A DEFENSE OF DISPENSATIONALISM By Paul Wilson
One of the latest attacks on dispensationalism is a book entitled Backgrounds to Dispensationalism by Clarence B. Bass. It needs to be answered, and since its author took occasion to attack early Brethren (sometimes called Plymouth Brethren), we feel that it would be well to have a spokesman for dispensationalism among Brethren answer the book. That i$ why we have chosen this article by Paul Wilson who is editor of Christian Truth, a monthly periodical which staunchly main tains this position. A Defense of Dispensationalism by Pau l Wilson
PREFACE Dispensationalism is that line of truth which dis tinguishes between God’s special dealings with men on earth at different times. It makes a difference between God’s dealing with Adam in innocence, and then after the fall; with man’s being allowed to go his own way before the flood, and the government put into the hand of man after it. When man went into gross idolatry, God chose the seed of Abraham and separated it from the nations of the world to be a special people for Him to be a testimony to the one true God. Then when Israel turned to idolatry, H e allowed them to go into captivity. He brought a remnant back, and to them He presented His Son who came in grace; but they rejected Him. This present period is the time of God’s gathering out of the earth and ch iefly from among the Gentiles a body of believers to be the heavenly bride of Christ. The Lord’s coming to take them home is the next great event on God’s calendar; then tribulation w ill envelop the earth, after which Christ w ill come back to put down His enemies and reign. Israel w ill then be brought to judge their sins and w ill be restored into a favored earthly position during the Millennium . W ithout dispensational understanding, the Bible cannot be known with clarity. W e w ill now proceed to examine Dr. Bass’s book, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism. Its author has de grees in theology, and a Ph. D. from the University of Edinburgh. Dr. Bass has not brought forth anything new as an answer to dispensational truth, nor are his arguments more convincing that those which have previously been advanced by others. There seems to be the same under lying will to reject that which for some reason seems to cut across a predetermined course. One of the most frequently recurring phrases in Dr. Bass’s book is “ historic faith.” He seems to feel that because there is no record of the hope of the Lord’s coming, to call His redeemed ones to Himself, to be found in the writings of the so-called church fathers, it cannot be true. But this is illogical on the face of it; for a search of the writings of the church fathers will not prove anything, but that they were almost without ex ception in error. Some of them were not even sound on the deity of Christ, and it is vain to rely on the church fathers for any truth. Departure and declension were coming in rapidly before the apostles left the scene. If we go back to Scripture and refer to the parable JULY, 1962
of the ten virgins in Matthew 25, we find that from the beginning these professors (some real and some false) took their lamps (symbols of profession) and went forth to meet the bridegroom. Here, in unmistakable clarity, these professors at the beginning started out expecting the immediate coming of the bridegroom. That this was true in early Christianity is abundantly clear from m any scriptures. The Thessalonians turned to God from idols “ to wait” for His Son from heaven. There was no dispo sition to reject the imminence of the Lord’s coming in those days. But we read of an “ evil servant” who said in his heart, “My Lord delayeth his coming” (Matt 24:48). The basic fault was “ in his heart” ; he preferred to put it off because he did not desire to meet Him. Per haps this same evil is at work today. The ten virgins were not at fault in this way, but they ALL went to sleep; that is, they forgot to wait and watch for their coming bridegroom. They at first wearied and became drowsy and then lost the hope of the Lord’s return. They settled down in the world to live with and as the world. This continued for a long time, for they required an arousing call “ at midnight” to awaken them. In view of our Lord’s own parable to des cribe things after He left them, is it surprising that reli gious writers for century after century made no men tion of the hope of the Lord’s coming to claim His re deemed ones? The lack of such statements from the church fathers, and from all theological writers until the early part of the 19th century, is merely proof of the accuracy of our Lord’s parable. It was necessary that the hope be lost and then finally revived to fulfill the scriptures. Thus, the evidence cited by Dr. Bass and oth ers to prove that the Lord’s coming cannot be truth be cause it was so long not mentioned, is but proof of its truth and verity. Thank God that the parable does not say that they ever all went to sleep again; therefore His coming MUST be close at hand, for it is being given up on every side. It is coming under attack and would soon be lost, but before that can happen He will shout that shout and call us home. Dr. Bass’s search for supporters of his rejection of the truth of the Lord’s coming for His Church leads him into some strange territory, for he makes common cause with a foremost Seventh-day Adventist writer. He not only quotes from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by LeRoy Froom, but lauds his work- he writes thus: “ LeRoy Froom’s masterful survey of the history of es- 21
Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter