Read this post at PastorRobertson.com
Tweet
Is the Kingdom of Christ Political
Posted in: Eschatology
About the Author
Jason Robertson is a husband and a father and a pastor. He is dedicated to leading and equipping his the Church with God’s word and biblical theology for life ministry, using a combination of pastoral, church planting and evangelism experience. He holds a Master of Divinity from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He is experienced in church planting, evangelism, missions, and the training of pastors and Bible teachers.
Jason has been preaching the gospel since 1985, serving the first ten years of ministry as a Southern Baptist itinerant evangelist out of Milldale Baptist Church in Zachary, LA which ordained him in 1993. He has preached in hundreds of churches in over 30 States and 4 countries. He planted churches in Siberia, Russia in the summers of 1993 and 1994. He founded Murrieta Valley Church in California, which he planted in cooperation with the SBC NAMB in 2001. He also teaches ministry students at California Baptist University.
You can hear his sermons and read his manuscripts on sermonaudio.com. Just follow the link to "sermons" at the top of this page.
But not progressive dispensationalists, which is the “growing trend” amongst most traditional or classic or revised dispensational schools, which places like Dallas Theological Seminary or Multnomah Biblical Seminary represent.
Nice post – made me think.
I want to learn and I know things like this can get quite hostile and you are a group of amills that have earned my respect.
1) Don’t you think that it is a huge oversight to quote Luke 17:21 and say the Kingdom is within you, but than leave out 17:22 when Jesus tells them that they will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man.
2) If you still think its spiritual seeing how can you explain verse 24 “For just like the lightning, when i t flashes… so will the Son of Man be in His day.” Still a physical seeing.
3)v35 also continues the same temporal reality and the Apostles ask “Where Lord” which is clearly asking where in physical space? And Jesus answers “Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered.”
4) Even Christ’s warnings in v30 and 31 feel like there are in reality,
I have a real tough time accepting all these things as “spiritual” and happening “within us.”
It would be nice to see your guys’ take.
(Hey at least we both agree on the 5 solas
)
Bobby,
I have a question for you. What is the difference between PD and MacArthur’s “leakey” dispensationalism? Are they well defined systems yet, or are they still systems in transition? I have had a hard time getting my arms around the various brands of dispensationalism and exactly how they differ one from another. BTW, I think that PD is a massive improvement over classical dispensationalism at almost every point. I have a great deal of respect for you PD’s.
Brett,
To be honest I’m not sure what view of disp. MacArthur takes. I believe Jason R. noted somewhere that they define themselves (at the Master’s Seminary) as “Traditional Dispensationalists”–which I believe means they tend to be more “Revised” or “Ryriean” dispensational. You’re right there is transition in disp., just like any other “system” of theology has movement. Disp., like Cov./Amil is not monolithic–which makes it hard, at points to discuss, i.e. over-coming the language barrier.
I think PD is still in transition, but Blaising and Bock do a good job articulating some fundamental points that I think are great touchstones to build on, as it continues to “progress”. Actually I’m pretty comfortable with where it has progressed to, and see it as being faithful as a framework to biblical theology. Beyond that I have a couple short, oversimplified articles on the difference between classic/revised disp. and PD, the link is:
http://bobbygrow.blogspot.com/2007/03/progressive-dispensationalism.html
and another link to an old blog of mine, that I don’t even have the password for anymore is:
http://shalomjerusalem.blogspot.com/2005/09/dispensationalism-dispensationalism-is.html
1. Classic (Scofieldian) Disp. saw a hard and fast distinction between Israel and the Church (i.e. heavenly people=church; earthly people=Jews). 2. Ryriean or Revised Disp. “softened” the line between Israel/Church (i.e. did not think of Israel as earthly people and the Church as the heavenly people–but still saw an distinction in the sense that there are two “programs” for Israel and the Church). 3. PD progresses from Ryrie and sees continuity between the “one people of God”, just with role distinctions within the unfolding plan of God’s salvation history. Let me provide a quote from Bock that sums up the view of PD on Israel and the Church, he says:
Two criticisms have tended to come from those of a more traditional form of dispensationalism. One is that the promises of the covenants are for Israel only. The second is to declare that allowing for such fulfillment means Israel and the church are not distinct, a supposed denial of a key indicator of what dispensationalism is.
Both criticisms are incorrect. The opening up of blessing through the seed to the world as indicated in the promise made to Abraham in Gen 12 means that God’s program always had the nations in view as coming into the blessed people fo God. Israel was to be a means through which such blessing came, which is precisely what happened through Jesus. This criticism also ignores God’s right to expand the beneficiaries as he wishes (as he does through Christ). God can add to his promise without taking away from those he made promises to earlier. So Gentiles can be included in Christ without Israel losing her benefits or promises. In this way, Israel and the church can remain distinct structures in God’s program (a dispensational distinction) without losing the oneness of God’s people Christ was called to bring accordng to Eph 2:11-22. (quote taken from:
http://dev.bible.org/bock/node/29)
Hope that helps.
In Christ