Lewis S. Chafer said that dispensationalism has "...changed the Bible from being a mass of more or less conflicting
writings into a classified and easily assimilated revelation of both
the earthly and heavenly purposes of God, which reach on into eternity
to come.." Lewis. S. Chafer, ‘Dispensationalism,’ Bibliotheca Sacra, 93 (October 1936), 410, 416, 446-447
Chafer, a founder of Christian Zionism, following John Darby and C.I. Scofield, claimed the Bible is a mass or more or less conflicting writings and that dispensationalism or Christian Zionism makes the Bible more easily classified and assimilated, or more easily understood.
Yours is basically the myopia of the extremist.
There is often no reasoning with such.
And regardless of the particular shade of extremism, each suffers from the same narrow-minded lens that is the looking at a thing as an end product set in stone (content) in contrast to looking at it as an ever live dynamic (principles).
I've lost count of how often I have attempted to point out this critical distinction to various extremists on here, but here goes once more for nought, more often than not, I'm sure.
You basically asserted your set in stone take on a thing - "Lewis S. Chafer said that dispensationalism has '...changed the Bible from being a mass of more or less conflicting writings into a classified and easily assimilated revelation of both...'" this and that.
Now watch the actual live dynamic the Dispensationist is actually following, whether he knows it or not (though awareness of it will allow far much finer distinctions than is otherwise possible absent of said conscious awareness).
Here, I'll be talking principles over content set in stone.
Here goes...
Later, much more developed means of communication of intended meaning through various rules of grammar, as they were developed - rules like the separation of letters into individual words, and sentences, together with punctuation, and even further divisions of things via chapters and verses "changed the Bible from being a mass of more or less unclear writings, as is, into a much more organized or classified and easily assimilated revelation of both" one thing or another much better divided from one anorher, throughout the Scripture.
Dispensationalism is nothing more than that same kind of living dynamic, ever evolving...dynamic.
When one's Dispensationalism is actually consistent, that is.
A system dependent on the Scripture itself as to what goes where, just as an earlier form writing like this mass of letters all as one...
...gradually evolved into this much more organized and cohesive...
...via the much later, further developed system or "ism" we now know as a division of letters into individual words, together with an even further division of punctuation, and further still, the separation of thoughts into each their own sentences, chapters, and so on, towards far greater ease in use, and therefore, in greater ease of approachability.
You see, northwye, while your kind - regardless of school of thought - are blinded by your set in stone "this and that" this Dispy has long since evolved beyond the "milk" that is your obvious ignorance, to the meat that is "what higher principle or guiding rule of thumb is actually at work in whatever this or that, I happen to be looking at, and or am attempting to sort out..."
And what I have found is the important role that is shifting from looking at a thing from it's mere content, to a wider frame of reference, where it's various underlying principles are made obvious.
Not to worry, though, you and your kind are not the first in your kind of myopia...
The Lord Himself had to deal with such would be "fishermen" where this principle is concerned.
John 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8
opcorn:
