Fundamentalist View On Dallas Theological Seminary Professors

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by Truth Seeker, May 13, 2007.

  1. Truth Seeker

    Truth Seeker
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    I was wondering how fundamentalist baptist has viewed the professors at Dallas Theological Seminary. Dallas Seminary has produced many good bible teachers who have written many good books.

    They have taught dispensational premillennialism for many years and they hold to all the fundamentals of the faith like us baptists. I visited their website and they consider themselves to be evangelical protestants and not baptist.

    Some good bible men that have come out of Dallas Seminary are:

    Lewis Sperry Chafer (founder), John Walvoord, Dwight Pentecost, Charles Ryrie, Ron Rhodes, J. Vernon McGee, D. A. Waite etc.

    Many of you may even have some of theirs books at home, so what's wrong with these evangelicals?

    I know Dallas Theological Seminary may not be what it once was but we can say the same thing about some baptist colleges.


    Some differences may be that Dallas Seminary doesn't believe in secondary separation, they are non denominational and not baptist. They view themselves as Protestants and many baptist dont. They use other bible versions beside the KJV, and I think they agree with John MacArthur view on the blood. That the blood has no saving power in itself but that it is a symbol or a representation of the death of Christ.

    If there is more to this please let me know.
     
  2. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about Thomas Ice.
     
  3. Ulsterman

    Ulsterman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thomas Ice is a good brother - we had him at our church last year, he is scholarly and intelligent and one of the great defenders of the premillennial faith in this modern age.
     
  4. Truth Seeker

    Truth Seeker
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    I don't know much about thomas Ice except that he is a defender of the Pre Trib Rapture position. Where does Thomas Ice attend church? Is he a baptist?
     
  5. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    Off had I don't know where he goes to church, but he speaks in a lot of Baptist churches. He and Tim LaHaye do a lot of work together and Tim is a Baptist preacher.
     
  6. Truth Seeker

    Truth Seeker
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    Just was told by a DTS graduate and now a popular christian author, that DTS is no longer his top recommendation. He told me that Southern Evangelical Seminary is a better school to attend.

    This confirms to me what I was saying about the current state of DTS, that DTS has drifted away in the last few years. But I will look into Southern Evangelical Seminary and see where they stand.
     
  7. jilphn1022

    jilphn1022
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,273
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thomas Ice

    Re the mentions of Thomas Ice, I discovered that if "Thomas Ice (Wikipedia)" is typed on an engine like Google, two schools are listed on Wikipedia as having given him a Ph.D - but both are listed as "unaccredited"! So isn't it misleading if he or LaHaye or anyone else lists him as "Dr."? Since I believe in fairness, I should also mention that there are several less than flattering web articles about him, namely, "Thomas Ice (Bloopers)," "Thomas Ice (Hired Gun)," and "Pretrib Rapture Diehards" (the last part) - all by a historian who has majored for years on the historical beginnings of pretribulation dispensationalism. But don't take my word for what I've said. Checks things out for yourself. Betty
     
  8. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    He taught at DTS for years. Most dispensational folks like him very much and most nondispensational don't. For one, I've enjoyed his work for years and his teaching.
     
  9. Ulsterman

    Ulsterman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    You can read many of his articles here. http://www.pre-trib.org/

    Having met the man, and enjoyed fellowship with him I can tell you he is a brain. Anyone who thinks Thomas Ice is some kind of dummy obviously doesn't know the man.
     
  10. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't konw anything about Thomas Ice, but having a PhD from an "unaccredited" school does not mean you shouldn't call him Dr.
     
  11. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    1. Save for their dispensational premillenialism, DTS seems fairly doctrinally sound, though it wouldn't be my first choice of seminaries.

    2. Don't trust Wikipedia. It's notoriously unreliable. It's like telling the professor the guy sitting next to you is a scholarly source.
     
  12. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    I think most center/left Fundamentalists still look at DTS as fairly conservative and reliable. Right wingers would condemn it for its use of versions other then the KJV. If you cruise IFB seminary (not necessarily college) websites you'll find a smattering of degrees from there--most probably fairly old. However, there are more profs nowadays with degrees from Trinity.

    It's my view that well into the '60's DTS considered itself to be Fundamentalist, though I couldn't prove it without a lot more research. Suffice it to say that DTS prof Robert Lightner wrote Neo-Evangelicalism in 1959 (my edition is 1969), a book which I consider the best critique out there of New Evangelical theology. (Look for The New Evangelical Theology by Millard Erickson for the best defense.)

    I haven't heard much lately about DTS, but some years ago developed a prejudice against it because of the "spoil the Egyptians" ("all truth is God's truth") approach of their Christian psychology dept. :type:
     
  13. JDale

    JDale
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    What, may I ask, is a "center/left Fundamentalist"? Fundamentalism, by it's very nature, is a right wing, reactionary phenomenon, thus excluding anything "center/left."

    If by this you mean that some "Fundamentalists" are not as FAR right as others on a myriad of issues, I get it. As for DTS, it remains in my view the premeire Evangelical Seminary with regard to Theology (from a Dispensational-Premil view, which I hold), and I think they have a great Church Planting program. Aubrey Malphurs is excellent.

    No, they are not Baptist exclusively, they are non-denominational, but they appeal to Conservative Evangelicals in a wide variety of denominational and independent circles, and I think that fulfills their place and mission in the work of the kingdom.

    JDale
     
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Hi, JDale.

    There is a wide range of people calling themselves Fundamentalist now. The word is coming back into vogue as some Evangelicals look at the failures of their movement. (See Schaeffer's The Great Evangelical Disaster for what I mean--not that we Fundamentalists don't have our own failures.) So just in my own thinking I am apt to use left/center/right for various positions (not people).

    I hate to classify people specifically, so don't ask me for any names. I prefer to let people classify themselves. And the following classifications will be pretty general. (If the shoe fits, wear it. :smilewinkgrin: )

    Anyway, IMO a right wing Fundamentalist would be KJV only, practice secondary separation and preach hard against pants on women. A centrist would probably (not always) use the KJV but be open to other versions, would be less harsh in separation and would use scholarly works by Evangelicals, but still might oppose CCM, for example. A left winger might even consider himself an evangelical, but one who is in the line of the historical Fundamentalism of the 1920s-1930's. It's my impression that those in the SBC who call themselves Fundamentalist would come in here.

    For someone who classifies Fundamentalists in a similar way but names a lot of names, see A History of Fundamentalism, by George Dollar (an oldie but goodie), or the articles by Joel Tetreau on a rival forum (dare I say it), Sharper Iron.
     
  15. christianyouth

    christianyouth
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think many would disagree with Dallas Theological Semminary just for aspousing two things that are strongly debated within Christendom and even IFBdom. They proposed a 'new' interpretation of the book of 1 John, thus breaking away from the historic interpretation of the book, as well as being strong advocates of the doctrine of 'carnal Christians', that someone can be a Christian and live in continuos carnality and sin. Just for those two views alone Dallas Theological Semminary loses its respectiability with me, and as well with others.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since those aren't biblical fundamentals... wouldn't that disprove someone's fundamentalism?

    The historic fundamentalism is the only one with a real claim isn't it? They seemed to have said "Bible- no more, no less" whereas many self professed fundamentalists today go well beyond the Bible while occasionally even denying/ignoring sound and certain biblical teachings (ie. the de-emphasis of biblical repentance in easy believism).
     
  17. Bro. James

    Bro. James
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,643
    Likes Received:
    15
    Right, Reverend, Doctor Schools...

    have "cranked out" many scholarly people. The holy see has many scholarly people, woefully deceived, deceiving many. The standard has not changed: "preach The Word, reprove, rebuke, exort, with all long suffering and doctrine."

    I wonder who headed the Soteriology Dept. in the school from which Nicodemus was a "master"? See John Ch. 3: "Marvel not what I say unto you, you must be born again to enter the kingdom of God."

    "It is no wonder, Satan himself is become an angel of light."

    Selah,

    Bro. James
     
  18. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    I don't see your point. One can hold to all the Fundamentals and still hold to the things I mentioned, can't they? How would one's Fundamentalism thus be disproved?

    Beyond that, most of the early Fundamentalists had very strict standards of personal separation. In fact, that was one thing that Ockenga and the other fathers of New Evangelicalism objected to in Fundamentalism.

    Some of those who call themselves Fundamentalists today would be considered lax by our theological forefathers. Just to give one example, Hudson Taylor forbade the reading of novels on the first ship of missionaries he took to China. Years later the China Inland Mission was still very strict when my parents went to their candidate school in the late 1940's.
    Forgive me, but this seems to be a narrow view of Fundamentalism. The original Fundamentalism was a "big tent" movement, with Baptists in various groups, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, etc. We don't want to be like the pastor who looked his friend in the eye and said, "Brother, there are only two Fundamentalists left, and I've been worried about you lately!" :smilewinkgrin:

    My definition of a Fundamentalist is someone who believes the Fundamentals and is ready to take a stand and fight for them. All of the groups I mentioned above fit in that category. :type:
     
  19. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think to many folks today want to put fundamentalism in a box today that it wasn't in to start with.

    The following folks I would call fundamentalism and many today wouldn't, but in their day they were know as fundamentalism:
    Alva J. McClain from Grace
    Herman A. Hoyt from Grace
    William Culbertson from Moody
    Clarence Mason, Jr. from Philadelphia College of Bible
    J.J. Reeve from Southwestern Theological Seminary
    Charles Erdman from Princeton Theological Seminary
    A.C. Dixon pastor here and in England
    R.A. Torrey from Moody and Bible Institute of LA
    James M. Gray from Moody

    Just to name a few.
     
  20. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen! Bro. Joj, Major on the Major stuff, eat the cherries and spit out the pits.:godisgood:
     

Share This Page

Loading...