DISPENSATIONAL PREMILLENNIALISM
PART 5 - Consequences

The theory of Dispensational Premillennialism has been proven to be a false theory. We have examined many of its major points in the light of scripture and seen that they simply do not hold up. But someone may ask, "Does it really make any difference? Dispensational Premillennialism is an exciting theory, it gets people interested in current events and sends them back to the Bible looking for clues to the future. It generates a great deal of interest. What difference does it make what a person believes about the Second Coming of the Lord as long as they believe that the Lord IS coming back? Isn't Dispensational Premillennialism really just harmless speculation?

What I would like to do is to show conclusively that it does make a great deal of difference what one believes about the Second Coming of the Lord. I would like to show that the theory of Dispensational Premillennialism or any other brand of premillennialism, is not just harmless speculation but carries with it some consequences that are simply unacceptable to one who believes the Gospel. As a matter of fact, I want to show that a person cannot believe what the Bible says about the Lord Jesus, about God the Father, about the kingdom, about the blood of Christ, about salvation being available to all individuals whether they be Jew or Gentile, and believe in Dispensational Premillennialism. It is not a harmless theory!

Several things concern me about this fanciful speculation about the End Times. First of all, it absolutely makes the first coming of the Lord Jesus into this world a failure. Every Dispensational Premillennialist that I have read admits and accepts that when John the Baptist preached that the "kingdom was nigh," it truly was nigh, nearby or at hand. They admit and accept that when Jesus came "preaching the gospel of the kingdom," He had come here to establish that very kingdom. However, the Jews rejected Jesus, did not want Him to reign over them as their King and therefore, Jesus could not set up His kingdom. I deny as vehemently as I can that Jesus was unable to do what He came to do.

In an earlier lesson we have demonstrated conclusively that the Jewish people wanted Jesus to be their earthly king, indeed they were going "to take him by force, to make him a king' (John 6:15). We showed that Jesus did establish His kingdom, but it was not meant to be an earthly kingdom. He said, "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36). We showed that Paul and John both said that they were in the kingdom, an impossibility if the kingdom has not yet been established. Paul spoke of "saints and faithful brethren" being "delivered from the power of darkness" and "translated into the kingdom of his dear Son" (Colossians 1:2-3). Jesus did not fail to set up His kingdom. But what of other aspects of His work?

I want you to notice something with me. We all recognize that the chapter divisions in the Bible are not inspired; they were added by man. Sometimes those chapter divisions help a great deal, and sometimes they tend to interrupt a flow of thought. One such place, I believe, is found in Galatians 3 and 4. In Galatians 3 Paul was demonstrating how Abraham was the father of all believers; that the promise made to Abraham had been made long before the giving of the Law of Moses. He wrote also of the purpose of the Law of Moses. I'd like us to pick up reading in Galatians 3:24, and read through Galatians 4:5. The passage reads as follows, "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."

Now think about this. Galatians 3 & 4 tell us that God the Father sent Jesus into the world at the appointed time, "the fullness of time;" for an appointed purpose, "to redeem;" and that He did it, 'For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." Was it the "fullness of time" or wasn't it? Did He fulfill His purpose or didn't He? The Dispensational Premillennialist must answer those questions with a NO!

There are a few more passages I would like for you to look at in considering the ungodly idea that Jesus failed in His mission when He came here the first time. In John 17:1-4 we read these words, "These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do." Now I know that Jesus was yet to die, but does anyone think that He did not know that at the time of this prayer? Does anyone truly think that the death of Jesus was not part of God's plan? In John 12:27, Jesus said, "Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour." And then down in verses 31-33, Jesus said, "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die."

Oh no, brethren and friends, Jesus' mission was an absolute success. He did what He came to do and no amount of fanciful speculation by those who are tied to the earthly and physical just as the Jews of the first century were can change that fact.

Something else that really concerns me about this false theory of Dispensational Premillennialism is what it does to the church. This theory makes the church nothing more than a stop-gap measure, a parenthesis is what some call it, an "unexpected aspect" or a "spiritual contingent" something that God did not actually plan for. This idea minimizes the One Body of people, the "Body of Christ" for which the Lord died. In Acts 20:28, in the midst of his farewell address to the Ephesian elders, Paul said, "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the Rock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." It is unfathomable to me that this theory would refer "to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all" (Ephesians 1:22-23), a "stop-gap" measure.

A simple reading of Ephesians 3: 1-11, takes care of the idea of the church as a spiritual contingency that was not in God's plans. In the interest of time, we will look at verses 9-1 1. There we read, "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God. According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord."

My friends, Paul said that the church is "according to the eternal purpose" of God. It was meant to show forth the manifold wisdom of God, just like a bridge shows forth the wisdom and the skill of its designer. You cannot believe what Paul wrote in Ephesians by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and be a Premillennialist. The two views, Paul's and the premillennialist's, are diametrically opposed to one another.

I would suppose that the majority of those who are Dispensational Premillennialists are not Jewish by birth, but rather are Gentiles. We all understand that you are either one or the other. All of us are either Jew or Gentile. We would also all understand that the majority of people in the world are not Jewish, but are Gentile. Now you may be asking, "Why would he now be talking about Jews and Gentiles? What difference does that make as far as Dispensational Premillennialism is concerned right now?" The answer to that is simple - if Dispensational Premillennialism is true, or any other brand of premillennialism for that matter, than salvation is not available to Gentiles yet, and that is another consequence of this false theory. Let me show you why.

In Acts 15, in the city of Jerusalem, a very important controversy was being addressed by the apostles and elders. The controversy involved Gentile converts to the Lord. Certain of the Jewish Christians were demanding that Gentiles adhere to certain aspects of the Law of Moses, especially circumcision, in order to be saved. Paul had stood in strong opposition to them and now the question was going to be answered. First, Peter spoke, telling of the conversion of the Gentiles. He was referring to Cornelius and his household from Acts 10. Peter's conclusion was that they should not put the "yoke" of the Law of Moses upon the Gentiles. Secondly, Paul and Barnabus spoke, "declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them." Then James spoke in verses 13-19. The passage says, "And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works From the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles we turned to God."

In his comments James appealed to Amos 9:11-12. Amos prophesied of the destruction of Israel and their carrying away into captivity by the Assyrians. He said that after certain things that he had spoken of had occurred, then God would rebuild, or "raise up the tabernacle of David." Now we need to understand that the "tabernacle of David" refers to his house, or the royal line. The Dispensational Premillennialists tell us that the "tabernacle of David" will not be rebuilt until Jesus returns to establish His kingdom in the city of Jerusalem, reigning on David's literal throne. But James understood that to have been fulfilled when "God at the first did visit the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name." He said, "To this agree the words of the prophets..." He was saying, "This is that ...... just as Peter did in Acts 2:16. James was inspired of the Holy Spirit - the Dispensational Premillennialists are not. Who are we to believe?

But now there is another point to make, indeed the point I really want us to notice. The reason the "tabernacle of David" was to be rebuilt was so that, in order that, "the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things." If the "tabernacle of David" has not been rebuilt, as the Dispensational Premillennialists theorize, if this prophecy was not truly fulfilled as James said that it was, then the Gentiles cannot seek after the Lord now! Let me repeat that. "The word "that" is the fatal word of premillennialism. They tell us that the tabernacle of David is yet future, that it will not be rebuilt until national Israel is restored in the millennium. But in Acts 15 James quoted God as saying through Amos the prophet that he would 'build again' the tabernacle of David and 'set it up' that the Gentiles might seek after the Lord. Now, if that prophecy has not been fulfilled - if the tabernacle of David has not been rebuilt - then the Gentiles cannot seek after the Lord now. Premillennialism asserts that it has not, therefore premillennialism denies salvation to the Gentiles now" (Wallace, Foy E. Jr. , God's Prophetic Word, p. 373).

One more consequence of this false theory that I feel must be mentioned (there are several more that could be mentioned), I will introduce this way. Several years ago I was involved in an extensive discussion with a premillennialist. After considerable time, as I was preparing to leave, I made some remark about the King, Jesus. His response was, "He's not my King now. He will be, but He is not King now!" Needless to say, that response started yet another discussion.

Brethren and friends, Dispensational Premillennialism dethrones my King Jesus. It denies that, "the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords" is reigning now. It teaches that Jesus will not be reigning as King in His own right until He returns to establish that earthly kingdom of 1,000 years duration. They are wrong, and the dethroning of the King is blasphemous. In Acts 2, in the midst of Peter's sermon, he said the following in verses 29-33. "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being prophet, and knowing that God had swom with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we are all witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear." Jesus was raised to reign. He is on the throne of David now. Peter said that the very promise made to David had reference to the resurrection of Jesus. Again, whom do we believe - Peter or the Dispensational Premillennialists?

When Jesus returns, He will be delivering His kingdom back up to the Father, not establishing it. Let's close by looking at I Corinthians 15:23-26, where we find, "But every man in his own order; Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."

From a series of sermons by Greg Litmer