Printer Friendly
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Critical Issues Commentary CI A BIBLICALLY BASED COMMENTARY ON ISSUES THAT IMPACT YOU C S EPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2008 I SSUE N UMBER 108 is always referring to the myster- ies that were revealed to him. HYPERDISPENSATIONALISM AND THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST And what are mysteries? Secrets. IS THERE REALLY MORE THAN ONE GOSPEL? And Who kept them secret until BY BOB DEWAAY revealed to this man? God did. And when God called Paul out of the religion of Judaism, and saved ecently I spoke with a friend from revealed to Paul. He claimed that the him on the road to Damascus, another state who recounted to church age as we know it did not begin He sent him down to Mt. Sinai me how he had lost fellowship until Acts 28, when an offer to immedi- R and poured out on him for 3 with a long-time Christian friend ately institute the kingdom of God on years all the revelations of the because of an eccentric doctrine the earth was withdrawn from Israel. mysteries. There are all kinds of friend had gotten caught up in. The par- Bullinger claimed that only the prison mysteries that Paul speaks of in ticular doctrine claims Jesus’ teachings epistles were binding on the church. Thus his writings, and since they are not “for” the church, that the Great Bullinger relegated most of Scripture to a were revealed to him he then Commission is not binding on the category similar to the book of Leviticus: became the steward of those church, that there are at least two differ- inspired, but not directly binding on mysteries. And if he was the ent gospels, and that the gospel of grace Christians in all of its details. One impli- steward of them then he was the was totally unknown until Paul received cation of this teaching is that Jesus’ own administrator of them. When we it. When my friend tried to correct his teachings, including the Great understand that, then this Book friend, he refused to listen and now only Commission, are not binding or applica- becomes as plain as a 300 watt fellowships with others who believe ble to the church. I label as hyperdispen- light bulb. It just lays right out in these strange teachings. This is what sational this and any other doctrine that front of you. Of course this is a Paul described as “factious” (Titus 3:10). claims that the gospel as we know it was whole new administration or A faction develops when doctrines first given to Paul sometime toward the dispensation.5 derived from unbiblical sources become middle or the end of Acts. the condition for fellowship. In 1938 H. A. Ironside wrote a Feldick believes that Paul’s time gaining I have since heard from several oth- rebuttal to what was then known as this new mystery, that supposedly had ers who have had friends or family get Bullingerism entitled Wrongly Dividing not been told to any the other apostles, 2 caught up in this same teaching. For the Word of Truth. This book is still a ended in about 40 A.D. By putting the many, the current source of this doctrine valuable resource for those who have change of dispensation in the middle of is radio teacher Les Feldick. Critics of been confused by the false teachings of Acts instead of at the end of it as this system (myself included) call the hyperdispensationalists. Current hyper- Bullinger does, mid-Acts dispensational- doctrine hyperdispensationalism. It is dispensationalists distance themselves ists may avoid a few of Bullinger’s distinct from dispensationalism, which from Bullinger and resent being linked to extremes but they create a serious 3 teaches that the church age began at him. exegetical problem for themselves: they 1 Pentecost. In this article I will describe The most popular versions of this ignore the narrative unity of Luke/Acts the source of hyperdispensationalism, doctrine today would prefer simply to be and make it rather easy to rebut their some of its current proponents, and called “dispensationalist” but will toler- doctrines based on their use of Acts examine its claims by comparing them ate being called “mid-Acts” dispensa- alone and by itself. I shall demonstrate with Scripture. I will conclude that its tionalists because, unlike Bullinger, they that shortly. claims are false and constitute a dimin- believe that the gospel of grace that they ishing of Christ’s authority over His own deem distinctive to Paul was revealed to ARE THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS church. him somewhere between Acts 9 and BINDING ON THE CHURCH? Acts 13.4 Les Feldick says this about the HYPERDISPENSATIONALISM point at which Paul was given a never- Hyperdispensationalists claim that Jesus before known message about the gospel presented to the Jews an offer of a king- In the 19th century, Anglican clergyman of grace: dom that He would have instituted dur- E. W. Bullinger was the father of a system ing the first advent—had they accepted. of theology that claimed that the gospel Now if you’re a Bible student you They further teach that the twelve apos- of grace was unknown until it was will catch on real quick that Paul tles continued this offer after Jesus’ res- S EPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2008 2 I SSUE N UMBER 108 urrection and ascension. It was eventual- elapsed—and that the church of lutionary change would have been ly withdrawn, they say, after it was clear today is not a perpetuation of the explained in the text had Spirit-inspired that the Jews were not going to accept organization which Christ found- Luke knew it happened. Les Feldick says, the offer. Hyperdispensationalist C. R. ed while on earth.8 “So when you see the word Church, this Stam claims the offer was withdrawn at is why Paul almost always identifies it as the end of Acts: “The offer of the king- This means that the church Paul speaks ‘The Church which is His Body,’ which dom, made at Pentecost, was not official- of in his epistles was not the church that makes a big difference from the word ly withdrawn until Acts 28:28.”6 After Jesus founded or that Peter and the oth- Church that’s maybe used elsewhere in that time, Jews and Gentiles alike are ers belonged to. Stam claims, “The Scripture.”11 This is false: the church to offered salvation by grace. building of this house, the church of this which God added members early in Acts Hyperdispenstionalists claim that age, was a secret which Peter and the is the same church that Paul calls “the Jesus’ teachings were the terms that eleven knew nothing about when they body of Christ.” would have been in effect had the Jews followed Christ as king and offered His But, in the hyperdispensational read- accepted the offer of the kingdom. kingdom to Israel at Pentecost.”9 ing of the gospels and Acts, Jesus’ men- Those terms were still valid as long as Let us examine the book of Acts to tion of “My church” is not the “church” the offer was valid. After that they have see if this claim makes sense. now, and His teachings applied only to it no importance to the church and are not Hyperdispensationalists are quick to and not directly to churches founded binding.7 They do not claim the gospels warn that simply because we see the under Paul’s new gospel. This would are not canonical, but that the teachings term “church” (from the Greek word mean that Paul did not believe that what therein are not authoritative for the “eccle_sia” in the New Testament) it does Jesus taught to the 12 disciples was bind- church unless they contain some princi- not necessarily mean the church that ing on the churches that He founded. ples that would transcend any given dis- exists under the gospel of grace. It is true But in Acts 20:35 Paul quoted words pensation, much like we would use that eccle_sia is occasionally used in a that Jesus taught and applied them to Leviticus. Hyperdispensationalists non-technical way where it simply the church: “In everything I showed you believe that the only revelation binding means assembly (as it is in Acts 7:38; that by working hard in this manner you on the church is that which was given to Acts 19:32, 39, 41). However, there are must help the weak and remember the words Paul. 23 other uses of eccle_sia in Acts where it of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ‘It They also have a very different idea means “church.”10 What is obvious is is more blessed to give than to receive.’” about the church itself. For example, that the meaning of the term did not (Acts 20:35). These words are not when Jesus said, “On this rock I will change in the middle of Acts. Luke found in any of the gospels, but Paul build My church,” he supposedly was not applies the term to gatherings of believ- knew them to have been spoken by Jesus speaking of the church (i.e., the body of ers throughout Acts, and this is true and applied them authoritatively to the Christ) but a Jewish “church” that only whether the gatherings are of Jewish or Gentile church in Ephesus. existed for a while until the middle of Gentile believers. Luke knew nothing of H. A. Ironside, in refuting the teach- Acts. This means that the church we are two different “churches.” To believe the ings of Bullinger, cited this passage: in is not what Jesus called “My church.” hyperdispensationalist reading of Acts, For example, Stam claims that we we must consider the “church” that Paul If anyone advocates a different doc- could easily solve the problem of Rome persecuted according to Acts 8:1 to be trine, and does not agree with sound claiming Peter as the first pope if we were unrelated to the church whose elders he words, those of our Lord Jesus to realize that the church Jesus referred admonished in Acts 20:28 (to whom Christ, and with the doctrine con- to as “My church” in Matthew 16:18 Paul had preached the gospel of grace – forming to godliness, he is conceited does not now exist on earth: Acts 20:24).