Thread: Dispensationalism - looking for a good book

I am looking for a good book that really explains the history and doctrine of dispensationalism that is not 10,000 pages long

If there are any online resources as well that you could recommend that would be great.

I noticed that the majority of Reformed hold to Covenant theology which I am starting to read Christ and the Covenants O Palmer Robertson.

But why does John MacArthur hold to this view? Just curious to know what you might think about this. Also I am a frequent visitor to Phil Johnson's blog Pyromaniacs and he made this statement in one of his posts "Jim is a fellow-Calvidispiebaptogelical" I am assuming he means 1. A Calvinist 2. A dispensationalist 3. Padoebaptist ? So he is another Reformed person who is a dispensationalist? Just curious, how do you reconcile these two views of Reformed and dispensationalist.

I did see a few books, one by A.W. Pink a Study in Dispensationalism and I guess that one is good since he himself was one at one time??

So any suggestions for a newby in reformed theology to sink my teeth into this subject would be helpful.

Steve

Originally Posted by The Author of my Faith

I am looking for a good book that really explains the history and doctrine of dispensationalism that is not 10,000 pages long

If there are any online resources as well that you could recommend that would be great.

I noticed that the majority of Reformed hold to Covenant theology which I am starting to read Christ and the Covenants O Palmer Robertson.

But why does John MacArthur hold to this view? Just curious to know what you might think about this.

I did see a few books, one by A.W. Pink a Study in Dispensationalism and I guess that one is good since he himself was one at one time??

So any suggestions for a newby in reformed theology to sink my teeth into this subject would be helpful.

Steve

Two very good resources that come immediately to mind and are easily available are John Gerstner's Primer on Dispensationalism - it's very short but to the point. Keith Mathison also has an excellent book entitled "Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?"

Another book that comes highly recommended is Vern Poythress's Understanding Dispensationalists, though I haven't personally read it so I can't vouch for it.

I'd also see if you can get your hands on a copy of Gerstner's more substantial work, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth. I know you can get that at the Nicene Council website, here. The Nicene Council also has a DVD out, the first volume of a multivolume set, entitled "The Late Great Planet Church", though I've not seen it.

Originally Posted by The Author of my Faith

Also I am a frequent visitor to Phil Johnson's blog Pyromaniacs and he made this statement in one of his posts "Jim is a fellow-Calvidispiebaptogelical" I am assuming he means 1. A Calvinist 2. A dispensationalist 3. Padoebaptist ?
Steve

Actually your number three is wrong: it stands for "Baptist", i.e. he believes in believers baptism.

I read Mathesons "Rightly Dividing the People of God" for class. It was very good and helped me see the very clear lines between DT and CT

Originally Posted by Damon Rambo

Originally Posted by The Author of my Faith

Also I am a frequent visitor to Phil Johnson's blog Pyromaniacs and he made this statement in one of his posts "Jim is a fellow-Calvidispiebaptogelical" I am assuming he means 1. A Calvinist 2. A dispensationalist 3. Padoebaptist ?
Steve

Actually your number three is wrong: it stands for "Baptist", i.e. he believes in believers baptism.

thanks for letting me know that on number 3 I thought that it was not consistent with what I know about him.

I started going to college to study for the ministry and I was a baptist, but had no idea what dispensational or covenant theology was.

After three years of having professors beat dispensationalism over my head i'm now a Reformed Calvinist Paedobaptist Monergist Presbyterian, in other words, the OPPOSITE of a dispensational fundamentalist baptist.


Allis, Oswald T. Prophecy and the Church.

Cox, William E. Examination of Dispensationalism

Crenshaw, Curtis I. And Grover Gunn III. Dispensationalism Today, Yesterday, and Tomorrow.
Gertsner, John. Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism

Machen, Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?

Mathison, Keith. Dispensationalism.

Poythress, Vern. Understanding Dispensationalists.

Weber, Timothy P. On the Road to Armageddon.

Williams, Michael. This World is Not My Home: The Origins and Development of Dispensationalism.

I read Machen's book twice cuz it was so good and that one pretty much sealed the deal. Certain arguments in there are outdated since dispensationalism evolves so much to try to fix its errors, but most of it is applicable and relevant.

I haven't read it, but I assume that Williams' book (based on its title) must be more relevant to the topic you questioned about, so you might want to check that one out.


some good books to buy are here:
Against Dispensationalism books and DVDs


some free books and articles on it are here:
http://www.preteristsite.com/contradispy.html


a newsletter dealing with some problems and theology of dispensationalism are here:
Dispensationalism in Transition


Here is Brian Schwetley's Article on why the pretribulational rapture is NOT Biblical:
Is the Pretribulation Rapture Theory Biblical?


Hope that helps you out a little in your research!

Let me tell you one thing that is for sure: you will NOT find a resource from a dispensationalist with a fair, accurate account of dispensational history. Why? Because dispensational history is embarrassing--unacademic, based on eschatological hype, etc.

you say...

But why does John MacArthur hold to this view? Just curious to know what you might think about this.

Remember, John Macarthur is a man. Don't hold him higher than others as though he's less likely to fall for bad theology and doctrine.Why does ANYONE hold to dispensationalism? anybody can be deceived when it comes to theological views. John Macarthur is not a typical dispensationalist, but he is a dispensationalist nontheless. He has done much for the church, but that doesn't mean his theology's all that great.

An example is how he said that "every self-respecting calvinist is a premillennialist." This statement is, ofcourse, not theologically or practically based, but shows some sort of ignorance on his part. That comment was made at the Shepherd's Conference 2007 at Grace Community Church, Sun Valley California.

Read this book if you're interested about MacArthur's errors on his view of calvinism and premillennialism:
Amazon.com: MacArthur's Millennial Manifesto (9780980217926): Samuel E. Waldron: Books

Originally Posted by Nathan Riese

Machen, Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?

...

I read Machen's book twice cuz it was so good and that one pretty much sealed the deal. Certain arguments in there are outdated since dispensationalism evolves so much to try to fix its errors, but most of it is applicable and relevant.

Are you sure? I can't find any record of Machen having written such a book, especially of the same title as Keith Mathison's.

Are you sure? I can't find any record of Machen having written such a book, especially of the same title as Keith Mathison's.

DOPE! my bad! you're right. not sure why my brain did that!

[/quote]

Two very good resources that come immediately to mind and are easily available are John Gerstner's Primer on Dispensationalism - it's very short but to the point. Keith Mathison also has an excellent book entitled "Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?"

Another book that comes highly recommended is Vern Poythress's Understanding Dispensationalists, though I haven't personally read it so I can't vouch for it.

I'd also see if you can get your hands on a copy of Gerstner's more substantial work, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth. I know you can get that at the Nicene Council website, here. The Nicene Council also has a DVD out, the first volume of a multivolume set, entitled "The Late Great Planet Church", though I've not seen it.[/QUOTE]

Nicene Council holds to preterist view correct? Is that in line with reformed theology? I am not to familiar with that view point though I know it claims most happened in 70 AD?

Two very good resources that come immediately to mind and are easily available are John Gerstner's Primer on Dispensationalism - it's very short but to the point. Keith Mathison also has an excellent book entitled "Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?"

Another book that comes highly recommended is Vern Poythress's Understanding Dispensationalists, though I haven't personally read it so I can't vouch for it.

I'd also see if you can get your hands on a copy of Gerstner's more substantial work, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth. I know you can get that at the Nicene Council website, here. The Nicene Council also has a DVD out, the first volume of a multivolume set, entitled "The Late Great Planet Church", though I've not seen it.[/QUOTE]

Nicene Council holds to preterist view correct? Is that in line with reformed theology? I am not to familiar with that view point though I know it claims most happened in 70 AD?[/QUOTE]

Yes that is correct that Nicene Council holds to the partial preterist view. They are VERY opposed to full preterism. There is a HUGE distinction.
Nicene Council are fully reformed confessionalists as well.

Check out Gentry's book Before Jerusalem Fell. Very good read.
Before Jerusalem Fell

He has another one titled The Beast of Revelation. I haven't read it yet but i'm sure it'll be good. Gentry's ordained PCA.
Beast of Revelation

All Thanks for your input. I am going to get the book Rightly Dividing the People of God. Question. I have been reading many things about this on Monergism's Theology page. I am seeing that there are many reformed people who hold to Premillennial view, but not necessarily to a pretrib view? It gets rather confusing with SO many different views. Is Premillinial synonymous with Dispensationalism?

The answer is no. Premillenial is not synonymous with dispensationalism in that many historical premil`s are not dispensational, however, it can be said that all dispensationalists are pre-mil.

Originally Posted by Michael Doyle

The answer is no. Premillenial is not synonymous with dispensationalism in that many historical premil`s are not dispensational, however, it can be said that all dispensationalists are pre-mil.

he's right. Dispensationalism takes premillennialism and adds things that historic premillennialists would completely disagree with.

Reformed premillennialists would be historic premil
Dispensationalists would be dispensational (pretribulational) premil.

There is a big difference between the two. those who are reformed and historic premil are those who have the covenant, reformed, calvinistic faith and have premillennialism as their eschatology.

One who believes in Reformed Covenant theology can be premil, amil, or postmil

Dispensationalists are contra-reformed, contra-covenantalists, and their theology necessitates pretribulational premillennialism and nothing else.

Here's another recommendation:

Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, by Clarence B. Bass (Baker Books, 1960). Re-published by Wipf & Stock Publishers in 2005.

Amazon.com: Backgrounds to Dispensationalism: Its Historical Genesis and Ecclesiastical Implications (2005) (9781597520812): Clarence B. Bass: Books

You know, Jim, all I can think of when I see your new moniker is:

All I can think of when I see that pic is to ask him, gently, if I can mix him a drink.

There is a DVD called " The late great planet church: the rise of dispensationalism". Very good dvd.Perhaps this shall help.:-D

Originally Posted by Berean

All I can think of when I see that pic is to ask him, gently, if I can mix him a drink.

Just remember, I know tings.

Originally Posted by Jimmy the Greek

Originally Posted by Berean

All I can think of when I see that pic is to ask him, gently, if I can mix him a drink.

Just remember, I know tings.

Jimmy, you sound like your from my neighborhood. Brooklyn! I know dings too!

OK as I read I get MORE CONFUSED! OH FUHGEDABOUDIT!!!

In Reformed Theology you have Amil, Premil, Postmil. BUT they are not Dispensationalists correct? Do all these views above believe that the Church will go through the tribulation?

So does that mean a Dispensationalist can be Amil, Premil, Postmil? And do they believe that the church will NOT go through the tribulation?

My Head Hurts!!!!!!!!

Steve, friend, I would encourage you to read a short book on Dispensationalism by a Dispensationalist. Then, you will know exactly what they believe. Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism is probably still the most useful, broadly accepted, accessible treatment of the subject. You can find it on the internet used for around $5, shipping included. If you want a book that focuses specifically on the eschatological aspects of Dispensationalism, I would recommend The Rapture Question by John Walvoord.

Since so many Christians are Dispensationalists, it's a work of love for us to understand what they believe. There are some good Reformed treatments out there if you just want to confirm what you already believe, but nothing is as useful as getting it straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

I just received Gerstner's Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth yesterday.
Just read the preface and first ten pages this morning before work.

Originally Posted by CharlieJ

Steve, friend, I would encourage you to read a short book on Dispensationalism by a Dispensationalist. Then, you will know exactly what they believe. Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism is probably still the most useful, broadly accepted, accessible treatment of the subject. You can find it on the internet used for around $5, shipping included. If you want a book that focuses specifically on the eschatological aspects of Dispensationalism, I would recommend The Rapture Question by John Walvoord.

Since so many Christians are Dispensationalists, it's a work of love for us to understand what they believe. There are some good Reformed treatments out there if you just want to confirm what you already believe, but nothing is as useful as getting it straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

I will do that. I have to SLOWWWWWW down. THis weekend I am going to purchase a few of the books recommended and take my time and try to make sense of this very confusing and controversial subject of eschatology and then hopefully come to my own position as to what I feel is the most biblical. But I dont want to be obsessed with this either. Some of my fiends are over the top end time guru's who are dispensationalists and have every thing mapped out to the T. Everytime there is a car accident or a murder or a fire or a plane crash they say "that is a sign of the times" Oy Vey!!!!!! I might just forget about this whole issue and adopt my friends view who still is not sure what he believes in this area but is very strong in the doctrines of grace and other biblical doctrines. He adheres to PanMil. And I think I am leaning towards that view as well.

WE shall see.

Thanks all!!

Originally Posted by CharlieJ

Steve, friend, I would encourage you to read a short book on Dispensationalism by a Dispensationalist. Then, you will know exactly what they believe. Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism is probably still the most useful, broadly accepted, accessible treatment of the subject. You can find it on the internet used for around $5, shipping included. If you want a book that focuses specifically on the eschatological aspects of Dispensationalism, I would recommend The Rapture Question by John Walvoord.

Since so many Christians are Dispensationalists, it's a work of love for us to understand what they believe. There are some good Reformed treatments out there if you just want to confirm what you already believe, but nothing is as useful as getting it straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

But doesn't your post assume that the Reformed Treatments are not fair in their describing the system that they wish to critique? If they are fair, then why does one have to get a book in defense of the system to "really" understand it?

I am not against reading sympathetic treatments but I think your advocacy goes a bit far.

CT

Originally Posted by ChristianTrader

Originally Posted by CharlieJ

Steve, friend, I would encourage you to read a short book on Dispensationalism by a Dispensationalist. Then, you will know exactly what they believe. Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism is probably still the most useful, broadly accepted, accessible treatment of the subject. You can find it on the internet used for around $5, shipping included. If you want a book that focuses specifically on the eschatological aspects of Dispensationalism, I would recommend The Rapture Question by John Walvoord.

Since so many Christians are Dispensationalists, it's a work of love for us to understand what they believe. There are some good Reformed treatments out there if you just want to confirm what you already believe, but nothing is as useful as getting it straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

But doesn't your post assume that the Reformed Treatments are not fair in their describing the system that they wish to critique? If they are fair, then why does one have to get a book in defense of the system to "really" understand it?

I am not against reading sympathetic treatments but I think your advocacy goes a bit far.

CT

I agree. Also, dispensationalists make claims about themselves and about others that are not true, and use quite a bit of propaganda to scare people into believing their theology. I'm at a dispensational fundamentalist bible college right now, so i'm right in the middle of it. I'm not quite so sure he's ready to face that, from the look of his biography and comments made here. I'm assuming (but only for sake of caution) that he's not seasoned with the positive enough (covenant theology) to be given the negative (dispensationalism).

one resource that looks at Dispensationalism from a dispensationalist point of view is Charles Ryrie's work entitled Dispensationalism. It is not a long read and in it he contrasts dispensationalism with Covenant theology, etc.

Again, Ryrie is a dispensationalist, so his view will be biased and in favor of that view.

All of the resources listed have some value (esp. Gerstner and Poythress).

Since, the popular appeal of dispensationalism is in its pre-trib, premil eschatology, I would recommend Riddlebarger's A Case for Amillennialism. He writes as an ex-dispensationalist for dispensationalists to show them a better way. His MP3s (Amillennialism 101) are also a user-friendly entry point and FREE (Riddleblog - Reformed Amillennialism). He quotes Ryrie and Walvoord a great deal and shows the problems with the dispensational system. You will never find a better comparison and contrast than Riddlebarger. He is VERY understandable and quite knowledgeable (did his PhD under Richard Muller with a dissertation on Warfield).

The DVD mentioned is good. However, the proposed second volume will be much more helpful in dealing with the biblical and doctrinal errors of dispensationalism. The first one focuses more on its storied and somewhat sordid history.

Originally Posted by passingpilgrim

one resource that looks at Dispensationalism from a dispensationalist point of view is Charles Ryrie's work entitled Dispensationalism. It is not a long read and in it he contrasts dispensationalism with Covenant theology, etc.

Again, Ryrie is a dispensationalist, so his view will be biased and in favor of that view.

If you pick up Ryrie, be sure to get the latest edition. The first one tackles my buddy Dan Fuller. This one also interacts with the challenge of "Progressive Dispensationalism" and updates the material in helpful ways.

Ryrie is THE source sited for the definition of dispensationalism. He will make it clear that the two defining characteristics of dispensationalism are a claim to read prophecy "literally" and a definitive separation of "Israel" from the "Church."

Thats It I am A PANMIL Live for Jesus and he will PAN it all out in the end!! LOL!

Only Kidding. Brothers thanks so much for your insight. I have read everyone's comments and plan on reading all that has ben recommended

I am Studying Romans right now and using the following commentaries: Thomas Schriener/R.C. Sproul/ML Jones/Barnhouse/Moo.

Since I come from an Arminian background where Doctrine is a four letter word and most of my freinds could not even spell eschatology or expiation or propitiation or any other important doctrine that the bible teaches, I want to start fresh in Romans and re-study God's Word in light of Reformed Theology. I am amazed that most people I know in the arminian camps really have no stance doctrinally on many issues. I was a memeber of a world famous huge church for 20 years in Brooklyn with a famous choir. The theology was simply this" Just say yes to the Holy Spirit. You do not need seminary or bible school, just say yes." It is only when I embraced Reformed Theology a little over a year ago that I was indroduced to the richness of Doctrine found in God's Word and realized how little I really knew. Now mind you I was preaching/teaching/studying and was considered someeone who knew God's Word. But I was quickly humbled when I began to rub shoulders with men who have been under Reformed Theology for years and it has created a deep hunger to know God's Word in a greater way. So I have to be careful because I want to devour it all and this is something that will take a lifetime. I never even heard of Covenant Theology and I have been a beliver for 20 years. I have freinds who were sent to plant churches under my old church who never went to bible school and I see how sorely lacking they are in biblical knowledge. I am so blessed to be around men who think that Doctrine is important and am learning so much. That is where I am right now and I am asking all of you to pray for me that God will give me greater understanding in these issues. God Bless!!

Steve

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

All of the resources listed have some value (esp. Gerstner and Poythress).

Since, the popular appeal of dispensationalism is in its pre-trib, premil eschatology, I would recommend Riddlebarger's A Case for Amillennialism. He writes as an ex-dispensationalist for dispensationalists to show them a better way. His MP3s (Amillennialism 101) are also a user-friendly entry point and FREE (Riddleblog - Reformed Amillennialism). He quotes Ryrie and Walvoord a great deal and shows the problems with the dispensational system. You will never find a better comparison and contrast than Riddlebarger. He is VERY understandable and quite knowledgeable (did his PhD under Richard Muller with a dissertation on Warfield).

The DVD mentioned is good. However, the proposed second volume will be much more helpful in dealing with the biblical and doctrinal errors of dispensationalism. The first one focuses more on its storied and somewhat sordid history.

I Just listened to the First teaching on Amil by Kim Riddlebarger. Very imformative!! Thanks.

I think that it is the second or third one devotes much time to dispensationalism, per se.

Originally Posted by Nathan Riese

I agree. Also, dispensationalists make claims about themselves and about others that are not true, and use quite a bit of propaganda to scare people into believing their theology. I'm at a dispensational fundamentalist bible college right now, so i'm right in the middle of it. I'm not quite so sure he's ready to face that, from the look of his biography and comments made here. I'm assuming (but only for sake of caution) that he's not seasoned with the positive enough (covenant theology) to be given the negative (dispensationalism).

CT and Nathan, what I said was pretty clear. The best way to understand anything is by reading the source, unless the source is extremely obscure or in another language. CT, there are a few ok Reformed works, but I'm not impressed with the level of description or nuance in many of them. They tend to be better at critiquing than explaining.

Nathan, I don't think we need to shelter people from reading sources. You are at a Dispensational Fundamental bible college (which one?) and yet, with all that pressure, you are doing a fine job of rejecting the teaching. I was a dispensationalist at a dispensational fundamental bible college, and reading Ryrie was for me a major step away from Dispensationalism. I thought his case was poorly presented and only spoke against his theology. However, even if Steve should read some works on covenant theology first, he should still read Ryrie. Everyone should read Ryrie; he's important for understanding evangelical theology.

Not all dispensationalists are the same either. There are significant differences between Tim LaHaye's and my church's dispensationalism. We could accurately be considered MacArthurite, by the way.

I have to agree that works critiquing a view are of limited value. Rarely does an author who rejects a particular view have a truly solid understanding of that view.

As a former dispensationalist, I find most works critiquing it to do so very poorly. That being said, I would offer that a biblically literate individual could gain a reasonable understanding of dispensational distinctives would be gained by reading Sections XII (“I Will Build My Church”) and XIII (“Things to Come”) of Ryrie’s “Basic Theology.” After one gains this reasonable” understanding of the theological system, especially their purported “literal hermeneutic,” he would do well to read two chapters of another book; “Issues in Dispensationalism” by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master, consulting editor, Charles Ryrie. In that work, the two chapters 2 and 4, in that sequence, should be read. Chapter 2 is a paper on the so-called literal hermeneutic of the dispensationalists. The second is called “Biblical Kingdoms, Compared and Contrasted.”

Only those who have invested greatly in the accuracy of dispensational thought can read these two chapters along side of one another and not see their mutual conflict.

These chapters illustrate two mutually exclusive “truths” that must both be sustained for dispensationalism to hold together.

Originally Posted by msortwell

I have to agree that works critiquing a view are of limited value. Rarely does an author who rejects a particular view have a truly solid understanding of that view.

As a former dispensationalist, I find most works critiquing it to do so very poorly. That being said, I would offer that a biblically literate individual could gain a reasonable understanding of dispensational distinctives would be gained by reading Sections XII (“I Will Build My Church”) and XIII (“Things to Come”) of Ryrie’s “Basic Theology.” After one gains this reasonable” understanding of the theological system, especially their purported “literal hermeneutic,” he would do well to read two chapters of another book; “Issues in Dispensationalism” by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master, consulting editor, Charles Ryrie. In that work, the two chapters 2 and 4, in that sequence, should be read. Chapter 2 is a paper on the so-called literal hermeneutic of the dispensationalists. The second is called “Biblical Kingdoms, Compared and Contrasted.”

Only those who have invested greatly in the accuracy of dispensational thought can read these two chapters along side of one another and not see their mutual conflict.

These chapters illustrate two mutually exclusive “truths” that must both be sustained for dispensationalism to hold together.

One of the obvious difficulties in critiquing the dispensational system is determining who speaks for dispensationalism. There are so many variations and odd-ball subtheories that trying to honestly identify the system is like trying to nail jello to the wall.

E.g., does Ryrie ala Dispensationalism Today still speak for the movement? Or do the progressives that run Dallas TS more accurately reflect the saturation today. The Tommy Ice types don’t seem to care much for the progressives, and Joe in the pew seems more given to following the fringe/wacky element. Is it a system defined by rigorous scholarship or mere popularity?

What they need is a dispensationalist version of a confession of faith to outline the system in an agreeable fashion.

Originally Posted by tcalbrecht

What they need is a dispensationalist version of a confession of faith to outline the system in an agreeable fashion.

Don't they have one - a series of books called "Left Behind"?

Originally Posted by tcalbrecht

Originally Posted by msortwell

I have to agree that works critiquing a view are of limited value. Rarely does an author who rejects a particular view have a truly solid understanding of that view.

As a former dispensationalist, I find most works critiquing it to do so very poorly. That being said, I would offer that a biblically literate individual could gain a reasonable understanding of dispensational distinctives would be gained by reading Sections XII (“I Will Build My Church”) and XIII (“Things to Come”) of Ryrie’s “Basic Theology.” After one gains this reasonable” understanding of the theological system, especially their purported “literal hermeneutic,” he would do well to read two chapters of another book; “Issues in Dispensationalism” by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master, consulting editor, Charles Ryrie. In that work, the two chapters 2 and 4, in that sequence, should be read. Chapter 2 is a paper on the so-called literal hermeneutic of the dispensationalists. The second is called “Biblical Kingdoms, Compared and Contrasted.”

Only those who have invested greatly in the accuracy of dispensational thought can read these two chapters along side of one another and not see their mutual conflict.

These chapters illustrate two mutually exclusive “truths” that must both be sustained for dispensationalism to hold together.

One of the obvious difficulties in critiquing the dispensational system is determining who speaks for dispensationalism. There are so many variations and odd-ball subtheories that trying to honestly identify the system is like trying to nail jello to the wall.

E.g., does Ryrie ala Dispensationalism Today still speak for the movement? Or do the progressives that run Dallas TS more accurately reflect the saturation today. The Tommy Ice types don’t seem to care much for the progressives, and Joe in the pew seems more given to following the fringe/wacky element. Is it a system defined by rigorous scholarship or mere popularity?

What they need is a dispensationalist version of a confession of faith to outline the system in an agreeable fashion.

You are correct that dispensationalism is NOT represented by a single voice. Still, I found it very eye opening to read "Issues in Dispensationalism." The nuanced (some would say horribly contrived) understanding of what they believe is meant in Scripture when God's "kingdom" is referenced, in light of their claim to embrace plain meaning (or literal interpretation) of Scripture brings the entire system (of any stripe) into serious question.

And, I believe it is important that we not allow the fringe elements attract too much attention. There is sufficient to be concerned over with the "main stream."

Blessings,

Thanks All! I read Rightly Dividing the People of God by Kieth Mathison. AWESOME! Very helpful. Question. So MacArthur is a dispensationalists who holds to the Doctrines of Grace? Is he the only one? Is that a contridiction?

Originally Posted by The Author of my Faith

Thanks All! I read Rightly Dividing the People of God by Kieth Mathison. AWESOME! Very helpful. Question. So MacArthur is a dispensationalists who holds to the Doctrines of Grace? Is he the only one? Is that a contridiction?

No, there have been lots. John Darby was a soteriological Calvinist. Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary is full of Calvinist Dispensationalists. The Bible Presbyterian Church (think Francis Shaffer) contained Dispensational Calvinists. Lots of guys at Dallas these days are both Dispensational and Calvinistic. Most Fundamentalists who are Calvinistic are also Dispensational. Now, it is true that many of the outspoken Dispensationalists were non-Calvinists. It's easy to prove correlation, hard to prove causality.