Other than MaCarthur, are there many?

Thoughts on this web site;

http://hopeoftheglory.com/Home.htm

__________________
Adam - Pennsylvania - Baptist

http://www.myspace.com/aleavelle

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/p...5655012&ref=nf

Interesting.

__________________
Nathan Olaf Brandal

"Man is nothing: he hath a free will to go to hell, but none to go to heaven, till God worketh in him to will and to do his good pleasure"
GEORGE WHITEFIELD TO JOHN WESLEY

My Blog

Pretty pictures.

__________________
Bob Vigneault C.O.L, L.E., G.E, Dr.O.P., O.U.T.
The Heartbeat of Heaven (blog)
Deacon/Christ Presbyterian Church, Janesville, WI OPC www.christ-opc.org

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I guess a Dispie Calvinist is trying to get the best of both worlds.

On one hand they have one foot entrenched in the Calvinistic community, thereby being privy to the well written works of the reformers. They therefore sound smart when they speak to their evangelical ilk. One the other hand they have another foot entrenched in Dispyism so as to garner a good share of the evangelical rapture crowd. Because of this, they will be able to enjoy being on many radio stations around the country, and will be able to churn out sensational works for profit.

__________________
~Keon Garraway~ Brooklyn, NY Member of Franklin Square OPC

Love for God demonstrated by the love for our children in giving them a God centered education is the only hope for our country. by David Morrow
Pslam 71:20 [Thou], which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and shalt bring me up again from the depths of the earth.

Keon, that may be true about some of the present popular writers (I don't know anything about them). But the early Plymouth Brethren were Calvinists, and many of them still are. I worshipped with some until about three or four years ago.

And they were that way before the era of bestselling blockbusters. Most of their writings were published in the hundreds, not the thousands.

Much of what Darby wrote was Calvinistic, but sometimes it is hard to tell what he is talking about at all. McIntosh tried not to be either a Calvinist or an Arminian, because he thought they both were too restricting.

Vic

__________________
Raymond Victor Bottomly
Providence Reformed Baptist Church, Tacoma, WA

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Arthur W. Pink was a Calvinist dispensational in his earlier years.

__________________
Jeff Bartel
Mechanical Engineer
Member - Trinity Reformed Church - RPCNA

"To believe in the power of man in the work of regeneration is the great heresy of Rome, and from that error has come the ruin of the Church. Conversion proceeds from the grace of God alone, and the system which ascribes it partly to man and partly to God is worse than Pelagianism" (The Reformation in England (London, 1962), Vol. 1, p. 98)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Precision:

Dispensationalists Who Believe in the Doctrines of Grace.

__________________
C. Matthew McMahon, Ph.D. (Pot hole Digger)
John 5:39, "...search the Scriptures..."

Dr. C. Matthew McMahon.com, www.apuritansmind.com and www.puritanpublications.com
Member - Christ Presbyterian Church

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Perhaps that should be precessionists. Push one way and the resulting movement is 90 degrees off.



Just to add a bit to my experience, the Brethren I know take the word of God very seriously and really try to understand and be obedient. In fact, this attitude caused me to study hard and to learn elementary Greek and Hebrew. Ironically, I ended up not believing dispensationalism because of their encouragement to study.

In their studies, they would often denounce Scofield because he advocated two forms of salvation. Even though they believed in a rapture, they also denounced the Tim LaHay version because it gave people a second chance. To a man they held that when the Lord returns, time's up.

Vic

Dispensationalism, in its classic form, was an amagamation between Darbyism and revivalism, so it has gone places Darby probably wouldn't want to go. John Macarthur hasn't written any sensationalist stuff about the rapture lately, he writes about Lordship salvation(pro), the Word of God, and other non-sensational stuff.

__________________
The man who is disposed to think of his sin as a great calamity, rather than as a heinous crime, is not likely either to reverence God or to respect His law. - John Kennedy, 1873
Meg
Blog
Member, Intown Presbyterian Church,PCA, Portland, OR

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

http://www.campbellbaptist.org/

Calvinist dispys ^^

What pushed you over the edge to dismiss your Dispensationalism? Particular text? Book? ...curious.

There are some others. Erwin Lutzer and S. Lewis Johnson come immediately to mind. I've seen David Jeremiah described as a "Calvinist" too, and he's certainly pre trib. I think some at SBTS may fall in this category too, but I'm not sure.

__________________
Christian
One Pilgrims Progress

There are a few at SBTS and DTS.

but you guys should actually take time and interact (not just on a computer) with folks who hold the dispy viewpoint. You'll find that some are much different than the 'dispensational strawman' that I see attacked in this thread.

Interesting observation: dispensational eschatology has and operates on Calvinistic presuppositions.

__________________
K. Joel Gilliard, Husband of Danielle since 7/11/09 (I married up!)
Theologically Correct dot Com
http://www.theologicallycorrect.com
MEMBER: Wallace PCA in College Park, MD as of 10/18/09
The Blog: THINK! - Wrestlin' With Wordz -N- Ideaz
Now announcing: Life | Doctrine | Music - join the message board now! Site launch with streaming radio coming in 11/09!

Same here

Convinced Calvinist ( errr... edited: of the Doctrines of Grace in the last 3 years

Shed Dispensationalism shortly after that. Still not completely sure what God's truth is concerning His return, but I'm somewhere between Amil and Post. Gentry's book on the Dating of Revelations has been a real eye opener for me. Is there a "standard" book for each of these?

I know that Boettner was most helpful in clearing up the notion of Predestination with his wonderful book.

[Edited on 4-29-2006 by caddy]

__________________
~ Steven Bradford ~
Member Covenant Presbyterian, Chattanooga, TN

Could the Scofield, New Scofield, and Scofield III Study Bibles properly be termed Calvanistic and Dispensational? It seems so to me.

__________________
Daniel Walsh
St. Mary's Lutheran Church (ELCU), Kenosha, WI
ESL teacher.
Help us, o Lord, to teach
The beauty of your ways,
That yearning souls may find the Christ,
And sing aloud his praise.

Really?

I knew one over at Rapture Ready.com

__________________
Joe Burgess
Grace Bible Church - http://www.gracemessenger.com/
Olive Branch,MS

"Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?" - St. Polycarp

From Gerstners 'Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth':

Scofields unambiguous statement "Salvific grace is a new testament phenomenom" and "legal obedience to the law was the condition of salvation in the OT while faith in Christ is the condition of the NT".

Pg 171

Two ways of salvation are antibiblical and heretical. Dispensationalism is not Calvinism; they are polar opposites.

__________________
Scott Bushey
Husband to Tina, father to Nicole, Danielle and Zoe
Member First Presbyterian Church of Margate PCA

Scott,
Curious. Which writings of Scofield did Gerstner get these quotes from?
Bob

__________________
B.Howes
Framingham, MA

What is Al Mohler's position? Since he is in the SBC I would guess pre-mil dispensationalism... Just curious since his name hasn't been brought up yet.

__________________
Brandon Addison

Member- Michiana Covenant Presbyterian Church
Granger, IN ([url]http://www.michianacovenant.org/[/url])

Attending and serving the youth @- Christ Church Pasadena Pasadena, CA ([url]www.christchurch.la[/url])

Ummm...Keon, your implications disturb me. I was a Dispensational Calvinist until two years ago. Never once did I view my dispensationalism other than from the fact that it was the correct interpretation of scripture. I would be careful about painting with a wide brush. You don't know the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

__________________
Bill Brown
Elder
Reformed Baptist
Maryland

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
Visit my BLOG Theology for the Rest of Us

In the Fall 2000 Westminster Theological Journal (62:2, p.281), there was an article by Stephen Nichols entitled "A Brief Exchange Between Lewis Sperry Chafer and J Gresham Mechan". In it he quotes from a letter from Chafer to Mechan in which he wrote "Our theology as well as the interpretation of the Scripture in every department is strictly Calvinistic, far more so than the usual denominational seminary is today"
In a later letter from LSC's brother Rollin, Rollin wrote of Dallas Theological Seminary (at the time known as Evangelical Theological College) to JGM "œI suppose no seminary in America is more rigidly Calvinistic than we are."�
Obviously, this did not hold up over time, but the original intent was for DTS to be Calvinistic and Dispensational.
As to other churches, see Believer's Chapel in Dallas Texas under the leadership of S. Lewis Johnson.

__________________
Greg Bednarchik
Sovereign Grace Church
(part of Sovereign Grace Ministries)
Cherry Hill NJ

I don't know Mohler's stand, but just because someone is a Southern Baptist does not make them a pre-mil dispy. I know many who are not. I highly doubt that Mohler is a pre-mil dispy.

BTW, I'm at a friend's house posting this. I have lost my internet connection at home for the time being and I'm not sure when I'll be getting it back. So if I don't respond to this or other posts after today for a while you'll know why.

__________________
Ivan R. Schoen, B.A., M.A., M.L.I.S.
Pastor of Maranatha Baptist Church (SBC)
Poplar Grove, IL, USA
http://maranatha-sbc.org

As one who recently (last 3 years) shed his dispensational views after 23 years, I hope you don't mind me jumping in and answering your question even though it wasn't directed to me.
The first crack came from reading John Piper's "The Pleasures of God" and finally understanding what was meant by the "Doctrines of Grace". I was challenged by a member of my congregation over and over to defend the dispensational understanding of the Church and Israel. As an adult Sunday School teacher, who took the job seriously, I was studying a lot. As I did I was always asking the question "what does this text tell me, if anything, about the relationship of the Church to Israel?". I found myself stuck on a couple of verses: Colossians 2:1-11, Romans 11:17-24, Hebrews 3:1-6 (a unitary house), Galatians 4:28. Hebrews 8:13 made me seriously doubt the possibility that the Mosaic covenant was going to be brought back into force and Hebrews 9 made the idea of a rebuilt temple being part of God's plan seem kind of absurd.
I haven't come across any good books addressed to dispensationalist. I had started Jay Adams "The Time is at Hand"(?) 20-some years ago and couldn't stand the condescending attitude. I don't think anyone is coming around from reading Gerstner - it is just preaching to the converted.
The bottom line is it takes person-to-person conversation. Remember that the issue is not timing it is the relationship of the Church to Israel - is there one people of God or two. The other avenue that can be fruitful is to ask a dispensationalist about their hermeneutic. Ask them to explain it and then ask them to read how the NT writers treated OT text. If the apostles violated that hermeneutic is it as right as it is thought to be?
Resist the temptation to win arguments.

If you really examine what Chafer taught, you will find him much more semi-pelagian that Calvinistic.

__________________
Sean Rhoades
Crystal Waters Fellowship
Riverside, CA

I agree. He wanted to be known as a Calvinist but what wanted to redefine the term.

Bill,
Good observation. Thanks for your thoughtful comments.

Equating Scofieldism with Dispensationalism doesn't quite come to the a correct conclusion. Scofield had some pretty disturbing perspectives, but to lump all dispensationalists (dispensationalism as a whole) into this perspective is reminicent of Gerstner's straw man tactics. There are some dispensationalists who still think this way, no doubt. However, I have not run into any in many years. And I've never attended a non-dispensational church, except to visit a couple.

Calvinism and dispensationalism are opposites in regard to ecclesiology, but not soteriology. Both, if understood correctly, recognize the absolute sovereignty of God in all things; just as both, if understood correctly, understand the culpability of man... even in evangelism.

[Edited on 5-13-2006 by Wannabee]

__________________
For the Glory of our King,
Joe Johnson
Slave of Christ, husband, father, Preacherboy at Cornerstone Community Church, Escanaba, MI. and TMS graduate. Personal website - SoundLife.org

I do not know, and I do not say, that a person cannot believe in Revelation and in evolution, too, for a man may believe that which is infinitely wise and also that which is only asinine. ~ CHS

Joe, the majority of Arminian churches are dispensational (and vice versa). I would argue that (more often that not) dispensationalism and Arminianism go hand in hand. This is what makes your pastor such an enigma. He is not your prototypical dispensationalist. Neither is mine.

[Edited on 5-13-2006 by BaptistInCrisis]

Bob,
From Gerstners footnotes: Scofield Reference Bible, p. 1115

Scott,
Thanks.

I did a search and came across an interesting excerpt from the Minutes of the Eighty-Fourth General Assembly of the PCUS, 1944. I'm sure most here have read this before, but its new to me and I thought they did a good job pointing out some of the differences between dispensationalism and some of the teachings in the Westminster Confession Faith.

You're right Bill. However, just because the "majority" of dispensationalists are at least moderately Arminian, that doesn't mean one causes the other. Because of Covenantalism's close ties with Calvin, it is very unlikely for one to be covenantal and arminian. Dispensationalism comes from a hermeneutic that is not driven by a system though. Sure, it's been systemetized to mean a whole lot of things. But the hermeneutic behind it has been abused by the eschatological sensationalists. If one simply submits to the clear and simple meaning of Scripture there's no way to come away from Scripture without a recognition of God's complete sovereignty.

So, my point is, although most dispensationalists may be arminian(istic), this does not mean that dispensationalism leads to arminianism. If one truly holds to a dispensational hermeneutic they will end up along side MacArthur, and apparently your pastor as well.

The twain are aquaintenances, but not related by blood.

Hi Joe,
Thanks for your email newsletter; I pray you are not under the weather any longer. Are you in Virginia?

Do you disagree with Gerstners statement from the Scifield?

Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948), 4:162-164.

[Edited on 5-13-2006 by Scott Bushey]

I know how everyone loves J. Robbins:

http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=193

Scott, Scott, Scott!

Those are classical dispensationalists, at least Scofield & Chafer. J.N.Darby taught much the same thing. These guys are NOT your father's dispensationalists, to quote an ad.

Hi Scott,

We move at the end of June. I'm doing better, but still struggling with something. The root canal helped a lot... Still being sanctified though

In regard to Scofield, my comments are contingient upon Gerstner quoting accurately and in context. I do hesitate to give it complete credence because of his flawed argumentation -
Scofield's comment, if accurate and in context, is flat out wrong, as is Chafer's. In the OT obdience was a result of slavation, not a condition for it; just as in the NT. The Gospel According to Jesus does a pretty good job of defining this. The problem lies in the fact that these guys were both dispensational and had some pretty bad theology, at least in their soteriology (esp. OT). There was a disjointed way of looking at dispensations. The Covenantalist sees the same time periods, but more continuity; thus they label them differently. Guys like MacArthur tend to be somewhere between the two, as am I. If you've ever heard MacArthur discuss his perspective on Chafer's teaching you'll not hear a tone of admiration for his theology, nor what he's done for evangelicalism. The above comment by Meg is well put and should be heeded.

To see a marriage between Arminianism and Dispensationalism is akin to seeing a marriage between hyper-Calvinism and Covenantalism. From either extreme there is a more biblical perspective gained by approaching the beliefs of the other. If the truth is in the middle then each party can learn more and will be closer to the truth by approaching the understanding of his counterpart.

My point was that dispensationalism does not necessitate a departure from the solas of the Reformation, nor a departure from TULIP. This comes from espousing a system above the clear teaching of Scripture. The same happens in Covenantalism, but with different results (Salvific Baptism, NPP, Federal Vision, etc.). Man-made systems always have flaws and lead to varied positions. Scripture doesn't.

[Edited on 5-13-2006 by Wannabee]

Meg,
Thanks for the direction. I would disagree. These guys are the father of dispensationalism! However I admit, I will be the last to tell you I have all these guys neatly lined up on their position; however, what I was getting at is that all the strains of dispensationalism in one way or another mince up the people of God and Gods plan. In that light, they are polar opposites when compared to Calvinism and cannot sit within the same discipline.

[Edited on 5-13-2006 by Scott Bushey]

Joe,
It is to be commended that the dispensational camp you speak of holds to tulip & the solas! But generally speaking, by and large the moniker is an assault on the discipline. The greater number of those whom go by the title are Arminian and flaming charismatics; you'd agree I'm sure.

I don't know that I'd agree that Salvific Baptism, NPP, Federal Vision are eschatological disciplines that are relevent to the discussion; maybe I've misunderstood you? These are just abberant systems, period.