# Between Dispentationalism and Covenant Theology?



## Zork (Mar 12, 2012)

What if someone agrees with the Covenants but believe there is a future for Israel and there will be a Rapture and 1000 years etc.?? 

Believe in Covenant theology but not their interpretation of the end times.

I read the book Introduction to Covenant Theology M.Horton.
Watched a few dvd's called "against dispentationalism". I agree with a lot said here like(Only one way of salvatiomn 

They interpret the Bible one way until they get to prophecies then they change the rules.

Please help me with this.


----------



## J. Dean (Mar 12, 2012)

Spurgeon had a view similar to this. His eschatology was a mixed bag in that he didn't hold to the Darby school of thought, but he did believe in a literal thousand years and in a restored Israel.

The more I study amillennialism, the more convinced I am of its truth over premillennialism. That being said, as with credo vs padeobaptism and other secondary matters, one is not saved or condemned based on end-times theology, so I don't make a big deal about it.


----------



## Peairtach (Mar 12, 2012)

There is what is called "historical premillennialism" or "covenantal premillennialism". 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_premillennialism

E.g. Francis Schaeffer was a noted Presbyterian and Reformed premil.

Premillennialism existed before John Nelson Darby and Dispensationalism and was espoused by some (many?) of the Puritans.

As regards the "rapture", we all believe in that, but wouldn't usually call it "the rapture" to distinguish it from what Dispensationalists believe. I don't know what historic premils believe on that.



> For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (I Thess 4:16-17)



I think most Reformed scholars would hold (?) that when we experience this, our Ascension - "the Rapture" - at the end of time, the Day of judgment will immediately follow, followed by Hell for God's enemies and the New Heavens and New Earth for God's people.

Regarding "a future for Israel" i.e. Israel-after-the-flesh (I Cor 10:18), they have had a future for the past 2,000 years, in the sense that if God was completely finished with them He'd have wiped them out in A.D. 70.



> Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, *a remnant shall be saved*: For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. (Rom 9:27-28)





> And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. (Matt 24:22)





> And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days. (Mark 13:20)



John Brown of Haddington saw the above verses referring to A.D. 70 and the sparing of some Jews so that there would be an elect among them in the future.

Many Reformed and Puritans (e.g. Charles Hodge and John Murray) and not just premils, but also postmils, have seen in Romans 11, 

(a) A promise that there will always be some Jews in this world.

(b) A promise that there will always be at least a small proportion of believers among them.

(c) A promise that the Jews will repent nationally.

(d) A promise that this will lead to greater gospel prosperity.

See e.g. John Murray on _Romans_, and Ch. Hodge, _Systematic Theology.
_

Also this book by Iain Murray on the history of eschatology is very enlightening:
Amazon.com: Puritan Hope (9780851512471): Iain H. Murray: Books

Murray explains the Puritan views on eschatology and how the whole whacky idea of dispensationalism got going in the 1830s, muddying the waters of this subject for all and sundry.


----------



## cajunhillbilly53 (Mar 12, 2012)

I loved the book by Iain Murray and agree with its view of national Israel. That is why I call myself an optimistic amillenialist.


----------



## Scott1 (Mar 12, 2012)

Read Kim Riddlebarger's, _A Case for Amillennialism_.

The answers to some of your questions will fall into place as you find you are not asking the right questions, and one side has framed the debate on its own presuppositions (which are not the historic witness of the church).


----------



## Ed B (Mar 16, 2012)

Peairtach said:


> There is what is called "historical premillennialism" or "covenantal premillennialism".
> 
> .....
> 
> ...



I just started reading this book on the recommendation of you and Cajunhillbilly53.

I appreciate the recommendation.


----------

