There Is No Rapture and The Jews Are Not God’s People: PART ONE

The Analogia Fidei Against the Dispensational Hermeneutic and The Real People of God.

I. Introduction

When seeking to understand the Bible, Gods Holy Word, the importance of a sound hermeneutic cannot be stressed enough. Over the past 50 years in Christianity Dispensationalism has been the most influential interpretive hermeneutical system. In this paper we will provide a definition of hermeneutics, analyze the Dispensational hermeneutic, compare it to the Analogia Fidei or Analogy of faith the hermeneutic used by Christians historically and demonstrate from Scripture using the analogy of faith that there is only one people of God which has existed throughout Biblical history: the church of Jesus Christ.

II. So What Are Hermeneutics?

Hermeneutics, coming from the Greek word hermeneuein, is the science of Biblical interpretation and is the art by which one establishes a proper interpretation of the Biblical text. Over the course of the history of the church, various interpretative grids have been used to understand the Scriptures, the two most popular and well known being literal interpretation and allegorical interpretation. While a literal interpretation seeks to understand the text in a word for word manner the allegorical text seeks to understand the text as speaking not in a literal sense but in a figurative sense to things beyond the literal understanding of the text. Because of the different genres that Scripture divides itself into (history, poetry, law, epistles, et al) understanding how to interpret the different books of the Bible can be challenging as one cannot always use one interpretive approach to properly understand any given text. Furthermore, hermeneutics establishes principles of interpretation that have commonly been used by pastors and theologians of the church as general principles to help in this interpretive task.

III. The Analogy of Faith

[III-1. The Only Infallible Interpreter of Scripture is Scripture Itself]

The most fundamental principle used by the aforementioned teachers of the church is the analogy of faith (Analogie fidie). This principle holds that since the whole of Scripture is not in contradiction with itself (as that would violate the perfection of God's nature) the best interpreter of scripture must necessarily be the scripture itself (as it alone is inspired and was plainly given as a coherent whole to all mankind).

[III-2. More Plain Texts Interpret Less Plain Texts.]

Therefore, when seeking to understand the text of Scripture we are to move from clearer texts to understand the less clear texts, allowing the clearer and better understood parts of Scripture to interpret the less clear texts of Scripture since the Bible speaks as a unified text and cannot contradict itself.

A primary example of this principle is in Genesis 6:6 where the text indicates that God can and does change His mind: "And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart." While this text seems to indicate that God was so sorry because of man’s wickedness that He wished that He had not made man (changed His mind), when we compare it to clearer passages of Scripture (1 Samuel 15:29, Numbers 23:19) the truth is made clear that God does not change His mind or regret the works that He has done. Thus, the analogy of faith is established.

[III-3. The Revelation of Christ and His Apostles Authoritatively Interprets the Law and the Prophets]

Furthermore, the New Testament coming after the Old Testament is to be relied upon to interpret and properly understand many of the Old Testament texts since the New Testament writers are engaged in doing that very task. As the clearer writings of Scripture, the New Testament provides a clear interpretation of the Old Testament that recognizes Jesus of Nazareth as the Jewish Messiah-King of Psalm 2 and the Suffering-Servant of Isaiah 42 and Isaiah 53.

IV. What is Dispensationalism

Having established the analogy of faith we will now consider the Dispensational hermeneutic and if it agrees with the analogy of faith. The system of Dispensationalism as a hermeneutical system, especially its end times interpretation of Revelation, has been the most influential theological system in America since the beginning of the 20th century and its teachings have been propagated in the popular book and movie series Left Behind written by Tim Lahaye. This system separates the Bible into separate dispensations where God deals with His human creation in different and separate ways giving each of them certain commands to obey. In each of these Dispensations the requirements of obedience are different and particular to each individual or group of people that God reveals Himself to. The two most important dispensations are the dispensation of law where God establishes a covenant with the people of Israel and the dispensation of grace where God establishes a covenant with the church. These two dispensations establish two peoples of God in the Bible: Israel and the Church.

V. The Dispensational Hermeneutic.

Having briefly described Dispensationalism as a system we will now consider the hermeneutical principles used by the Dispensationalists to interpret the Bible.

V-I Extreme Literal Interpretation

The Dispensational system uses what its teachers consider to be a literal interpretation hermeneutical principle. However, one will soon discover that there is more to this “literal interpretation” than meets the eye. According to Charles Ryrie, Dispensational theologian, those who do not believe in dispensationalism also use a literal hermeneutic; the difference is that Dispensationalists use it consistently: Of course, literal interpretation is not the exclusive property of dispensationalists. Most conservatives would agree with what has just been said. What then, is the difference between dispensationalists use of the hermeneutical principle and the nondispensationalists? The difference lies in the dispensationalists claim to use the normal principle of interpretation consistently in all his studies of the Bible. He further claims that the nondispensationalist does not use the principle everywhere. He admits that the nondispensationalist is a literalist in much of his interpretation of the Scriptures but charges him with allegorizing or spiritualizing when it comes to the interpretation of prophecy. Herein lies the problem of the extreme literalness of the Dispensational hermeneutical: it seeks to apply this principle both equally to those texts of Scripture that are clearer (narrative, law, epistles) and to those texts that are less clear (prophecy including the book of Revelation. This extreme literalness violates the analogy of faith principle that clearer passages of Scripture interpret less-clear passages.

V-2. Denial of New Covenant (Christ and His Apostles) Interpretive Authority over the Old.

Another connected problem with this literal interpretation of the Bible is the relationship of the Old Testament to the New Testament. While historical Christianity has always used the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament, the Dispensationalist's extreme literalness will simply not allow him to confess this truth: New revelation cannot mean contradictory revelation. The reality is this, that later revelation on a subject does not make the earlier revelation mean something different. It may add to it or supersede it, but it does not contradict it. A word or concept cannot mean one thing in the Old Testament and take on opposite meaning in the New Testament. While the analogy of faith agrees that Scripture does not contradict itself it disagrees with the principle that the New Testament is to be interpreted by the Old and not the Old by the New! Otherwise, Jesus of Nazareth would not be understood to be the Messiah and we would still be required to obey the ceremonial parts of Gods law which modern Judaism teaches contrary to Christianity.

Since the New Testament interprets the Old Testament, we are not to understand Jewish identity as primarily physical but primarily spiritual according to Paul in Romans 9 and therefore only one people of God exists: those who have faith in Christ (Galatians 3:29). But the Dispensationalist cannot allow the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament or his whole system of seeing two peoples of God (Israel, Christians) would be destroyed so he must interpret the New Testament using the Old Testament and argue that there are two peoples of God: Jews and Christians. One of the best examples of this interpretation is the Dispensational interpretation on the sermon on Mount in Matthew 5-7. In the Sermon on the Mount, we have the finest example of Jesus Christ's teaching on obedience to the law and objective morality that exists in the New Testament; the only problem is that Dispensationalists do not interpret it as applying to the present-day church! As Charles Ryrie clearly states:

"The dispensationalist does recognize the relevance and application of the teachings of the Sermon to believers today regardless of how much non-dispensationalists want to make him say otherwise. The dispensationalist, however, views the primary fulfillment of the Sermon and the FULL following of its laws as related to either the offering or the establishing of the Messianic kingdom." (Ryrie)

While Ryrie implores his readers that he indeed does believe the Sermon on the Mount has relevance to the church today he cannot get away from the fact that he and other dispensationalists find the fulfillment of this passage in the Messianic kingdom and not the church! The fact is that this interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount reads the Old Testament into the New Testament instead of using the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus clearly gives His in depth understanding of Gods law in contrast to the Pharisees and the Talmudhe Talmud. In doing so, He sets up Himself in the place of the Pharisees as the teacher of Gods people and the true expositor of Gods law for Gods people for all time. The message was spoken to Jews, but Jesus was not only bringing in the kingdom of heaven in this message but setting Himself up as Messiah and properly teaching the law. While the dispensationalist only understands Jesus’ teaching here as a presentation of the physical millennial kingdom and Jesus presenting Himself as its king, Jesus understands His sermon as a proper explanation of Gods law as being primarily spiritual, not physical, and as the kingdom of heaven being immediately present to His audience as He presents Himself as the Messiah not of a millennial kingdom in the future sometime but of those who truly understand their sin in light of Gods law, repent of it, and trust in Jesus Christ as their Savior now and until the end of days. In other words, Jesus presents Himself as bringing in the kingdom of heaven regardless of whether His audience accepts His message or not. And the rest of the New Testament presents the reality of this message: Jesus is King over all the nations whether you accept Him or not; He simply does not need you to validate Him as King. Furthermore, when the Jews do try to make Jesus into the king that they want Him to be He continually rejects their proposals to the point of hiding Himself from their pursuit as in John 5 after the feeding of the five thousand. Again, the Dispensationalist uses the Old Testament texts on a triumphant king to interpret Jesus’ presentation of Himself as a king to the Jews instead of using Jesus’ own understanding of His first coming and bringing the kingdom of heaven as primarily a spiritual reality and not a physical one. This reason is why Dispensational teachers like Charles Ryrie must find the direct fulfillment of the Sermon on the Mount in the physical millennial rule of Christ as king: because they refuse to acknowledge Him as King and Lord over all the nations in His incarnation and then triumphantly in His death and resurrection setting themselves up against the totality of New Testament teaching on this subject beginning with Jesus Christ Himself in Matthew 28:16-20:

Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

Amen. Jesus Christ’s very basis for sending His disciples to preach the gospel to all nations and disciple them is His authority as king over all the nations. The Apostle Peter reaffirms this truth in Acts 2:34-36:

For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself: The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool."' "Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.

St. Peter in presenting the gospel message boldly interprets Psalm 110 to understand not Jesus Christ’s future millennial reign on earth but His current reign now over all the nations at the right hand of God the Father Almighty in heaven. Here the New Testament definitively interprets the Old Testament text and also entirely changes how one understands the Sermon on the Mount: it is not a future physical millennial kingdom in Jerusalem that Jesus speaks of but of a now-present spiritual kingdom that is not built upon physical power, wealth, and invention, but upon spiritual realities which earthly kingdoms like the Roman Empire soon understood that it could not overcome. It is NOT in the future that this kingdom calls all mankind to bow the knee to the Lord Jesus Christ BUT in the present HERE and NOW and such sees no distinction between Jew and Gentile but brings all under the ONE dominion of Jesus Christ.

VI. Conclusion

This truth is one that the Dispensationalist simply cannot allow for because it threatens his theological system that is based upon a Biblical hermeneutic that simply cannot stand against the teachings of the New Testament writers and their clear proclamations. Therefore, the dispensationalist must subvert the true meaning of Scripture to obtain his desired ends by again 1) applying an extreme literal interpretation to all genres of Scripture, 2) using texts that are less clear to interpret texts that are clearer and 3) using the Old Testament to interpret the New Testament, all which violate fundamental Christian Biblical hermeneutics.