Return to the M.B. Herald Vol. 35, No. 14
Home Page
As one who was weaned on the teachings of Darby and has since chosen to affiliate with the Mennonite Brethren, I find the fascination with dispensational premillennialism among a few anabaptists to be somewhat incongruous. I was taught as a youngster that God worked throughout the Bible in different ways in different time periods (or dispensations). As a result, Israel and the church are separate communities. The New Testament (the "church age" or "dispensation of grace") was not foretold in the Old Testament ("the dispensation of law"). The church age is a parenthesis in God's plan, necessitated by Israel's rejection of her Messiah, and should be inserted between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel's prophecy. The prophetic calendar concerning Israel will only come into effect again after the church is raptured.
Several implications of this system merit comment. First, certain forms of dispensationalism require that Old Testament saints and Christians be saved by different means (by works and faith respectively), necessitating Christ's returning separately for each; they are not the people of God together, and the Old Testament law is of no direct concern to Christians.
Second, and even more significant for anabaptists, the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) are not applicable during the church age but represent a Kingdom ethic that has been set aside for the time being.
I am not suggesting that everyone who holds to a two-stage return of Christ accepts all of these related ideas, but in my upbringing it was clearly understood that they are all part of the same piece. Darby would not allow for the possibility of accepting his view of eschatology without also accepting the view of Scripture upon which it is based. If we are uncomfortable with some of the implications, then we should be cautious about views that depend upon this method of reading Scripture.
Brian Larmour, (E)
Winkler, Man.
Until a few years ago, I might have agreed with him. I have since been challenged by Christian leaders, speakers and friends to examine the Scriptures more closely, and have concluded that this is an issue where Christians should agree to disagree.
Redekop refers to "numerous Old and New Testament prohibitions", but I can think of only two, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. These verses are part of the Holiness Code that God gives to Israel and, like the prohibition against shaving (19:27) and the command to be circumcised, don't necessarily apply to Gentile believers. On the other hand, these acts are singled out as "detestable", which may or may not have a universal application. Robin Scroggs has demonstrated that the New Testament was concerned with pederasts, not homosexuals. And that's about it for prohibitions. Perhaps there are "two valid perspectives" after all.
Peter T. Chattaway, (E)
Surrey, B.C.
The article is out of date. Ewert claims 13 countries in the European union; there were 15 as of Dec. 31, 1992. He calls it the ECM, which was changed to E.U. over four years ago. He charges Lindsay and others with date setting, which I have never seen. He belittles the 666 man, saying that is history, but John wrote Revelation approximately AD 95, whereas Nero was in the AD 70s.
Ewert questions the tribulation period. I ask: When are those judgements predicted in the Old Testament as well as by Jesus in Matthew 24, Luke 21 and Mark 13 going to take place if not as predicted in Revelation?
We have been studying prophecy in detail for several years in our home Bible study, as well as six months in adult Sunday school, with average attendance of 50-60.
The spirit of that article is very unkind and negative toward anyone who thinks other than Ewert.
Ewert spiritualizes prophecy. Revelation 1:1-3 says Revelation is the testimony of Jesus and promises blessing to the one who reads, hears and takes to heart, which means to take Revelation literally. Pastors should be encouraged to warn people that will be left behind of the seriousness of taking the mark (Rev. 14:9). God says what He means, and we should be warning people rather than sowing seeds of doubt in our Christian papers.
I enjoy the Herald and Jim Coggins's articles.
Jake Reimer,
Port Rowan, Ont.
His sixth question, "Do we believe that . . . at least some Christians in our age have been given the gift of healing?", has been asked by many. A pastor from an evangelical church asked us one evening to pray for a difficult situation in his church. He, another pastor and an evangelist were to meet Joe (not his real name) to discern the spirit with which Joe was able to help heal people. Joe would demonstrate the power on his wife when he touched her at certain spots. There was no denying that the power was real, and Joe, being a church member, claimed it was a gift from God. In front of a number of witnesses in Joe's home, the pastor prayed for God's presence and then commanded in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ that every evil spirit in the room must leave. He then asked Joe to demonstrate what Joe had demonstrated many times, and it did not work.
The seventh question was: "How should we explain the lengthy biblical discussion of the gift of tongues?" The answer is found in I John 4:1-3, where the Holy Spirit commands us to "test the spirits, whether they be of God". An incident was related to me by Ruark, former teacher in cults in the Three Hills Bible Institute: Two men, one a Chinese, attended an "after-meeting" in a charismatic church in Calgary. The people there were speaking in tongues in what sounded like Chinese. The other man asked his Chinese friend whether he understood. The Chinese man replied "Yes, but it's so filthy."
There is no doubt that the Holy Spirit can give the gift of healing and the gift of speaking in tongues. Satan, the great imitator, can give both gifts as well. In the above incidents~, Christians had failed to obey the command given in I John 4. Many cults and New Agers speak in tongues. In most cases, a "high" is experienced by the person speaking in tongues, and a "low" soon after.
The Holy Spirit never brings attention to Himself. His gifts never glorify man. They are always given to glorify Jesus Christ.
Peter Hamm,
Kelowna, B.C.
My main concern is the May 31 letters that were very critical of David Ewert's teaching on eschatology. The critical letters clearly are proof of us living in the "last days" (II Timothy 3:1-5).
As a former student of Ewert (1966-70), I don't know of anyone in the MB Conference who is as well versed in the Holy Scriptures as brother Ewert. He always was well prepared for each class, always presenting various views on controversial issues and pointing out shortcomings of each.
The MB Conference trusted brother Ewert to teach its future leaders and church workers for many years, entrusting the presidency of MBBC to him for some time and calling him to teach at the Seminary. He was known for his unselfish devotion to the ministry of the MB Conference over decades. He deserves ~to be treated as a "senior statesman".
While my views ~on eschatology have changed from c ollege days, I highly respect brother Ewert's teaching.
It is deplorable when people who claim to have the mind of Christ can say: "All the ministers understood that Ewert doesn't know what he is talking about" or "he could better leave prophecy to those who have the gift of prophecy". The apostle Paul says: "Do not rebuke an older man harshly. . . . The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honour, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching" (I Timothy 5:1,17). To publicly portray brother Ewert as an ignoramus requires some serious soul searching, especially before participating at the next communion table.
In our day, we copy the standard of the world in our journalism and in our lack of respect for each other in the way we address each other in the household of faith. If we would seriously teach again about relationships within the family, the assembly of believers and society as Paul taught to the Ephesians, Colossians and Timothy, the respect of the world for the church would be greatly enhanced. I wonder how we expect the Lord to bless where teenagers call parents "guys", where pastors refer to children as "kids" and where all forms of respect are dropped in favour of "freedoms"? Isn't it time to create a different world inside the church than outside? Jesus did not nullify God's command: "Rise in the presence of the aged, show respect for the ~elderly and revere your God" (Leviticus 19:32).
Criticize? Yes, but in love and with due respect.
Isaak Eitzen,
St. Catharines, Ont.
The MB Church in particular, and the evangelical church worldwide, owes an immense debt to David Ewert for the many years of intense, devoted and excellent scholarship, teaching, writing and conference work that he has contributed, often at considerable cost to himself and his family. I suggest reading David Ewert's A Journey of Faith: An Autobiography (Kindred Press, 1993). Let us "hold such men in honour".
Frank Penner,
Winnipeg, Man.
Jane Woelk,
Winnipeg, Man.
Henry Wedel,
Winnipeg, Man.
I am the victim of sexual, emotional, psychological and spiritual abuse at the hands of Ed Dyck, a former church leader and a "man of God". I am writing in response to the article in the June 14 Herald. After several weeks of painful communication with the editor, I was led to believe the article would be printed with the correct, accurate information. In reality, my efforts to speak the truth have been crushed without a second thought. The practice of proofreading an article of such a personal nature was neglected. I do not expect the editor to understand, even remotely, what it required of me to go through the hard work of exposing the information to him. Yet I was assured by him that the correct information would be printed.
I was told to trust once again, only to have that trust betrayed once again. Trusting was my mistake.
I am referring to certain segments of the article which were of significant importance, involving specific dates and places, which were directly misquoted. I felt a familiar, deep sorrow when I read the article.
What is truth? The search for truth requires the courage of searching within yourself, even when all hope is gone. My heart is learning that taking risks, one small movement at a time, does take courage. Courage is not the absence of fear, but it is seeing your fear in a realistic perspective, defining it, considering the alternatives and choosing to function in spite of risk. This fear of risking inhibits the potential of courage. I knew I was taking a huge risk in allowing information to be printed, but my motivations and intentions were my desire for the truth to be spoken.
Mistakes are made, but there is no excuse for this destructive mistake. The credibility of the news in the MB Herald is now questionable.
I am a survivor of abuse. I have trudged toward the mountains, gone around them, and now I have come back to learn how to climb over them.
Name withheld
Editor's note:
Due to an editorial error, the next-to-last version of the article "Youth leader admits abuse", rather than the final edited version, was inadvertently given to our layout department and carried in our June 14 issue. As a result, some facts were misrepresented. We are very sorry for the additional pain caused to the victim and other people concerned, and are printing the parts of the story which contained the errors:
Column 1, paragraph 5:
. . . . Consequently, she went to the Scott Street leadership in December, 1994 and told them she had been raped and abused. At her request, they shared a statement describing the abuse with the Scott Street congregation in February, 1995; both the victim and Dyck had approved the statement ahead of time. . . .
Column 2, paragraph 2:
The sexual assault refers to touching and fondling that began after a youth retreat in August, 1975. The rape charges refer to various incidents of sexual exploitation, the first of which occurred in October, 1975 in a parking lot at McFarland Park. "Fraudulent means" means that Dyck used his power as her youth sponsor and spiritual mentor to manipulate the teen. When she questioned what he was doing, he assured her that it was all right and that this was "Christ's love He has given me for you". The teen says she was naive and didn't even know what intercourse was until the first rape occurred. When she said that she would tell what was going on, she was told in a threatening voice not to tell anyone.
Return to the M.B. Herald Vol. 35, No. 14
Home Page