A friend and I recently had a spirited discussion about two major theological perspectives: Fulfillment Theology and Dispensationalism. As we debated, one thing became clear—only one of these views truly aligns with Scripture, history, and logic.
Fulfillment Theology argues that the Church has inherited all of God’s promises to Israel, while Dispensationalism maintains that God’s covenant with Israel is still in effect and will be literally fulfilled. Through our discussion, I became more convinced that Dispensationalism is the more consistent and biblically faithful view.
Literal vs. Allegorical Interpretation
One of the first issues we tackled was whether the Bible should be taken literally or allegorically. My friend leaned toward a more symbolic approach, arguing that many of the Old Testament promises were fulfilled in Christ and the Church. But I pushed back—prophecy has always been fulfilled literally in the past. Christ was literally born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), He literally rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9), and He was literally pierced for our transgressions (Isaiah 53:5).
If past prophecies were fulfilled exactly as written, why should future ones—like Christ’s millennial reign (Revelation 20:1-6)—be any different? Dispensationalism remains consistent by taking prophecy at face value, while Fulfillment Theology arbitrarily ...
You must be a subscriber and logged in to view the complete article.
Login or Subscribe
