to maintaining a Christian perspective is to remember who is administering the affairs of this world. Our worldview must be a Biblical one. At present, the world is run by Satan and fallen man. E.W. Bullinger writes:
“God is not administering, ordering, or ruling [the world's] affairs; though He is over-ruling all things in order to secure the accomplishment out of His secret counsels and purposes. His rule, and Dominion is in abeyance; and, while He is silent, He is, by His Spirit whom He has sent, bringing the world in guilty, of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment” (The Great Cloud of Witnesses, pg. 318).
A sober realization of these facts will keep our eyes looking up to Christ as the one hope we have. He alone is the bright and morning star (Rev. 22: 16). And so we get theology for a rainy day. Those who realize their high calling, as unfolded in the prison epistles of Paul (Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy), will learn to sit loose to the things of this world.
Moses the man of God once said: “So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts to wisdom” (Psa. 90: 12). Only when the world’s image is effaced from our hearts will we ever truly know what real Christianity is about. Man must be made to learn how frail he is, that all carnal security may be shaken. He must understand that the sands of this aeon are fast running out. Until Christ comes to bind the usurper and establish His kingdom, the daily round of human existence is futile at best.
Christian discipleship can sometimes be burdensome. As pilgrims, our journeying to and from leads us sometimes to view ourselves as outsiders – mere visitants waiting for the “calling on high” (Phil. 3: 14); and so we forget our role as witness-bearers in this world. That is what a Christian must become, though, if he would serve his Lord properly: a lamp shining in the midst of a dark and unregenerate (and might I say, doomed?) world. To keep precious oil in our vessels, we must remain in communion with Him Who sits at the right hand of God. This entails setting our affections on things above, not on things on the earth (Col. 3: 1-2).
Moses knew what he was talking about when he said, “Let us number our days.” The fact that the things are this world are so fleeting gives us a standing reminder that we have a commission to carry out, which is more important than our own agendas. That commission is to bear witness to the Gospel in whatever way we can. All other programs must be subservient to this.
But most of us fail miserably when it comes to personal witnessing. I speak from experience. Side-tracked by ephemeral issues, we too often forget that bearing witness to the truth of the Gospel is infinitely more important than refuting error, in whatever shape it may come.
But like clouds that obscure the sun, those things that divert attention from Divine priorities tend to go away after a heavy rain. Solomon once said, “It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go the house of feasting; for that is the end of all men; and the living will lay it to his heart. Sorrow is better than laughter: for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better” (Ecc. 7: 2-3).
Solomon did not know when he’d die, but he knew it could be at any moment. And then he would go down to the grave, not to awaken until the trumpet called him forth. Surely without this hope to sustain him, existence would have been a miserable thing.
It was the hope of resurrection that made life worth living. It was the simple fact that also sustained Job throughout all His afflictions. It was the coming of the Savior, the second Adam, to receive what the first Adam had forfeited, and to bring in the long-awaited kingdom, that sweetened the earthly pilgrimage of the fathers. It was the hope of the second coming that bolstered Paul as he languished in his prison. It is the same hope that motivates us today.
Without being too sentimental, I call this “theology for a rainy day.” Throughout the ages, the hope of Christ’s return has always exercised a salutary effect on the human heart. If you the reader are missing the blessed realization that the Savior will soon come, or have allowed it to become obsured by the things of this world, I urge you to look into the Scriptures of truth, “that ye may know what is the hope of His calling, and what the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints” (Eph. 1: 18).
The Two Phases Of Blood-Wrought Redemption
When presenting to Christian believers the truths concerning our high and holy calling, it is always essential that we make a distinction between two phases of Christ’s redemptive work. These two phases are marked by two time periods, known respectively as “since the foundation of the world” (Matt. 13: 34-36; 25: 34; Luke 11: 49-51; Heb. 4: 3; 9: 26; Rev. 13: 8; 17: 8) and “before the foundation of the world” (John 17: 24; 1 Peter 1: 19-20; Eph. 1: 3-4).
If we do not draw this distinction right away, confusion will necessarily follow, and we shall read truths that pertain to one calling into Scriptures which speak of another.
Concerning the various “callings,” the Bible mentions three. There is firstly, the calling of the “wife,” which is Israel according to the flesh. This calling is predominant throughout the Old Testament (see Isaiah 54: 4-6; 62: 4; Hosea 2: 16-19), but is largely absent from the New Testament writings — the most notable exception being the Book of Revelation, which places the wife’s redemption at the close of the Great Tribulation (Rev. 19: 7).
The second calling is that of the “Bride.” This calling is the subject of the apostolic epistles (those written by Peter, John, James, and Jude), and speaks of promises which pertain to spiritual Israel, and Gentiles grafted into the root and fatness of the covenant nation (Romans 11: 17). The Apocalypse represents those who constitute the “Bride” as being redeemed in two separate companies — a Jewish first-fruits offering of 144,000, as well as a great multitude of believers from all nations (Rev. 7). The marriage of the bride is consummated in the New Heavens and New Earth, whereas that of the wife takes place during the Millennium.
The third calling is the one that most concerns ourselves, and appertains to the “Body.” This calling, unlike those of the wife and bride (which date SINCE the foundation of the world), was hidden in God until the time of its disclosure was ripe (Eph. 3: 9; Col. 1: 26). Its connection is with the period of time designated “Before the foundation of the world.” Hence it is not the subject of Old Testament prophecy, which only concerns things predicted SINCE the age began (Acts 3: 21).
When Israel was temporarily set aside in Acts 28, consummation of the Millennial kingdom was put on hold, and a new phase of God’s purpose made known for the first time. With Israel absent and the “good olive tree” cut down, a new calling was needed to fill the interval. This calling involves Jews and Gentiles being made a “joint body” in Christ. This joint body is termed by Paul as “one new man” (Eph. 3: 15). The dispensational distinction which obtained between Jew and Gentile during the Acts Dispensation knows no place in the Administration of The Mystery. The middle-wall of partition has been taken down (Eph. 2: 14), and all ordinances cancelled by the blood of the cross (Col. 2: 14).
The inspired writings which deal with this third calling include: Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, Titus, Philemon, and 1 & 2 Timothy. These were all written after Acts 28: 28. The other Pauline epistles, written during the Acts period, contain truths which are foundational to the Dispensation of the Mystery, but which yet preserve doctrines relative to the second calling — that of the “Bride.”
A distinction must therefore be made when reading Paul’s epistles, so that we do not read the Hope of Israel into the hope of the One Body. Israel’s hope is the parousia; while the hope of the One Body is a ”calling on high” (Phil. 3: 14), which will take place before the commencement of Daniel’s 70th week. The church of the one Body will then enter into its inheritance in the heavenly holiest of all (Col. 1: 12). When the Millennium is ended and the heavens and earth are purified by fire, the New Jerusalem will descend to earth (Rev. 21: 2), and the church of the one Body will have its administrative sphere in the “New heavens,” but will doubtless not be excluded from participation in the delights of a renewed and regenerated earth.
At that time, the Wife will have given place to the Bride, all Israel having been fully redeemed and sanctified. During the eternal administration, the holy nation shall bear a priestly role to the nations of the world (cf. Isaiah 61: 6). The inhabitants of the nations will enter the New Jerusalem, partake of the tree of life (Rev. 22: 14), and after fulfilling their destined purpose on earth, will ascend into those mansions above (John 14: 2), to make room for new generations. Thus there will be no end to Christ’s kingdom on earth, or in the heavens (cf. Isaiah 9: 7).
While many Christians today think that the church is under the New Covenant, we must remember that Christ’s blood covers all callings connected to the two time-periods noted above. As the covenants made with Israel date SINCE the foundation of the world, it is wrong to say that the church of the One Body, whose calling is related to the period BEFORE the foundation of the world (Eph. 1: 4), has any part or portion therein. While Israel remains absent from the Divine program, her covenants are in abeyance.
Notwithstanding, since all men are descended from Adam, and inherit the taint of sin, the work of the law is written in their hearts (Romans 2: 14), and bears witness to their condemnation when the Word of God is faithfully preached. Only the blood of Christ, which was shed SINCE the foundation of the world (Rev. 13: 8), but purposed BEFORE the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1: 20), can effectually redeem men and enable them to partake of that calling which concerns us today.
Charles H. Welch– The Hope of The Church
(from The Testimony of The Lord’s Prisoner, 1931)
Concerning the whole period of the Acts of the Apostles is the “hope of Israel” (Acts 28: 20), a fact to which the epistles of Paul written during this period conform. The hope of 1 Thessalonians 4 is associated with the voice of the archangel, whose name is given in Jude as Michael. Daniel 12 states that when Michael stands up:
“Many that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake.”
This hope, moreover, is connected with the trump of God.
The term used in the early epistles for the Second Coming of the Lord is “parousia,” a word never used by Paul for the hope of the church of the Mystery. Instead of “meeting the Lord in the air,” the church of the one Body looks forward to “being manifested with Him in glory.” When Israel were set aside in Acts 28, the hope of Israel was necessarily set aside too. The coming of the Lord within the lifetime of that generation was rendered impossible through Israel’s unrepentance, and the great parenthesis of the Mystery brought with it a new standing, a new calling, a new constitution, and a new hope.
To teach that the theme of Ephesians is the revelation of a mystery never before made known, and in the face of the fact that hope and calling go together, to teach that the hope of the church of the one Body is the hope of the Acts period, is inconsistent and unscriptural. Just as faith is the substance of things hoped for, so hope when realized will be the consummation of things already believed. No other company has its sphere of blessing “in heavenly places,” “above principalities and powers,” and the hope of any other company would necessarily fall short of the expectation of the church of the Mystery.
Heaven And Earth Might Have Passed Away!
Matthew 5: 17-18: “Think not that I am come to loosen down (Gr. kataluo) the law and the prophets. I am not come to throw down, but to fill up. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth MAY PASS, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all MAY TAKE PLACE.”
If we look at Christ’s words in the original Greek text, we’ll find that He is making a conditional statement. This is verified by use of the particle ‘an,’ which always modifies the action of the verb, making it contingent on some condition express or implied.
Young’s Literal Translation gives a more faithful rendering than that of the AV:
| 17. `Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets — I did not come to throw down, but to fulfill; 18. for, verily I say to you, till that the heaven and the earth may pass away, one iota or one tittle may not pass away from the law, till that all may come to pass. |
Not one jot or tittle would pass from the law, until certain things might have happened.
–The heaven and earth MIGHT have passed away.
–All things MIGHT have taken place.
According to E.W. Bullinger’s “Critical Lexicon and Concordance To The English and Greek New Testament,” the word “kataluo” means “to loosen down, to dissolve, i.e., to disunite the parts of anything, spoken of buildings to throw down, to put an end to” (pg. 220). The verb occurs 17 times in the N.T., and is rendered ”dissolve,” “destroy,” “throw down,” “overthrow,” “lodge,” “be guest,” and “come to nought.” The scope and context of a given passage will determine its precise meaning.
It Matthew 5: 17, ”kataluo” clearly bears the primary sense. Christ didn’t want to loosen down, or dismantle, the law and the prophets. Which is why He offered the whole Messianic package to Israel (Romans 15: 8). Unfortunately, Israel never accepted their Messiah, and so the package was broken up, and salvation sent to the Gentiles (Acts 28: 28).
Instead of all things being fulfilled in A.D. 70, the temple was destroyed, and the Messianic promises that would accompany Christ’s coming in glory were postponed to a future time. This is because the hope of Israel is conditional on NATIONAL REPENTANCE (Hosea 5: 15; Matt. 23: 39; Acts 3: 19-21).
During the first century, a special window of grace was given to make good the fulfillment of all things that were written. The whole package was held out to Israel until this window was closed. During this period of opportunity, Christ was “STANDING at the door,” waiting for Israel’s repentance (James 5: 9; Rev. 3: 20; cf. Acts 7: 56). The saints were told that they could hasten the day of God! (2 Peter 3: 11-12).
But since the nation didn’t repent, fulfillment never materialized. The parousia was postponed, and the “hope of Israel” put into abeyance. The Dispensation of the Mystery (Eph. 3: 9) was interposed between Israel’s “rejection” and their “renewal,” to fill up the gap created by the breaking short of the Pentecostal Dispensation.
So what does that mean? It means that once the time-frame for fulfillment of the condition ran out, there was no reason why certain jots and tittles of the law should not pass away.
We are not suggesting that any prophecy fell to the ground. The package that Christ originally offered was simply dismantled. The promised threats were executed upon the covenant nation for their unbelief; but the promises of glory were not fulfilled, because they involve the PAROUSIA of Christ. Because certain jots and tittles passed from the law in A.D. 70, the fulfillment of Israel’s blessings is still future!
The Altar-Call: A Remnant Of Roman Priestcraft
It was once said by a certain theological writer, that there is a fundamental difference between religion and Christianity. Christianity has to do no more nor less than with a person — Jesus Christ. Its look is upward, and away from earthly things (Col. 3: 1). Its focus is Divinely centered. In contrast, religion emphasizes the mere earthly aspects of human worship. Its look is downward, and its focus on the things that the flesh can do to maintain communion with God.
It recently occurred to me, that most forms of evangelical worship as practiced today, are man-centered. They are products of religion, and not Christianity. They depend heavily on the perpetuation of the elements (Gr. stoicheia) of religious observance (Gal. 4: 3, 9; Col. 2: 8, 20), which Paul teaches have been done away for those who are members of the Church of the One Body.
Man has had, and ever will have, his sects. While Paul taught the Corinthians that denominational strife is a mere product of fleshly division (1 Cor. 3: 3), men have ignored his inspired precepts, and carved out “bodies” of their own, which practically deny the “unity of the Spirit” (Eph. 4: 3). As it was then, so it is now.
An instance of mere religious formality may be seen in the “altar call,” which is popular among the Baptist denominations. At the close of a sermon, the preacher will typically call the pianist and organist to their places, and after they begin to play, will issue an ‘invitation.’ This invitation consists of a call to “come to the altar and accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.”
Now, I am not criticizing preachers for inviting people to come to Christ. What I am criticizing, is the presumption of the preacher, that man must come to man in order to be saved. I see in this mindset a subtle revival of Roman priestcraft, which elevates man at the expense of Jesus Christ, obscuring His headship over the church, and His authority over the individual.
If God intends to save an individual, He will do so without any help from man. Why must individuals approach the “altar” in order to accept Christ? The only altar that God recognizes is the Cross; and the only method of approach is in Spirit and truth (John 4: 23). Any other way of coming to God is false, and belongs to human religion, not Christianity. Religion places priests between God and the individual, teaching that the sinner can never truly know Christ until he submits to the authority of the priest. I reject all such inventions as being of human design, and frustrative of the true intent of Christian worship.
The sad fact is, most Christians who go church on Sunday don’t realize that they are merely following the “traditions of the elders.” It matters not what kind of church they may attend. It is still a ‘church,’ with all its human contraptions and man-devised ordinances. Whereas the simplest saint who humbles himself in the dust before Christ, worshipping Him in Spirit and in truth, though he do so in a tin-roofed shack, knows more of real Christianity than the finely dressed gentleman who sits in a gilded pew every Sunday.
Most Christians seem unaware that they can profitably dispense with such religion as entails “altar calls,” and set-and-ordered “programs of worship.” The one is a product of priestcraft; the other are leftovers of liturgical worship. They have no place in the realm of real Christianity.
Only by understanding the truth of the Mystery (Eph. 3: 2-11) may the reader gain any true apprehension of what he has IN CHRIST. In the church which is His body, there is no restriction of access to God, for we are members of Christ, and are seated where He is – in the heavenly places (Eph. 2: 6). In the Dispensation of the Mystery, there is not one day which is more important than another, on which we must specially ‘observe‘ the ordinances of worship. There are no ordinances in this dispensation, for they are all done away in Christ (Col. 2: 14).
Only by recognizing our perfect standing IN HIM will we be able to cut free from the ‘the weak and beggarly elements‘ (Gal. 4: 9) to which men desire to bring us into bondage. The liberty that is ours in Christ must not be compromised; for our seat of goverment is in heaven (Phil. 3: 20), and we are complete in Christ (Col. 2: 10). To subject ourselves to vain laws and ordinances, or to think that we may only have access to God through men, is to greatly lower our standing in Christ, and to place ourselves under a dispensation which is past.
It strikes me that men who issue “altar calls” have missed the very essence of Christianity. They fail to see that they are mere instruments in the hand of the Spirit, and not the door through which the sheep must enter. The only door is Christ (John 10: 9). All others who pose as the door are thieves and robbers. And no matter what their authority may be in the eyes of men, nothing can excuse them for usurping the prerogatives that belong to Him alone.
Do Dispensationalists Employ A Hyper-Literal Hermeneutic?
In conversations with our friends from the Reformed world, the phrase “hyper literal” has sometimes been dropped when referring to the hermeneutical standards espoused by Dispensationalists. It is often said, that we hold to a ‘hyper literal‘ interpretation of prophecy. While Preterists acknowledge that Dispensationalism falls within the pale of orthodoxy, many feel that we have gone too far in applying the literal principle to our understanding of the sacred text. And so the term ‘hyper literal‘ has been coined.
It is not surprising to find that much of this rhetoric originates from the “orthodox Preterist” camp. Orthodox Preterists endorse a hermeneutic which generally calls for a more dynamic understanding of prophetic language. In contradistinction to most schools of prophetic teaching, Preterists claim that the majority of Christ’s eschatological predictions were fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
However, this view requires interpreting certain texts according to what may be called a “literal method.” While conventional futurists often claim that “time texts” must be referred to God’s standard of time, where a day is as a thousand years (2 Peter 3: 8), Preterists insist upon a restrictive meaning. But the epithets “hyper-literal,” “wooden literal,” and “over simplistic” are reserved for those who believe that the prophecies concerning Christ’s parousia are yet future.
When the orthodox Preterist view is laid on the table and carefully examined, it appears that they are using a two-tiered hermeneutic. Adopting a pseudo-literal view of the timing indicators, they use these as leverage for a spiritualized understanding of Bible prophecy. O.P.’s allow for a literal interpretation in matters of timing, but deny that the same literality applies to those passages which indicate how an event is to be fulfilled.
The texts which indicate nature are just as inspired as those which indicate timing. Therefore, they should be read according to the same canon of interpretation.
Dispensationalists of the Bullinger/Welch school take all of the timing texts in the same way that Preterists would. Except the conclusions reached are different from that of Preterism. Because we are taking “nature indicators” just as literally as we take the “time texts,” we cannot agree that there was any fulfillment of the parousia in A.D. 70. A careful look at the evidence assures us that after Acts 28: 28, the parousia was postponed, due to Israel’s failure to meet the required conditions of national blessing and restoration. In Acts 28, there was a break in the course of ages, and the parenthetical Dispensation of the Mystery (Eph. 3: 9) began. This mystery involves the “one body of Christ” — a joint body of Jews and Gentiles with no Dispensational distinction between them, peace having been made through the blood of the cross.
Of course, all Dispensationalists maintain that the Bible is to be read literally — that is, interpreted according to the customary laws of grammar and rhetoric. In Dr. Mal Couch’s “Introduction To Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics” (2000, Kregel Publications), Ron Johnson defines the essential hermeneutic as a “normal reading of Scripture.”
Johnson quotes Bernard Ramm, who observes:
“To interpret Scripture literally is not to be committed to a “wooden literalism,” nor to a “letterism,” nor to a neglect of the nuances that defy any “mechanical” understanding of language. Rather, it is to commit oneself to a starting point, and that starting point is to understand a document the best one can in the context of the normal, usual, customary, tradition range of designation, which includes ‘facit’ understanding.” (pg. 34). — Quoted from Protestant Biblical Interpretation, 3d. rev. ed. pg. 121.
Of course, only when such principles are consistently applied can the student hope to gain any degree of objectivity. Preterists employ the hermeneutic outlined by Ramm, but only when dealing with the time-texts. All other language is spiritualized for the sake of retaining the literality of passages which speak of a “soon” coming of Christ.
Orthodox Preterists can call Dispensational hermeneutics “hyper literal” all they want. The fact is, they are using the same technique whenever they aproach texts that speak of the timing of prophetic events.
From a Dispensational perspective, Preterists and Hyper-Preterists are both inconsistent, as they fail to interpret Scriptures according to uniform exegetical standards. What is the hermeneutical and exegetical necessity for taking the timing texts literally, but the controlling context spiritually? There is no necessity other than that which Preterist theology creates, through its insistence of A.D. 70 as an eschatological marker.
Of course, Preterists do not like to hear such an assessment. Rather than blame their own hermeneutics for the proliferation and spread of Hyper-Preterism, it is sometimes alleged that Dispensationalism is to blame!
Dee Dee Warren, administrator of the Preterist Blog, and an outstanding proponent of Orthodox Preterism, recently wrote:
“I am amazed daily at precisely how hyper-literal the hyperpreterist can be; at times worse than some dispensationalists.”
Such statements appear on their surface to indicate that Hyper-Preterism and Dispensationalism are allied theologies. I am sure that both parties would be surprised to hear of this affinity, as the difference between their respective hermeneutical standpoints is like night and day. Hyper-Preterists can hardly be called hyper-literal, as they spiritualize almost all of the eschatological passages that speak of Christ’s second coming. It is this spiritualization against which Dispensationalists protest.
Rather, the Hyper-Preterist ideology is closely allied to that of orthodox Preterism — so much so, that certain distinctives of Hyper-Preterist doctrine (such as that Matthew 25: 31-46 was fulfilled in A.D. 70) routinely pass as ‘orthodox‘ in Reformed circles, provided their adherents give lip-service to a future second coming of Christ and resurrection of the dead.
The critiques of Dipensational hermeneutics which come from the orthodox Preterist camp strike us as being a desperate measure to take the heat off themselves, lest their own prophetic approach be subjected to critical scrutiny. But when it comes to timing passages, they already agree with us on half the evidence. Why not the other half? If Preterists accuse Dispensationalists of using a hyper literal hermeneutic, then cannot the same label be applied to their interpretation of the time texts? And why may not Dispensationalists call Preteristic interpretations “hyper spiritual” for breaking their own rules? Instead of name-calling, however, we simply affirm that the Bible is to be interpreted according to clear-cut exegetical standards, and not by an arbitrary two-tiered approach.
Charles H. Welch– Israel and The Mystery
(from Grapes Of Eschol, 1956)
When we consider all that God has said concerning the place that Israel occupies in the outworking of His purposes, when we remember that the Lord Himself acknowledged that ‘Salvation is of the Jews’ (John 4.22), any failure on their part to live up to their high destiny, must inevitably bring about catastrophic consequences, and whether we believe that at Acts 28, that great dispensational rupture occurred or not, the events that happened both to Israel and Jerusalem in A.D. 70 make a change of the attitude of God to the Gentile imperative if salvation is not to die out of the earth.
What God would do, should Israel fail, no one could tell, for such an event is neither foreshadowed nor discussed. No one living before Acts 28 became history, except possibly Paul himself, knew that before the foundation of the world, God had foreseen and provided against such a condition, and until this new truth was revealed to Paul as the Prisoner of Jesus Christ for us Gentiles, it necessarily remained a ‘mystery’ in the fullest sense of the term. That aliens and strangers, Christless, Godless, hopeless Gentiles could ever be the objects of such superlative grace, that of such it could be written:
‘And hath raised us up together, and made us SIT TOGETHER in heavenly places in Christ Jesus’,
never entered the mind of man, and even today is received by comparatively few.
