Can Dispensationalism give us a solid foundation for Calvinistic Theology?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stephen L Smith

Administrator
Staff member
I have been having a friendly banter with a cousin who studied at the Masters Seminary so is a convinced Calvinistic Dispensationalist.

I have explained to him that Calvinistic theology, to be fully consistent, needs a covenantal framework. That is, Calvinist heology really developed along side Covenant theology during the Puritan era. Dispensationalism could never develop a consistent Calvinistic theology. My cousin strongly disagrees with this.

Has anyone reflected specifically on this issue? Would you agree that Calvinistic Theology is inextricably tied to Covenant theology?
 
Stephen,

It depends on what you mean by "Calvinism." If it is simply a shorthand for monergism or even the five points, (which is very likely all that your cousin means and probably isn't what you mean) then convinced TMS types are pretty much never going to be convinced of what you are arguing. In their view, eschatology and ecclesiology weren't sufficiently addressed or "reformed" at the time of the Reformation. It was only later that baptistic views and futuristic premil were developed or recovered. If you assume that point of view, then it is the Reformed amils (and postmils) who don't have a solid foundation (or consistency) when it comes to ecclesiology and eschatology.

They really do believe that consistent "Calvinism" leads to premillennialism as argued (or asserted) in MacArthur's (in)famous sermon. They think that it is "replacement theology" that has a "Plan B" and not dispensationalism.

They draw a parallel between the election of individuals to salvation and Israel's "election" and right to the Promised Land. If God revoked (or redefined) Israel's "election" then you can't be sure he won't revoke yours too. Hence rejection of their brand of premil is tantamount to "Arminianism." In this way of thinking, they are the real "Calvinists" and you are clinging to Romish eschatology and even ecclesiology to some extent. (They realize that Calvin wasn't a "Calvinist" in this regard.)

And MacArthur and even his brand of dispensationalism (or futuristic premil, as they referred to it in at least one book) isn't totally alone in this. Covenant premillennialist Horatius Bonar and others made similar statements in arguing against the later Patrick Fairbairn, whose views on the contingency of prophecy were held to be un-Calvinistic in this sense.

It is important to remember that their method is biblicism, so they are going to be more resistant to historical arguments compared to 1689ers, maybe. In the recent theology book edited by MacArthur and Mayhue, they describe their system as "biblicism" rather than Reformed, dispensationalist or something else, although they identify with Calvinistic soteriology.

They view Gerstner's book as little better than a Chick tract or Ruckman book with regard to its representation of the subject.
 
Last edited:
Have you directed your friend to John Gerstner's book Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, which deals with this subject?

I love Gerstner but he's so combative in that book. It's not something I would recommend to a Dispey.

On second thoughts, I acknowledge that you are correct; that book is only likely to antagonise the dispensationalist.
The Masters Seminary did a rather blunt review of this book in 1992 https://www.tms.edu/m/tmsj3d.pdf
 
Thank you Chris. You sharpened my thinking on the theological direction my cousin may be coming from.
It depends on what you mean by "Calvinism."
I was meaning in the context of covenant theology. Since the TMS folks are of Baptist conviction, I'll quote the 1689 Baptist Confession to show what I meant by a consistent foundation for Calvinism:
1689 Confession 7:2-3:
7:2 "Since humanity brought itself under the curse of the law by its fall, it pleased the Lord to make a covenant of grace. In this covenant he freely offers to sinners life and salvation through Jesus Christ. On their part he requires faith in him, that they may be saved, and promises to give his Holy Spirit to all who are ordained to eternal life, to make them willing and able to believe."
7:3 "This covenant is revealed in the gospel. It was revealed first of all to Adam in the promise of salvation through the seed of the woman. After that, it was revealed step by step until the full revelation of it was completed in the New Testament. This covenant is based on the eternal covenant transaction between the Father and the Son concerning the redemption of the elect. Only through the grace of this covenant have those saved from among the descendants of fallen Adam obtained life and blessed immortality. Humanity is now utterly incapable of being accepted by God on the same terms on which Adam was accepted in his state of innocence."
It was only later that baptistic views and futuristic premil were developed or recovered.
Actually recent books by both Jim and Sam Renihan show that during the Puritan era, Baptist convictions were solid but in their debates with Paedobaptists used covenantal arguments. Jim Renihan in "Recovering a Covenantal Heritage" argues that dispensaionalism was developed during a confessional Baptist decline, ie, theology in Baptist circles declined, they used dispensationalism rather than a covenantal framework for theology. Sam Renihan's recent book "From Shadow to Substance: The Federal Theology of the English Particular Baptists" has a full discussion of the covenantalism of the early baptists.
They really do believe that consistent "Calvinism" leads to premillennialism as argued (or asserted) in MacArthur's (in)famous sermon. They think that it is "replacement theology" that has a "Plan B" and not dispensationalism.
Reformed people do not believe in replacement theology. It is a misunderstanding that is often repeated
Covenant premillennialist Horatius Bonar and others made similar statements in arguing against the later Patrick Fairbairn, whose views on the contingency of prophecy were held to be un-Calvinistic in this sense.
Note you used the word Covenant premillennialist. This suggest Covenant theology is the prime issue. Covenant heologians have been Amill, Postmill, and Premill, but NEVER dispensational
It is important to remember that their method is biblicism, so they are going to be more resistant to historical arguments compared to 1689ers, maybe.
If you argue that dispensationalism is a novelty in church history, then the issue is that church history, rightly used, will give checks and balances in biblical interpretation.

But as I said the real issue is covenant theology as defined in ch 7 of the WCF and the 1689 confession.
 
I would agree that Covenant Theology is inextricably tied to Calvinism. This can be deduced logically: Christ is the "Messenger of the Covenant" who arrives and fulfills the requirements of the covenant for His chosen people. There is no discussion of Christ being the messenger of several covenants, depending on time and lineage; He is the only way that anyone, at any time, gets access to God, and no one can come to the Messenger of the Covenant unless the Father draws him!
The Dispensationalists have to reject the confessions in order to have their dichotomy of peoples.
 
Stephen,

It depends on what you mean by "Calvinism." If it is simply a shorthand for monergism or even the five points, (which is very likely all that your cousin means and probably isn't what you mean) then convinced TMS types are pretty much never going to be convinced of what you are arguing. In their view, eschatology and ecclesiology weren't sufficiently addressed or "reformed" at the time of the Reformation. It was only later that baptistic views and futuristic premil were developed or recovered. If you assume that point of view, then it is the Reformed amils (and postmils) who don't have a solid foundation (or consistency) when it comes to ecclesiology and eschatology.

They really do believe that consistent "Calvinism" leads to premillennialism as argued (or asserted) in MacArthur's (in)famous sermon. They think that it is "replacement theology" that has a "Plan B" and not dispensationalism.

They draw a parallel between the election of individuals to salvation and Israel's "election" and right to the Promised Land. If God revoked (or redefined) Israel's "election" then you can't be sure he won't revoke yours too. Hence rejection of their brand of premil is tantamount to "Arminianism." In this way of thinking, they are the real "Calvinists" and you are clinging to Romish eschatology and even ecclesiology to some extent. (They realize that Calvin wasn't a "Calvinist" in this regard.)

And MacArthur and even his brand of dispensationalism (or futuristic premil, as they referred to it in at least one book) isn't totally alone in this. Covenant premillennialist Horatius Bonar and others made similar statements in arguing against the later Patrick Fairbairn, whose views on the contingency of prophecy were held to be un-Calvinistic in this sense.

It is important to remember that their method is biblicism, so they are going to be more resistant to historical arguments compared to 1689ers, maybe. In the recent theology book edited by MacArthur and Mayhue, they describe their system as "biblicism" rather than Reformed, dispensationalist or something else, although they identify with Calvinistic soteriology.

They view Gerstner's book as little better than a Chick tract or Ruckman book with regard to its representation of the subject.
One can be indeed premil and hold to Covenant theology though, so the issue with Dispensational theology would be that they tend to puish to extreme the separation between Israel and the Church, but not on its Premil outlook.
 
Good questions. Here are my really scattered/initial thoughts: T) Why are men totally depraved? Because Adam broke the Covenant of Works in the garden; being the representative for all humanity, depravity (aka. spiritual death) was the punishment inflicted on all. U) The Covenant of Grace is the in-time outworking of the Covenant of Redemption (which is really the substance of election). L) That salvation would be purchased by Christ the Son on behalf of those given to Christ in the Covenant of Redemption. I) Grace is irresistible because God the Father promised us to Christ the Son, once again, in the context of the Covenant of Redemption. P) We will persevere unto glory for the same reason.
 
Last edited:
I would agree that Covenant Theology is inextricably tied to Calvinism. This can be deduced logically: Christ is the "Messenger of the Covenant" who arrives and fulfills the requirements of the covenant for His chosen people.

T) Why are men totally depraved? Because Adam broke the Covenant of Works in the garden; being the representative for all humanity, depravity (aka. spiritual death) was the punishment inflicted on all. U) The Covenant of Grace is the in-time outworking of the Covenant of Redemption (which is really the substance of election). L) That salvation would be purchased by Christ the Son on behalf of those given to Christ in the Covenant of Redemption. I) Grace is irresistible because God the Father promised us to Christ the Son, once again, in the context of the Covenant of Redemption. P) We will persevere unto glory for the same reason.
Agreed. In my post above I alluded to the Pactum Salutis, Historia Salutis, and the Ordo Salutis. It seems to me Reformed theology has this framework to give Calvinistic theology a solid foundation.
 
One can be indeed premil and hold to Covenant theology though, so the issue with Dispensational theology would be that they tend to puish to extreme the separation between Israel and the Church, but not on its Premil outlook.

Inconsistently. Forgive me if I error but "in saecula saeculorum" or "world without end," the Christian age will not come to an end.

Isaiah 9:6-7 King James Version (KJV)
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Isaiah 51:5-6 King James Version (KJV)
5 My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust.

6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.

Luke 1:32 King James Version (KJV)
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Ephesians 3:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Inconsistently. Forgive me if I error but "in saecula saeculorum" or "world without end," the Christian age will not come to an end.

Isaiah 9:6-7 King James Version (KJV)
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Isaiah 51:5-6 King James Version (KJV)
5 My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust.

6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.

Luke 1:32 King James Version (KJV)
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Ephesians 3:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
There shall come the time in the Future when Jesus shall turn His Kingdom unto the Father though...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top