[George]

Originally Posted by CKG

Some of the best info I have found on dispensationalism has come from articles on the net (folks like Timothy Morton). Here's a site for a church in Florida that has some pretty good sermons you can listen to (go to sermons and topics):

http://www.daytonabeachbaptist.com/index.cfm

Now this guy teaches that baptism for the Christian is a matter of liberty so some would say he leans toward hyper-dispensationalism, but I think I have a pretty good handle on sound doctrine and his sermons present some good instruction.

I didn't mean to imply anything negative about David Walker being a graduate of Ruckman's school. I have many of Ruckman's commentaries and books and have benfited from them although Ruckman isn't the greatest writer so maybe Walker presented the topic in a more clearer manner.

Aloha brother,

I'm in agreement with you (about info available on the net) and didn't think that you were disparaging brother Walker in any way. I took your comment as being a conjecture on your part as to where brother Walker may have gone to Bible School - and nothing more. (No offense taken ).

I also agree with you about brother Morton, who, by the way, needs our prayers today. {His mother died yesterday and has gone on to be with the Lord}.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by George

Aloha brother Stephen,

I personally think that Larkin and Ruckman are the two best sources on Dispensationalism.

However, brother Walker's book gives plenty enough information about the subject to satisfy most Christian's interests - unless someone wants to go further "in-depth" on the subject, in which case I think that a person can not go too far afield with Larkin and Ruckman. {Keeping in mind that nobody's perfect - And no one man is the repository of all truth.}

In the more distant past George Hawkins Pember, Ethelbert William Bullinger, and Cornelius Stam were excellent sources on Dispensationalism. However Bullinger and Stam became "HYPERS" (Hyper-dispensationalists or Ultra-dispensationalists) - that is they ended up "dividing" the word of God up so much (chopping up the Bible in such a way that practically the whole Bible ends up not applying to Christians) that they often make the word of God of none effect!

We have to be careful (extremely careful) that we don't get carried away with Dispensationalism (or any other "pet doctrine" - Prophecy, Tongues, Healing, Hair Covering, Hair Length, Deeper Life, Unity, Love, Evangelicalism, etc., etc., and yes, even King James Onlyism) to the point where we don't maintain the "balance" {Faith, Love, and Truth} that God would have us maintain in our lives.

In order to maintain that "balance" we have to keep our eye on the Lord Jesus Christ at all times and look to His Holy word (and not men) for the answers to all the issues of life.

As I have said before - Please Note: I do not recommend men - I recommend some of their books. I try not to glorify, commend, or idolize men - and I do not follow them. One of the curses of modern day Christianity is "respect of persons" and the elevation of Christian "personalities" (pastors, evangelists, teachers, psychiatrists/psychologists, etc.)

Always remember: God wants OBEDIENCE from His people not SACRIFICE! He wants FRUIT in our lives, for if we have FRUIT - the WORKS will follow.

Yeah, I've read Stauffer's chapter on the Hypers. What is beyond me is how folks can go hyper when the evidence against their doctrine is quite extensive. To be honest, the whole hyper doctrine to me is offensive. What I think is so beautiful about dispensationalism is that it doesn't make the OT of no use. I have a very significant love for Israel and most things Jewish, and out of all the "named" ways to study Scriptures, dispensationalism is the only one that truly elevates the entire Bible to the place it rightfully should rest. I have truly been blessed to study this subject, and have Chette, George, Luke, and many others on these forums to thank for allowing me to spout my mouth off like I did in the beginning of my stay here. If it hadn't have been for everyones persistance I would never have bought Stauffer's book and I would have remained ignorant. Love you guys

Peace and Love,
Stephen

[George]

Aloha brother Stephen,

You have no idea how much I have praised God for your growth in the knowledge of God's Holy word (and the accompanying growth in the knowledge of the Lord Himself).

We are but the instruments that God uses to spread His word. The glory (and the thanks) belong to God. I believe the Holy Spirit has revealed these truths to you, for true spiritual understanding and wisdom come from Him. [1Corinthians 2:1-16]

Your Posts and comments reflect real growth in spiritual discernment and understanding, and I pray that God will give you the corresponding wisdom to go along with what He is showing you. [1Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:17; Colossians 1:9, 3:16; James 1:5, 3:17]

My limited understanding on the difference between KNOWLEDGE, UNDERSTANDING, DISCERNMENT, and WISDOM is:

KNOWLEDGE = WHO or WHAT (Information & Data)

UNDERSTANDING = WHY (Scriptural Understanding - Reasoning - Reasons)

DISCERNMENT = WHERE (Spiritual Discernment – The Ability to Distinguish Between Good & Evil< > Right & Wrong)

WISDOM = HOW (Godly Wisdom - How to Apply the Knowledge that we have. Or Obedience to Revealed Truth Through Righteous Living)

Praise God - For He truly is great and wonderful. Keep on seeking Him and His truth brother - He will not disappoint you!

[CKG]

I've been saved a little over 25 years and have met Calvinists, Charasmatics, and such, but I've never met anyone I would consider a hyper-dispensationalist. As a matter of fact it seems most church members are not even familiar with dispensationlism. The lines are clearly drawn as to Calvinism and the Charasmatics, but exactly what do you consider a hyper-dispensationalist? I've heard people mention Doug Stauffer (I have his books on rightly dividing the Word and his defense of the KJV ), but David Cloud considers him a hyper.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/bewareof-hyperdisp.html

I think I could tolerate and get along with a hyper-dispensationalist much better than I can with Calvinists, Charasmatics, Emergents, and such.

[Here Am I]

Originally Posted by CKG

I've been saved a little over 25 years and have met Calvinists, Charasmatics, and such, but I've never met anyone I would consider a hyper-dispensationalist. As a matter of fact it seems most church members are not even familiar with dispensationlism. The lines are clearly drawn as to Calvinism and the Charasmatics, but exactly what do you consider a hyper-dispensationalist? I've heard people mention Doug Stauffer (I have his books on rightly dividing the Word and his defense of the KJV ), but David Cloud considers him a hyper.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/bewareof-hyperdisp.html

While I have enjoyed reading David Cloud's articles, I have come to the realization that there isn't much that he approves of. He's a bit legalistic, imo, and seems to get all bent out of shape on skirts and hair length and such.

As one preacher put it (and I paraphrase): if you just get closer to God, the rest will fall into place.

[Biblestudent]

...and Cloud included Ruckman on his list of hypers.

CKG, I think everybody considers another person a "hyper" if he believes or does more of something than they anyone does. But I would consider someone a "hyperdispensationalist" if he doesn't believe in water baptism to be practiced in this age and if he believes that the body of Christ started with Paul. In practical matters, some would consider one a hyperdispensationalist for making the OT of no value to the Body of Christ. However, those whom I consider "hypers" also emphasize that the OT were "written for our learning" and we get "practical applications" from it.

As with Here Am I, I still enjoy Cloud's articles (except, of course, the ones that I disagree with - such as his articles where he mentions Ruckman, Reese, and Stauffer, etc. "hypers").

[CKG]

While I may disagree with some points of their doctrine, in the big scheme of things I don't consider hyper-dispensationalism a serious problem in the American church.

David Cloud says a whole lot more that I agree with than I disagree with. Some say he is a TR man but whether that is true or not I don't know, but he does have a lot of good KJV defense material. I've heard people say he is gentleman if you meet him in person.

When the book "New Age Bible Versions" first came out it was loaded with errors (typographical in nature) so I took a copy and highlighted the errors with corrections and sent it to Gail Riplinger. She sent me a very nice letter thanking me for my effort and said they were taking actions to make the corrections. When David Cloud put out his book on Seventh Day Adventism (which is a very good book) I saw some errors with the numbers and sent them an email pointing them out. I don't know if it was him or someone involved in his ministry, but I got an email back and needless to say they weren't very thankful. Maybe they were having a bad day or something.

We need more people like David Cloud making good Bible believing material available, but it needs to be a good quality product.

[George]

Originally Posted by CKG

I've been saved a little over 25 years and have met Calvinists, Charasmatics, and such, but I've never met anyone I would consider a hyper-dispensationalist. As a matter of fact it seems most church members are not even familiar with dispensationlism. The lines are clearly drawn as to Calvinism and the Charasmatics, but exactly what do you consider a hyper-dispensationalist? I've heard people mention Doug Stauffer (I have his books on rightly dividing the Word and his defense of the KJV ), but David Cloud considers him a hyper.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/bewareof-hyperdisp.html

I think I could tolerate and get along with a hyper-dispensationalist much better than I can with Calvinists, Charasmatics, Emergents, and such.

Aloha brother,

In answer to your question:

Aloha brother,

I have been saved for a little over 50 years and I have only met one Hyper-Dispensationalist (I built a house for him, way back in the early 1970's).

Basically a Hyper-Dispensationalist believes:

• That The Old Testament Scriptures are meant ONLY FOR THE JEWS.

• The 4 Gospels are ONLY FOR THE JEWS.

• The first few Chapters of Acts (the Hypers differ on when & where) are ONLY FOR THE JEWS.

• NO Water Baptism for the church – ONLY FOR THE JEWS.

• NO Lord’s Supper for the church – ONLY FOR THE JEWS.

• There were TWO CHURCHES – One church (for the JEWS) of which Peter, James, John, etc. were the apostles. And one church (for the Gentiles) of which Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, etc., were the apostles.

• The church didn’t begin until – Acts Chapter 7; or possibly Acts Chapter 10; or maybe Acts Chapter 15; or Acts Chapter 19; or Acts chapter 28. {depending on which Dispensationalist writer you read}

• The Books of Hebrews, James, 1&2 Peter, 1, 2, & 3 John, and Jude are ONLY FOR THE JEWS.

• The Books that the Apostle Paul wrote is the only place a Christian must get doctrine for the church.

Now there may be some Hyper-Dispensationalists that may not believe all that I have presented, or they may have a slightly different “take” on some of these issues, but basically I believe that I have honestly presented some of the positions that Hyper-Dispensationalists take in regards to the Scriptures (there’s lots more).

I consider myself a “moderate” Dispensationalist. I believe that there are “Divisions” in the word of God [2Timothy 2:15], but I don’t “chop up” the Bible by the Old Testament vs. the New Testament; or The Gospels & Acts vs. Paul’s Books. By the way, I do not refer to myself as a Dispensationalist, I always refer to myself as a "Bible believing Christian".

I believe what Paul said:

2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were writtenFOR OUR LEARNING, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

I believe that ALL SCRIPTURE is for us – not just Paul’s Books. And we are obligated to “rightly divide” the Scriptures [2Timothy 2:15] in order to learn the truth from God. I believe that both the Old Testament and the New Testament {The whole Bible} was “written for our learning” (NOT just those Books that the Apostle Paul wrote) and although all Scripture is not directed at us – all Scripture has been written for our benefit.

Hyper-Dispensationalists are normally very knowledgeable about the Scriptures - but they are also (generally speaking) very proud, vain, and arrogant. They will argue and debate for hours on end without anyone being edified.

I do not believe that there is any "benefit" that can be derived with dealing with them, so I avoid them.

Brother David Cloud is in the sad habit of "labeling" anyone with whom he disagrees with with whatever "label" he thinks fits that person (in other words he invents his own "definitions" to fit his own opinions).

I don't understand why Christian celebrities think it is necessary to openly dispute with other Christians with whom they may disagree with, unless they are looking to make a name for themselves.

[stephanos]

Stauffer quoted Charles C. Ryrie in "One Book Rightly Divided", which I think sums up what the ultras believe:

Bullinger had two dispensations between Pentecost and the end of the church age. He placed the Gospels and the book of Acts under the Law and commenced the dispensation of the Church with the ministry of Paul after Acts 28:28. The prison epistles, therefore -- Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians -- set forth the fullness of the revelation of the mystery of this church age. He also denied that water baptism and the Lord's supper are for this age.

Virtually All ultradispensationalists, of whatever school, agree that it (the church) did not begin at Pentecost. All dispensationalists agree that it did. Therefore, ultradispensationalism may be defined, or certainly characterized rather definitively, as the school of interpretation that places more than one dispensation between Pentecost and the end of the church age.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

[MC1171611]

As far as Hyperdispensationalism goes, I haven't met many that really believe it, but I've been accused of believing it and teaching it by Cloudish people for years.

I believe that the Apostles and those saved in Acts 2-7 were accepted into the Church and will be at the marriage supper of the Lamb, but from what I can make out, the Church Age didn't properly start until the final rejection of Christ in Acts 7 with the stoning of Stephen; in the very next chapter, the first Gentile is saved, unarguably by Grace through Faith, as per Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 10:9-10. Immediately following, Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, was saved and called in Acts 9.

Overall, I'm cautious when preaching doctrinal stuff out of the Old Testament or the Gospels, as it's easy to get young Christians confused between the Kingdoms and Gospels without an all-out study on the matter, but the entire canon of Scripture is given to us for doctrine, correction, reproof and instruction in righteousness, though perhaps not in exactly that order.

As far as the Bible school thing goes, the only on-site institute I could recommend in good conscience is Pensacola Bible Institute, and correspondence courses would include the Bible Doctrine Institute and Charity Baptist Church's course. Bro. Steve Sturgeon in Dillon, Montana has an institute which my uncle is/was attending, but he has a somewhat more heavy-handed way of running his church, so it's definitely not for everyone.

(See this link for some information and a video that deals with apostasy in the Church and Crown College's response to the message.)