Dispensational Amillenialist is that an oxymoron?

[Goodcheer68]

There is a local pastor in my area preaching on the book of Revelation and he states that he takes the amil view. Nothing wrong with that, but he also is an arminian dispensationalist? That is where I am confused. I would think at the very least dispensationalism is out of the question for the simple fact of how it views Israel. Am I missing something? Could someone explain if that is possible and set my thinking straight. Thanks!

 

[ryanhamre]

I don't see how this is possible, without accepting extreme contradictions...

 

[Pilgrim]

It makes no sense, especially without some kind of clarification.

The only thing I can think of is that he (or someone hypothetically) may like the idea of dispensations as a way to explain progressive revelation as opposed to a Reformed Covenant of Works/Covenant of Grace schema. As someone noted in a recent thread, there were some notable figures in church history that prior to the development of dispensationalism as a system developed what amounted to proto-dispensational schemes, dividing time into several periods i.e. pre-fall, post-fall but prior to the giving of the law, post-Sinai, the church age, etc. But these men were otherwise basically amils who made no mention of a pretrib rapture and in most if not all cases didn't make much if any distinction between the Church and Israel the way dispensationalists do. Some examples that I seem to recall include Augustine, Cocceius and Isaac Watts.

On the other hand in the past (and perhaps the present in Singapore) you had Bible Presbyterians who were pretribulationists but who also claimed to be covenant theologians and who upheld the unity of the covenant of grace.

 

[MLCOPE2]

without accepting extreme contradictions...

He appears to be fine with contradictions... After all, he is an arminian!

 

[DMcFadden]

According to Ryrie's fairly definitive book on dispensational hermeneutics, the two essentials of the system include a "literal" approach to prophecy and a clear differentiation of Israel and the Church in the plan of God.

It would be curious to teach that national Israel had a promise of a physical fulfillment of prophetic and millennial expectations without according them some space in which to enjoy them. Traditional premillennialism at least believed that the millennium allowed for a special time and geographical place for the fulfillment of national Israel's "birthright."

One could, I suppose, see the present state of Israel as a fulfillment of "prophecy." However, would that not leave out a whole lot of "literal" prophecies about the spiritual condition of the people that accompany those expectations?

Riddlebarger is one amillennialist who believes that Romans 9-11 teaches an unusually productive ingathering of Jews into the church near the end of the age. But, that is a very far cry from the dispensational schema that would lead to a third temple and the reinstitution of bloody sacrifices.

 

[Dwimble]

It is certainly possible. There are varieties of dispensationalism...it isn't some sort of monolithic group, although it often looks that way due to its loud and popular representatives. Years ago, for example, when I went to a diehard classic pre-trib, pre-millennial dispensationalist church, the pastor used to rail against Progressive Dispensationalism all the time (almost as much as he railed against Covenant Theology) because PDs minimize the distinction of Israel, generally holding to a one people of God view (i.e. one vine, one people of God, some are "grafted in"). My guess is that the pastor you mentioned lies somewhere within that camp.

Similarly, I have a dispensationalist friend who LOVES Alistair Begg, and who used to go to the same diehard Dispensational church that I did. Even though he is still some sort of dispensationalist, he now clearly doesn't hold to those extreme views any more.