\u00a0 From the Conversations with Readers department appearing in the Spring 2008<\/a> issue. <\/p>\n The distinctions that Richie criticizes Chia for not<\/em> making are not genuine distinctions. Dispensationalism is not one-size-fits-all; there are a lot of significant differences among dispensationalists. Here are some examples of different dispensational views: cessationists who use ultra-dispensational arguments to keep the charismata in the early church, many Pentecostals that believe there will be an outpouring of the Spirit before the Rapture (whereas non-Pentecostals say that the apostasy of our culture is that mark of the end coming soon), and many Pentecostals who hold the idea that if you are not right with God that you will not \u201cgo up\u201d in the Rapture. I agree that Chia should not lump all pre-tribulation pre-millenarians together. However, Brother Richie appears to have created a straw man of what he feels is dispensationalism. To say that dispensationalism is built on an ultra-literalist hermeneutic is simply incorrect. These are like theological swear words. I fail to see how \u201cbelief in the chronology and reality of rapture-great tribulation-millennium\u201d is something other than dispensationalism.<\/p>\n Richie has developed a good reputation for himself through his writings in this publication, and I do appreciate what he has done here, even if we disagree on what dispensationalism is.<\/p>\n \u2014DJ<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response from Tony Richie:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n I appreciate D. J.\u2019s penetrating insight and gracious attitude. Biblical and theological conversations in this kind of mode are always a pleasure for me. They also tend to be more informative. Moreover, I think D. J. is correct in his general assertion that dispensationalism is a complex category. We ought to avoid oversimplification. However, in a short book review, the original author\u2019s, in this case, Chia\u2019s, discussion limits one\u2019s range. Yet D. J.\u2019s critique concerns itself with my own definition of (and disputation with?) dispensationalism. Particularly, he resists charges of \u201cultra-literalism\u201d and challenges whether retaining commitment to the rapture-tribulation-second coming-millennium continuum avoids dispensationalism after all. Mostly, he wishes to call attention to the complexity of the dispensationalist classification. I hope I understand and represent him correctly. Assuming I am, I will proceed to clarify my own position.<\/p>\n In a sense all Christians are dispensationalists in that they distinguish between the Old\/New Testaments (Covenants) of Moses and Jesus (John 1:17). Furthermore, Pentecostals are generally dispensationalists in their belief in a pneumatological eschatology, or \u201clatter rain\u201d outpouring of the Holy Spirit (cf. Joel 2:23). However, \u201cclassic dispensationalism,\u201d goes much farther, compartmentalizing God\u2019s dealings with humanity to a point of historical discontinuity. In other words, they tightly seal off the \u201cdispensations\u201d of history until the unchanging character and nature of God and his Word appear inconsistent or, worse, incongruous. Though there are other versions, for instance, the more recent (and more palatable) \u201cprogressive dispensationalism\u201d of Marvin Pate and others, the classic form of Darby and Scofield, albeit updated and expanded by Chafer and Ryrie and others, is still by far the most prominent. In fact, later adaptations are more like departures because they acquiesce on traditionally key points. For example, they abandon or seriously alter, the traditional dispensationalist doctrine that God has two separate peoples and programs, Israel and the Church, with the Church being merely \u201ca divine parenthesis\u201d\u2014as they term it\u2014in redemptive history. As this duality was a defining tenet of classic dispensationalism, to what extent they are still truly dispensationalist remains debatable. The extreme literalism (I don\u2019t mean to \u201cswear\u201d!) of classic dispensationalists is indisputable to anyone who has ever waded through tons of discussion about why kingdom of heaven<\/em> and kingdom of God<\/em> in the Synoptic Gospels must mean totally separate things or the difference between Israel<\/em> and Jacob<\/em> as denominatives for the OT theocracy. The same mindset lies behind the typical hard distinction between Israel and the Church. Although many liberal critics, such as Barbara Rossing, miss the point, belief in the Rapture is not necessarily dependent on dispensationalism. Excellent Pentecostal scholars such as Stanley Horton (The Promise of His Coming, <\/em>1967) and Hollis Gause (Revelation: God\u2019s Stamp of Sovereignty on History<\/em>, 1983) are not dispensationalist but do believe in the pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church. For me personally, belief in the pre-tribulation Rapture is a matter of imminence as much as anything. I believe the Bible teaches Christ could come at any moment and we had better be ready (e.g., Matt 24:44; Lu 12:40).<\/p>\n I am grateful to D. J. and to PR <\/em>for an opportunity to engage each other on these important matters of our faith. I look forward to a continuing and deepening discussion.<\/p>\n \u2014Tony<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u00a0 From the Conversations with Readers department appearing in the Spring 2008 issue. In Tony Richie\u2019s review of Roland Chia, Hope for the World: A Christian Vision of the Last Things (IVP, 2005), Pastor Richie says \u201cWhile Chia briefly notes \u2018historic premillennialism,\u2019 he focuses almost exclusively on \u2018dispensationalist premillennialism.\u2019 The former builds on…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2860,"featured_media":20666,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17,5531],"tags":[5534,3463,3464],"ppma_author":[4759],"class_list":["post-20665","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-indepth","category-spring-2008","tag-dispensationalism","tag-richie","tag-tony","author-tonyrichie"],"authors":[{"term_id":4759,"user_id":2860,"is_guest":0,"slug":"tonyrichie","display_name":"Tony Richie","avatar_url":{"url":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/tonyrichie-PTS-458x458-150x150.jpg","url2x":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/tonyrichie-PTS-458x458-150x150.jpg"},"0":null,"1":"","2":"","3":"","4":"","5":"","6":"","7":"","8":""}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20665","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2860"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20665"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20665\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24038,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20665\/revisions\/24038"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/20666"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20665"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20665"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20665"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/km7.a6a.mytemp.website\/journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=20665"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n![\"\"](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/08\/RChia-HopeForWorld-9780830833054.jpg\")
<\/a>In Tony Richie\u2019s review<\/a> of Roland Chia, Hope for the World: A Christian Vision of the Last Things <\/em>(IVP, 2005), Pastor Richie says \u201cWhile Chia briefly notes \u2018historic premillennialism,\u2019 he focuses almost exclusively on \u2018dispensationalist premillennialism.\u2019 The former builds on the apocalyptic literature of the Scriptures and the patristic teaching of the early Church, the latter on an ultra-literalist hermeneutic of Scripture shaped by a prefabricated paradigm popularized by J. N. Darby and C. I. Schofield [sic<\/em>] around the turn of the twentieth century. Increasingly, informed classical Pentecostals are identifying irreconcilable differences with such fundamentalist versions of dispensationalism. Dispensationalists are chiefly strong advocates of cessationism, and often entrenched opponents of Pentecostalism.\u201d<\/p>\n