The Dispensational View of the Davidic Kingdom - The Master's ...
The Dispensational View of the Davidic Kingdom - The Master's ... The Dispensational View of the Davidic Kingdom - The Master's ...
236 The Master's Seminary Journalof the Father is the throne of David in heaven, and that the presentchurch age is indistinct from the kingdom. 88Ramifications for the Dispensational View of the Davidic KingdomProgressive dispensationalists' view of the Davidic kingdomhas brought to the forefront some crucial aspects of dispensationaltheology. Four areas in particular suggest future directions inevaluating PD and offering critiques of normative dispensationalism. 891. Hermeneutics.A crucial aspect, though not the focus of this paper, is that ofhermeneutics. On the one hand, progressives have offered helpfulcomments about the limitations of the hermeneutical designations"literal" "normal." Bock's expansion to a "historical-grammaticalliterary-theological"method is more complex and, consequently, ismore capable of handling the complexities faced in interpretation. 90On the other hand, nothing inherent in such an approach demands theemployment of an already-not yet framework. 91 Further, this fullermethod does not mutually exclude a `literal' interpretation. Thoseissues are beyond the scope of this essay. However, their mention88Ryrie, "Update on Dispensationalism" 21.89I am not suggesting that these issues are in any way breaking new ground fordispensationalism. However, these issues and the related texts are increasingly beingunderstood in new ways in light of the paradigm shifts occurring among progressivedispensationalists. My point is that these issues and interpretations of the text needrethinking and developing in light of the current questions being raised.90Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism 76-105, esp. 76-77.91Ibid., 96-100. Here Bock offers this method as a way of relating texts, arguingthat the already-not yet tensions are evident through the Bible and serve to link "theplan of God into a unified whole" (97). However, this approach may be operating onthe assumption that because x is similar to or like y, then y has become x, or at leastincorporates x into its meaning, but actually y is simply similar to x, yet still different.The point is that even with the use of a more complex hermeneutic, theologicalassumptions still lie behind the application of the already-not yet framework to OTpromises.
Dispensational View of the Davidic Kingdom 237here points out a need to explore hermeneutical features in moredetail.2. The Rejected/Postponed Davidic-Kingdom View.Ultimately, a commitment to being consistent with Scriptureand not tradition is the issue in the ongoing development of theology.In this regard, the need is for a solid exegetical defense of the rejected/postponedview. A current deserving work along these lines isthat of Cleon Rogers mentioned above. This type of work is necessaryas the progressives have demonstrated that dispensationalists can nolonger simply assume the rejected/postponed paradigm. Perhaps afruitful study would be to examine the language of fulfillment inLuke-Acts as Luke progresses from the birth narratives through thelife of Christ and on to Peter's sermons. Here a study of the contrast/comparisonof the introductory formulas, the content of thequotations, and the context of the passages employing the quotationslooks most promising.3. The Present Form of the Church.Another area brought to the surface through the work of theprogressives is the differences of opinion about the relationship of thechurch to the overarching concept of the universal kingdom orsovereign rule of God. Progressives and non-dispensationalists alikeare making much of these differences and perhaps inconsistencies onbehalf of dispensationalists. A need exists for a thorough and clearexpression of the church's role as distinct from: (1) the Davidickingdom at present (What are the implications of viewing the churchas a mystery form of the kingdom? Cf. Matthew 13 parables.); (2) theDavidic kingdom during the millennium (Is ruling with Christparticipation in the Davidic kingdom? Cf. Rev 3:21); and (3) theuniversal kingdom of God. Some texts relevant to this discussiondeserve significant treatment (such as Eph 1:19-23; 1 Pet 3:22; passagesin Acts and Hebrews used by the progressives.)4. The Consistent Distinction Between Israel and the Church.The rejection of the normative dispensational view of theDavidic kingdom by the progressives is crucial because it impinges onthe dispensational distinctive of a separation of Israel from the church.
- Page 1 and 2: TMSJ 7/2 (Fall 1996) 213-239THE DIS
- Page 3 and 4: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 5 and 6: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 7 and 8: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 9 and 10: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 11 and 12: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 13 and 14: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 15 and 16: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 17 and 18: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 19 and 20: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 21 and 22: Dispensational View of the Davidic
- Page 23: Dispensational View of the Davidic
236 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Master's</strong> Seminary Journal<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fa<strong>the</strong>r is <strong>the</strong> throne <strong>of</strong> David in heaven, and that <strong>the</strong> presentchurch age is indistinct from <strong>the</strong> kingdom. 88Ramifications for <strong>the</strong> <strong>Dispensational</strong> <strong>View</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Davidic</strong> <strong>Kingdom</strong>Progressive dispensationalists' view <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Davidic</strong> kingdomhas brought to <strong>the</strong> forefront some crucial aspects <strong>of</strong> dispensational<strong>the</strong>ology. Four areas in particular suggest future directions inevaluating PD and <strong>of</strong>fering critiques <strong>of</strong> normative dispensationalism. 891. Hermeneutics.A crucial aspect, though not <strong>the</strong> focus <strong>of</strong> this paper, is that <strong>of</strong>hermeneutics. On <strong>the</strong> one hand, progressives have <strong>of</strong>fered helpfulcomments about <strong>the</strong> limitations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hermeneutical designations"literal" "normal." Bock's expansion to a "historical-grammaticalliterary-<strong>the</strong>ological"method is more complex and, consequently, ismore capable <strong>of</strong> handling <strong>the</strong> complexities faced in interpretation. 90On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, nothing inherent in such an approach demands <strong>the</strong>employment <strong>of</strong> an already-not yet framework. 91 Fur<strong>the</strong>r, this fullermethod does not mutually exclude a `literal' interpretation. Thoseissues are beyond <strong>the</strong> scope <strong>of</strong> this essay. However, <strong>the</strong>ir mention88Ryrie, "Update on <strong>Dispensational</strong>ism" 21.89I am not suggesting that <strong>the</strong>se issues are in any way breaking new ground fordispensationalism. However, <strong>the</strong>se issues and <strong>the</strong> related texts are increasingly beingunderstood in new ways in light <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> paradigm shifts occurring among progressivedispensationalists. My point is that <strong>the</strong>se issues and interpretations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> text needrethinking and developing in light <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> current questions being raised.90Blaising and Bock, Progressive <strong>Dispensational</strong>ism 76-105, esp. 76-77.91Ibid., 96-100. Here Bock <strong>of</strong>fers this method as a way <strong>of</strong> relating texts, arguingthat <strong>the</strong> already-not yet tensions are evident through <strong>the</strong> Bible and serve to link "<strong>the</strong>plan <strong>of</strong> God into a unified whole" (97). However, this approach may be operating on<strong>the</strong> assumption that because x is similar to or like y, <strong>the</strong>n y has become x, or at leastincorporates x into its meaning, but actually y is simply similar to x, yet still different.<strong>The</strong> point is that even with <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> a more complex hermeneutic, <strong>the</strong>ologicalassumptions still lie behind <strong>the</strong> application <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> already-not yet framework to OTpromises.
Change language