H. A. Ironside’s Great Parenthesis theory
Dispensationalists tend to discount the application of Old Testament prophecy to the church in the present age. In this they differ from the Reformers, who applied those prophecies to the church. Instead, dispensationalism says, the promises and prophecies apply to the Jews, in a future seven year tribulation, followed by the millennial age, and they claim that the church of the present age was unknown to the prophets. They called the present age of the church a great parenthesis. Dispensationalist author Harry A. Ironside wrote a book that promoted this idea, called The Great Parenthesis the mystery in Daniel’s prophecy.
Ironside said, “I believe it can be shown from Scripture that this Great Parenthesis is the true key to a right understanding of prophecy.” With this premise, based on their interpretation of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, the dispensationalists reinterpret all prophecy. But scholars have found that the book of Revelation is chock full of allusions to Old Testament prophecy. Its opening verse says, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass.” It seems strange, if there was to be a two thousand year gap, before the prophecies described in the book were to occur. These facts suggest that the idea of a Great Parenthesis which Ironside took as his “key” to unlock all prophecy was a flawed premise. In his book, Ironside described his view of the prophecies, which he represented metaphorically as mountains. The church age, he said, lay in a valley that was hidden from the prophets. He wrote:
It has often been pointed out by others, but is well worth repeating, that the Old Testament seer might be likened to a man standing on one of our Western plains looking off toward a great mountain range. Many miles before him is a vast mountain which for the moment fills all his vision. Clouds cover the top of it, so that it seems to pierce the heavens, but suddenly the clouds are lifted and in the blaze of the westering sun he sees another and higher peak beyond, covered with snow, which seems to shine in resplendent glory. What the man gazing upon this scene cannot see, however, is the valley or the lower ranges of mountains that come in between these two peaks. The one may be many miles beyond the other. In between may be lesser hills, valleys, rivers, villages and farms, but all of these are unseen by the man upon the plain.
Let us imagine a cross surmounting the first peak, and call this the vision of the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ to suffer and to die for our sins. Then imagine that the glory surrounding the second and higher peak takes the form of a crown of light, and think of it as indicating the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus to reign in power and glory over all this lower universe. Peter spoke of the “sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.” These two mountains illustrate both. But now, in between them we have all the events of the present age of grace, and these could not be seen by the Old Testament prophets for it was not yet the will of God to make them known. These are the mysteries kept secret from the foundation of the world, which began to be made manifest by our Lord Jesus as He told of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven; and then were more fully unfolded in the unique revelation of the mystery of the Church, the body of Christ, given to the Apostle Paul, and the unfolding of the mystery of iniquity and of Babylon the Great through Paul and John. Other mysteries there are linked with these, and nearly all of them have to do with what is going on between the First and Second Comings of our Lord.
Whether the present age is represented by a valley, that was hidden from the Old Testament prophets, is a question that needs to be considered carefully. It is one of the premises of dispensationalism. It follows from dispensationalism’s denial that the Christian church is represented in prophecy by Israel, or the Jews, or Jerusalem etc.
Ironside viewed the prophecies through thick dispensational lenses. That the church was unknown to the prophets was taught by John N. Darby, William Kelly, W. E. Blackstone, C. I. Scofield and others. They viewed the present age as a “parenthesis” in God’s plan, which according to them, is really focused upon the future of the Jews.
The mountains, hills, valleys, rivers, and seas associated with the promised land all have a significance in prophecy. The mountains are associated with the promises and blessings of the gospel, and revelations of God that are high and lofty, or spiritual in nature. [Genesis 49:26] These mountains are called “everlasting,” as mountains are very durable, and remain as landmarks over many generations; like the mountains, the promises of God are everlasting. David said “Thy righteousness is like the great mountains.” [Psalm 36:6]
Valleys are significant too, and they are associated with judgments, or places where God makes war. Gehenna represents a judgment, as of one who is cast out of Jerusalem. The valley of Jehoshaphat is a judgment of the nations. Rivers that flow from the throne of God, and the temple, and from Jerusalem, represent the truths of the Gospel going forth from the church to all the world. [John 7:38] The Euphrates has another significance. Seas which formed the borders of the promised land are symbolic of the peoples and nations. [Isaiah 57:20; Revelation 17:15]
Perhaps the meaning of the prophecy of Isaiah 2:2 was hidden from dispensationalists. That prophecy says the mountain of the Lord’s house will “established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills,” and from what I see in the New Testament, it must have happened when Jesus ascended to heaven, because in Galatians 4:26 Paul speaks of the “Jerusalem which is above,” and Hebrews 12:22 speaks of the “heavenly Jerusalem.”
Jerusalem was raised up. Paul said those who are in Christ are raised up, and “sit together in heavenly places.” [Ephesians 2:6] It seems to me that the dispensationalists were probably blind to the fact that Isaiah 2:2 was fulfilled in a spiritual way in New Testament times, most likely when Jesus ascended to heaven. Jerusalem has been raised up to heaven, and it is now “a city upon a hill,” not hidden in a valley. The church age was not hidden from the prophets, but on the contrary, the church is the subject of many prophecies.
Isaiah 2:1-3, and a similar prophecy in Zechariah 14:10-11 are compared below.
| Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. |
Zechariah 14:10-11 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s winepresses. And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited. |
I suggest, both the above prophecies were fulfilled, when Jesus ascended to heaven. Jerusalem became the heavenly city, as Jerusalem is the “city of the great King” and Jesus is the king who was given the throne of David, which was over all Israel, in Jerusalem, and it is the heavenly one, not the earthly city. We see in Galatians 4:26 and Hebrews 12:22 that Jerusalem is raised up.
These prophecies show that there is a continuity of the prophecies of the Old Testament into the times of the New Testament, and the age of the church. The prophecies about Jerusalem apply to the earthly city, up until the crucifixion, and after Jesus ascended, they apply to the heavenly one. The earthly city became a type or a shadow, once the reality of the heavenly kingdom was brought in by Christ.
Dispensationalists like Ironside did not understand that Jerusalem was raised up to heaven, when Jesus ascended to heaven as described in Acts 1. Jesus said Jerusalem is “the city of the great king,” and that “salvation is of the Jews.” But the city where he reigns as king is the heavenly city, not the earthly one, and “salvation” is promised to those who are Jews “inwardly” and their “circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” [Romans 2:29]
If the earthly city were his kingdom, no doubt he would have defended it in 70 AD when the Romans laid siege to it. But that did not happen.
In Ironside’s comments quoted above, the prophecies about Christ’s coming are represented by mountain ranges. This idea was developed by Clarence Larkin as well. The dispensationalists try to cram most of the events in Revelation, from chapter 4 to chapter 19, into a seven year period that is yet future. Their claim that the church age is a “parenthesis” is a denial that Old Testament prophecy applies to Christians in the present age. Similarly they deny that much of the Olivet Discourse applies to the church in the present age. This is why it is claimed the church lies in a valley, and that the prophets did not see it.
The prophet Ezekiel foretold an invasion by the hordes of Gog and Magog, who come against “the mountains of Israel,” and the “prophets of Israel.” The mountains, as implied in the above quote, are symbols of the promises, prophecies and revelations of scripture. These invaders represent deceived people who come against the camp of the saints, and the beloved city, in John’s interpretation of Ezekiel’s prophecy in Revelation 20:8-9. They misrepresent the prophecies, and impose their flawed interpretations upon them. The writings of dispensationalist authors on prophecy are an example. They present a misleading view of the prophecies, and a human point of view, rather than a divine one.
One of the problems with dispensationalism is the statement of James in Acts 15:15-17, where he applies an Old Testament prophecy about Israel to the church, and identifies the church with “the tabernacle of David.” He also says, “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” This discredits the dispensationalist idea that the church is a kind of “Plan B” implemented because the Jews rejected Jesus, and merely a “parenthesis” in what they think is a Jewish centered plan.
Another problem with their position is Amos 3:7, “Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” This contradicts their theory that the prophets did not “see” the church age.
Peter said that the prophets “prophesied of the grace that should come unto you.” [1 Peter 1:10] They wrote about the Gospel. It was the focus of their message. Peter said the Spirit of Christ was in them, which is also denied by dispensationalism. They “spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” [2 Peter 1:21] They ministered to the church; “unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you.” [1 Peter 1:12] The prophets are part of the church’s foundation, Paul said, together with the apostles. [Ephesians 2:20] Jesus presented the prophets as an example for us, as did James. [Matthew 5:11-12; James 5:10] The coming of Elijah was a prophecy of Malachi, that applies to the whole age of the church. [Malachi 4:5-6] The three and a half years of famine in Elijah’s time is a kind of parable, that applies to the church, which has endured a kind of spiritual famine. There has been no scripture written since the age of the apostles, for example. The gifts and signs of that age appear to have ceased. There are several analogies between the story of Elijah and the age of the church.
Dispensationalist authors promote a flawed view of prophecy, because they deny it applies to the church in the present age. They claim the present age is a vast “gap” in the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9. The truth is, I think, in the present age we are in the last half of that 70th week, and in this prophetic week, Christ is “confirming his covenant with many.” The disppensationalists misread Daniel, and say it refers to a covenant between the Jews and the Antichrist. Their position is false. Jesus said, “Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.”
When Jesus said, “it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem,” [Luke 13:33] he meant the heavenly one, of which he is king. He died outside the earthly city. But the prophets, he said, will all be in his kingdom. [Luke 13:28] The Jerusalem to which the prophecies apply, after Jesus ascended to heaven, is not the earthly one. This is where both preterists and dispensationalists go astray. They are blind to the fact that Isaiah 2:2 was fulfilled in the days of the apostles.
Creation Concept 
It is unfortunate that covenant theologians refuse to go to the Apostle Paul for their view of prophecy. The Apostle Paul only revealed 7 of the 11 greater mysteries in the New Testament. He said the church was a mystery, which means secret. Something not known before HE revealed it. That is why the church was NEVER seen or talked about in the Old Testament. There are spiritual principles in the Old Testament that are valid, but there is not one verse spoken (in context) to the church, It is to Israel, or some gentile nation. Jesus is an Old Testament Prophet, He was born under the law. He spoke almost exclusively of Israel. Proof! In Luke Jesus said “Go not into the way of the Gentiles” Why don’t you obey that verse, if you think it applies to the Church. Again he said “I am not come but for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Prophecy many times is given in symbolic language but is ALWAYS fulfilled literally. One the symbols are understood, the fulfillment will literal.
The Church is Spiritual Abraham, never spiritual Isaacs or spiritual Jacobs. Your view of how to handle the bible is in error. The reason is — your hermeneutics is totally wrong or non existent. Just give me one rule of hermeneutics please. I doubt it can be done.
Are not the Stone prophesies in Isa,8 and Isa.28 an Ps.118 about the Church, Eph.2:20-22? And wasn’t the Kingdom taken from the national jew (Matt.21:43) and given to the little flock, (Luk.12:31)? Still jews, but the believing remnant. We gentiles did not have promises, (Eph.2:12-14) But by the Blood we are come close, and together with the remnant we have the promises. Rom.9:6 shows us 2 Israel, the national body and the remnant within. The jews that did not believe were destroyed like other unbelievers, (Acts.3:21-26) and (Gal.3:8-16).
Right you are, Dennis. Speaking of the mysteries not revealed until the Apostle Paul, we can see the following one which represents the “great parenthesis” between the end of the 69th week of Daniel and the beginning of the 70th week:
“And to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things” (Eph.3:9; ASV).
The “great parenthesis” refers to events which were not revealed in the OT and it can be said that the present dispensation of grace falls within that parenthesis–the “dispensation of the mystery.”
Paul said the mystery was “now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.” [Eph. 3:5-6] The revelations about the Gentiles becoming believers and receiving the same Spirit which Jewish believers had received beginning at Pentecost was first given to Peter, when he was sent to visit Cornelius, as described in Acts 10. Paul said that the mystery that was “kept secret since the world began” was revealed “by the scriptures of the prophets.” [Rom. 16:26] In his epistles Paul cited many Old Testament scriptures and prophecies. In the Apocalypse also, allusions to previous prophecies are abundant.
The Spirit of Christ that inspired the prophets gave Paul the understanding and wisdom to write and teach as he did. The same Spirit inspired the apostle Peter, who said the prophets foretold the gospel; they “prophesied of the grace that should come unto you;” they wrote by “the Spirit of Christ which was in them; they foretold “the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow;” they ministered “unto us,” that is the church. [1 Peter 1:9-12] The church in the present age was one of the main subjects of Old Testament prophecy.
The references to “the Jerusalem which is above,” and “heavenly Jerusalem” plainly identify the church with Jerusalem in prophecy. Jesus called Jerusalem “the city of the great king.” After Jesus ascended to heaven, to the throne of his father, Jerusalem was raised up too. This is his heavenly kingdom. The saints are raised up in a spiritual sense, and “sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” [Eph. 2:6]
While the teachings of the apostles were new, and were unknown in previous ages, they were understood from the study of Old Testament prophecy, and founded upon the scriptures. This undermines and destroys the absurd notion that the church was never spoken of in the Old Testament. In fact, it is spoken of in many prophecies, but dispensationalists are blind, in a spiritual way, so they don’t get it. The “parenthesis” idea is a symptom of their blindness.
An example is the prophecy of Isaiah 2:2, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.” Verse 1 says the prophecy concerns Judah and Jerusalem. The spiritual and heavenly nature of the church is revealed in the prophecy. The church is called “the Jerusalem which is above,” and “heavenly Jerusalem” in the New Testament because Isa. 2:2 was fulfilled when Jesus ascended to heaven. The events of Pentecost and afterward were evidence of his glory and power. He has reigned on the throne of David ever since. The Gentiles coming into the church throughout the present age is further fulfilment of the prophecy.
The blindness of people who are unable to see that Isa. 2:2 was fulfilled, and that it applies to the church in the present age, is also a fulfilment of prophecy. In Zechariah 12, horses are smitten with astonishment, and blindness. Horses and mules are symbolic of people who lack understanding:
Psalm 32:9
Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding: whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest they come near unto thee.
The problem with the view, along with many others, that the Church has replaced Israel, is that covenant theologians don’t have any proper hermeneutics. This if fundamental to a proper understanding of the scriptures. Doug, I asked you to give me only one rule or law of hermeneutics, and I was correct, you aren’t able to give me any.
To tell anyone what the Bible says you must interpret what the Bible is teaching. This is called doing an “exegesis of scripture” which simply explained, means interpreting the Bible. But— the correct or proper defination of “exegesis” is: Applying the rules of hermeneutics. Now please give me the rules by which (there is no doctrine in the rules only guidelines on how to “rightly apply or divide the word of truth”) you prove that the church is seen in the Old Testament. By defination you have to apply the rules of hermeneutics to be able to tell anyone what the bible says. Just like the rules of arimathic (Associtative, communicative and distributive principles) don’t give you the answer only the means to arrive at the correct answer, now please list one if you can!
Doug what you are doing is confusing the interpretation of scripture with the application of a verse of scripture. There is only one proper tnterpretation and one only of every verse in the Bible, but many applications. I don’t want your application of the terms of scripture, I want you to tell me (in context) what the verse is teaching. Example, “Move not the ancient landmarks” Many times this verse is used to teach or preach not to change the doctrine of what the Bible teaches, but that is not the interpretion of that verse, only an application of it. The interpretion of that verse is it is teaching against stealing not changing the doctrine. You are making application of the verses in a devotional context, that is not interpreting them. Look at the verses in the context in which they are written an tell me what the author is trying to tell the reader in the Old Testament, because that is who would be reading them when they were written.
There are only (3)three types of commaments in the Old Testament, Civil, ceremonial, and moral. The civil and ceremonial laws were fullfilled or as the Apostle Paul put it in Eph 2:13-15 “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in (civil and ceremonial part) ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.”
The “moral part” is still valid. The apostle Paul states again in I Timothy 1:8-11 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; Knowing this, that the (moral part) law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.”
There are only (3)three groups of people to whom scripture is written The Apostle Paul states in I Cor 10:232 “Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God”
Now above is how you use hermeneutics to interpret scripture, Now use it to tell me from the Bible that Israel has been replace by the Church
Hermenuetics? One is this. Exegeses vs eisegeses. The first, you study the Bible, and the Word creates your view, Eisegeses: You put into the text thought you had beforehand. Where in the Bible does it talk about a gap between the 69th and the 70th week? Where does it says that the church are raptured in Rev.4:1? Where does it speak about Davids throne in Rev.20? Or offerings of animals in the new covenant??? I was a dispensationalist for 16 years. it is so wrong. They say the church is a parentheses. But the Bible says that Israel under the law, were in between Abraham and the Church as a parentheses. It is comic. (Gal.3:19), Read the whole chapter
Paul says that the mystery was “now” being made known to the saints and that it was “hid from ages and from generations:”:
“Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints ” (Col.1:25-26).
And yes, the prophets were aware of the grace which was to come but they had no understanding of the source of that blessing:
“Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven” (1 Pet.1:10-11).
Here Peter is saying that the prophets searched diligently in an effort to determine what the prophecies concerning Christ’s suffering did signify but it was not revealed unto them. Even the Twelve Apostles, those closest to the Lord Jesus, did not realize that He was going to die (Lk.18:31-34) or be resurrected (Jn.20:9). They certainly did not know the “purpose” of the Cross, that “Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God” (1 Pet.3:18).
This truth was a “secret” or “mystery” and was not revealed until Paul was given the stewardship responsibility to preach the gospel of grace. It is a shame that there are many who remain blind to the truth of Paul’s distincitive ministry.
“Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Tim.3:7).
Doug, you said:
Paul said that the mystery that was “kept secret since the world began” was revealed “by the scriptures of the prophets.” [Rom. 16:26]
As usual you must stand common sense on its head in order to attempt to defend your mistaken ideas. If it was revealed by the scriptures of the prophets then it is impossible that paul would call it a “mystery.”
A prophet is one who, moved by the Spirit of God, declates what he has received by inspiration. Therefore, the term “prophetic writings” is equivalent to “inspired writings,” the element of foretelling the future being purely incidental:
“but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him” (Ro.16:26; NIV).
Paul used the word “now” to describe when the mystery was revealed but you insist that it was revealed hundreds of years earlier:
“Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints ” (Col.1:25-26).
Common sense dictates that the mystery was not revealed in the OT.
This argument is flawed because prophecy is incomplete, and partial, and requires interpretation. Paul said:
1 Corinthians 13:8-10
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
Things revealed to the prophets were partial glimpses of how God’s plan would work out, that were expressed in “stammering lips and another tongue.” [Isa. 28:11] Isaiah showed that the prophecies were given “here a little, there a little,” so one has to search the scriptures, comparing one revelation with another. Some revelations were given over several
centuries, through different persons. Therefore the gospel remained a “mystery” until Christ, and until the Spirit was given, which Jesus promised would guide the saints to all truth.
In previous ages the mysteries of the gospel were hidden, because they were depicted in types, and allegories. The exodus from Egypt, for example, was a type of the saints being delivered from the bondage of sin and the world. The Israelites’ experience in the wilderness happened “for our examples,” Paul said. [1 Cor. 10:6, 11]
Paul said the gospel was preached to Abraham. “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.” [Gal. 3:8]
In a similar way, the gospel was preached in the promise to David. The gospel is about the reign of Christ, among his saints, for ever.
Psalm 146:10
The LORD shall reign for ever, even thy God, O Zion, unto all generations. Praise ye the LORD.
Doug, you said:
“This argument is flawed because prophecy is incomplete, and partial, and requires interpretation.”
No, it is your interpretation which is flawed. Paul made it plain that the mystery was hidden from ages and generations:
Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints ” (Col.1:25-26).
You say that the mystery was revealed in the OT prophecies despite the clear words of Paul to the contrary. You also say:
Paul said the gospel was preached to Abraham. “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.” [Gal. 3:8]
The word “gospel” means “good news” and the good news which was preached to Abraham was this:
“In thee shall all nations be blessed.”
You also said”
“In fact, it is spoken of in many prophecies, but dispensationalists are blind, in a spiritual way, so they don’t get it. The “parenthesis” idea is a symptom of their blindness.”
You cannot understand that the parenthesis is in regard to the present dispensation of the mystery and therefore was not revealed in the OT:
“And to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things” (Eph.3:9; ASV).
The present dispensation has for ages been hidden in God so common sense dictates that since it was hidden in God it was not revealed in the OT.
The scripture I cited included Paul’s statement, “we prophesy in part.” He showed that any particular prophecy was only a part of the whole, and one needs to look at all prophecy to see the complete picture. The prophecies about David’s eternal throne have to be viewed in the light of Isaiah’s prophecy about the mountain of the Lord’s house in Isaiah 2:2; the mountain of the Lord’s house, the temple, David’s throne, and Jerusalem are all established “in the top of the mountains” by the ascent of Jesus Christ, where he entered into glory. This agrees with all that Jesus said, and Paul, who said believers have been “translated” into Christ’s kingdom:
Colossians 1:12-14
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Perhaps you have misunderstood Paul, and misinterpreted his words. The meaning of many of the prophecies was hid in God, until he revealed it to the apostles. And there are many things we cannot understand, until Jesus opens our minds to receive it. Paul said of Christ, “In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” [Col. 2:3] The apostles interpreted the prophets and other Scriptures, and applied them to the present era of the church. Peter said:
Acts 3:24
Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
This discredits the dispensationalist dogma of a “parenthesis” unknown to the prophets. Peter does not contradict Paul, and Paul does not contradict Peter, but dispensationalist dogma contradicts Scripture. Paul said,
Romans 11:33
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
Doug
Again, you foolishly said:
Acts 3:24
Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
This discredits the dispensationalist dogma of a “parenthesis” unknown to the prophets. Peter does not contradict Paul, and Paul does not contradict Peter, but dispensationalist dogma contradicts Scripture.
It is just like someone who is trying to force his doctrine by twisting or misapplying scripture. Let’s look at the context that you tried to twist and say that as shown below that the prophets foretold of “these” meaning this dispensation of time.
Lets look at the context. First the key phrase is actually found in Acts 3:19-21 “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.”
“until the times of restitution of all things” The times of the restitution of all things is certainly not today and further more the qualifying phrase is “spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets”. The Holy prophets never spoke of these days. “these days” refers to the days (1) the prophets spoke of and (2) “times of the restitution of all things”
Now whose dogma contradicts scripture
Doug, you said:
“Perhaps you have misunderstood Paul, and misinterpreted his words. The meaning of many of the prophecies was hid in God, until he revealed it to the apostles.”
Please let me remind you that earlier you said that “the mystery” was revealed by the prophets of the OT. Here are your own words:
“Paul said that the mystery that was “kept secret since the world began” was revealed “by the scriptures of the prophets.”
Despite your words we can see that Paul made it plain that the mystery was hidden from ages and generations:
“Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints ”
You say that the mystery was revealed in the OT prophecies despite the clear words of Paul to the contrary.
Now you have the nerve to accuse me of misinterpreting his words despite the fact that it was you and you alone who misrepresented Paul’s words. You cannot understand that the parenthesis is in regard to the present dispensation of the mystery and therefore was not revealed in the OT:
“And to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things” (Eph.3:9; ASV).
The present dispensation has for ages been hidden in God so common sense dictates that since it was hidden in God it was not revealed in the OT. But you display a lack of common sense and you are willing to throw your reason to the wind in order to cling to your ridiculous ideas,
Hi Dennis,
You said the following to Doug:
“Doug, I asked you to give me only one rule or law of hermeneutics, and I was correct, you aren’t able to give me any.”
We should interpret the Scriptures in what is called their “plain” sense, as expressed by Charles Ryrie here:
“If God be the originator of language and if the chief purpose of originating it was to convey His message to humanity, then it must follow that He, being all-wise and all-loving, originated sufficient language to convey all that was in His heart to tell mankind. Furthermore, it must also follow that He would use language and expect people to understand it in its literal, normal, and plain sense. The Scriptures, then, cannot be regarded as an illustration of some special use of language so that in the interpretation of these Scriptures some deeper meaning of the words must be sought” (Ryrie, Dispensationalism, 81).
In other words, when the word “Jerusalem” was used in the following verse all the OT saints who understand that the subject is the earthly JerusalemL
“Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the LORD of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously” (Isa.24:23).
People like Doug say that this is speaking of the heavenly Jerusalem despite the fact that all of the Jews living in OT times believed that the verse is referring to the earthly Jerusalem. The sad part is the fact that Doug can give no evidence at all that demonstrates that it is the heavenly Jerusalem which is in view.
Hi Jerry
I appreciate your Dispensational position. I was thinking some of the same points that you wrote to Doug, but the focus of what I was saying would have been for an another entry.
The Reason why Doug has so many erroneous positions because he is so against Dispensationalism that his field of focus is Biblically non existant. He doesn’t realize that the first rule of hermeneutics is Dispensationalism. i wonder what his position on the 2nd rule of hermeneutics would be, A study of the 8 different Covenants?
Thanks again
Dennis
Isaiah tells us that God’s thoughts are “higher” than those of man. [Isa. 55:9] And the language of prophecy is said to be “another tongue.” [Isa. 28:11] “For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.” I think Isaiah’s words have far more authority than Ryrie’s opinions. Since prophecy is given in “another tongue,” which is the language of parable, and metaphor, it must be interpreted; the “literal, normal, and plain sense” may not convey the true meaning. Ignoring Isaiah’s comments would be foolish; the literal approach is quite likely to be nonsensical.
The moon, in prophecy, has a symbolic significance.
In the dream of Joseph in Genesis 37, the sun and moon were interpreted as Joseph’s mother and father.
Genesis 37:8-10
And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.
And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?
In the New Testament the woman in heaven in Rev. 12:1 is “clothed with the sun.” The woman represents the church, the true Israel, and the sun represents the gospel, and the promises to Israel, that were inherited by Christ. This would also fit the meaning Jacob derived from the dream of Joseph.
In the New Testament, Rachel is identified with the Jews, who mourned for their children slain by Herod.
Matthew 2:18
In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.
In Isaiah’s prophecy that “the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed when Christ reigns in mount Zion,” unbelieving ethnic Jews (possibly represented by the moon) were indeed confounded, when Christ began to reign in his church, and mount Zion and Jerusalem were raised up to heaven, in a spiritual sense, which happened when Jesus ascended to the throne of his Father, after his resurrection. The spiritual light and truth of the gospel began to go forth from the church to all the world; Christ is the “true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” [John 1:9]
Doug, you said:
“Since prophecy is given in “another tongue,” which is the language of parable, and metaphor, it must be interpreted; the “literal, normal, and plain sense” may not convey the true meaning. Ignoring Isaiah’s comments would be foolish; the literal approach is quite likely to be nonsensical.”
The prophecies concerning the first advent of the Lord Jesus can be taken literally so there is absolutely no reason to suppose that prophecy cannot be taken literally, especially the prophecy in regard to the lord Jesus’ return to the earth:
“When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory” (Mt.25:31).
This prophecy from the lips of the Lord esus tells us EXACTLY when He will begin to sit upon His throne. It will be when He “comes” or returns to earth. But since your eschatology has no place for the Lord Jesus beginning to sit upon His throne when He retunes to earth you are forced to somehow spiritualize away this verse.
Your method is inconsistent because the prophecies concerning His first advent are interpreted literally but you cannot interpret literally the prophecies concerning His return to earth.
Next, you fail to understand that the “literal” method of interpretation rules out a valid exegisis of “figures of speech” but you would be mistaken, Charles Ryrie says the following about that:
“It might also be designated plain interpretation so that no one receives the mistaken notion that the literal principle rules out figures of speech. Symbols, figures of speech and types are all interpreted plainly in this method and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. After all, the very existence of any meaning for a figure of speech depends on the reality of the literal meaning of the terms involved. Figures often make the
meaning plainer, but it is the literal, normal, or plain meaning that they convey
to the reader” (Ryrie, Dispensationalism, 80).
Now tell me why we cannot take Matthew 25:31 literally since this verse describes His return to earth and the prophecies concerning His first advent can be and are taken literally. why one method of interpretation concerning His first advent and an entirely different one concerning His return?
Hi Dennis, you said:
“The Reason why Doug has so many erroneous positions because he is so against Dispensationalism that his field of focus is Biblically non existant.”
His ideas were first promoted by those who believe that the nation of Israel had been forever cast away and thertefore any unfulfilled prophecies concerning them must be spiritualized away.
His ideas begin with a false premise and from there he must spiritualize away any passage which does not fit his mistaken view. This idea led to the teaching of replacement theology and it started on a false premise. When some of the early church leaders saw Jerusalem destroyed in the second Jewish revolt (A.D. 132-135) and the Jews excluded from Jerusalem upon penalty of death, they reasoned that the nation of Israel was apparently beyond any hope of recovery. Tertullian wrote:
“The Jews are scattered wanderers, excluded from their own land of Judea; this shows how they erred and forsook their calling, and how Judaism has been, therefore, superceded by Christianity” (The Apology).
These Gentile converts saw the condition of Israel, destroyed and seemingly beyond any hope of recovery, and reasoned that they would never be restored, in spite of the clear Revelation from God that ethnic Israel has not been cast away. Tertullian was not alone in this belief, as witnessed by the words of Justin Martyr in his conversation with the Jew Trypho:
“For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even at the present time. And hence you ought to understand that [the gifts] formerly among your nation have been transferred to us” (Dialogue of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, Chapter 82).
These men ASSUMED that God had cast away Israel. Their false belief was not based on the Scriptures but instead on what they saw and reasoned had happened. After coming to this false conclusion they reasoned that any unfulfilled prophecies which speak of Israel must be speaking of a so-called “spiritual Israel.”
Then they had to spiritualize away those verses since they contradict their man-made ideas. But God has not cast away Israel (Ro.11:2).
In His grace,
Jerry
John gives an account of the crucifixion, and notes that when Jesus was on the cross, he was already dead when the soldiers came to break his bones, so they did not break the bones of Jesus, which fulfilled a prophecy about him, “He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken.” [Psalm 34:20] John wrote:
John 19:36
Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.
And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
In the context of Psalm 34, it is not obvious that it is a prophecy of Christ. But it also fits the idea that Christ is the passover lamb, and its bones were not to be broken.
Numbers 9:12
They shall leave none of it unto the morning, nor break any bone of it: according to all the ordinances of the passover they shall keep it.
There are numerous Old Testament prophecies and events that connect Christ with a sacrifice, such as Abraham’s offering of Isaac, and the ram that was offered in Isaac’s place.
Other prophecies of Christ describe him as a rock. Paul said, “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” [1 Cor. 10:4]
God is described metaphorically as a rock in several scriptures:
1 Samuel 2:2
There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.
2 Samuel 22:2
And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer;
2 Samuel 22:32
For who is God, save the LORD? and who is a rock, save our God?
2 Samuel 22:47
The LORD liveth; and blessed be my rock; and exalted be the God of the rock of my salvation.
2 Samuel 23:3
The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.
Also Psalm 18:2; 62:7; 94:22, etc.
And one that is quoted in several places in the New Testament is:
Psalm 118:22
The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.
Jesus pointed out that this applied to himself:
Matthew 21:42
Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
It is applied to Christ here:
Acts 4:11
This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
Isaiah wrote,
Isaiah 28:16
Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
So these are some examples of prophecies about Christ, that seem to imply you may need to reconsider your claim that “prophecies concerning the first advent of the Lord Jesus can be taken literally.” The contrary is true, I think. Some prophecies are literal, but obscure; probably most are figurative. It would be interesting to study what percentage of them could be described as “literal.”
It does not say Jesus does not presently reign, as you imply.
Psalm 146:10
The LORD shall reign for ever, even thy God, O Zion, unto all generations. Praise ye the LORD.
Isaiah 52:7
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!
Matthew 25:31-33
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Ha ha! Is he coming to separate literal sheep from literal goats?
Of course you quoted a lot of verses but you failed to answer what I said here:
“When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory” (Mt.25:31).
This prophecy from the lips of the Lord esus tells us EXACTLY when He will begin to sit upon His throne. It will be when He “comes” or returns to earth. But since your eschatology has no place for the Lord Jesus beginning to sit upon His throne when He retunes to earth you are forced to somehow spiritualize away this verse.”
Here is what you said:
“It does not say Jesus does not presently reign, as you imply.”
Sitting on “His throne” is speaking of sitting on the throne of David since it is that throne which will be given to Him:
“He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father, David. And He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end” (Lk.1:32,33).
The throne where the Lord Jesus is now sitting is the Father’s throne and not His own:
“To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with My Father in His throne” (Rev. 3:21).
Please notice that here the Lord Jesus speaks of two different and distinct thrones–“My throne” and “My Father in His throne.”
To you they are one and the same throne, an idea that cannot be supported. You continue to insist that the throne of David is a “heavenly” throne despite the fact that Solomon sat upon that throne on the earth:
“Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly” (1 Ki.2:12).
You refuse to face reality and continue on in your fables. Nothing can change your mind that the throne of David is a heavenly throne. You obviously are not guided by the Bible but instead by what some men say about the Scriptures.