Was Clarence Larkin a liberal or simply confused?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Daniel David, May 4, 2003.

  1. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think this would be a good forum to discuss this. Clarence Larkin is a hyper-dispensationalist who lived a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

    No really, it was not that long ago. Anyway, he is most popular for his charts on his understanding of biblical truth.

    Here is a link to one of his charts. I had no idea he was this bizarre. Check it out.

    Larkin chart

    I suspect that if he were alive today, he would be booted from the fundamentalist movement like Saddam from Iraq. What are your thoughts on his theology?

    - a very concerned Grace dispensational, New Covenant, antiLarkinism preacher
     
  2. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    You classify Larkin as "hyper dispensational". Traditional dispies believe in 7 covering innocence to the milennial kingdom. How does Larkin deviate from this modern understanding of dispensations.

    (BTW, I am really thankful that not all knowledge and understanding of the Bible is static and that everything has "always" been known. In these last day we finally have gotten a good grip on "last days" - a subject misunderstood and misinterpreted for centuries!)
     
  3. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Daniel for some here who are ignorant (including myself) could you state the differences in your view and Larkins.
    Murph
     
  4. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not only do I find your last statement very divisive and without substance, but also hypocritical to say the least. Since you are so "up" on anti-anything, it might do well to explain what exactly it is that you mean without your element of insult. Clarence Larkin used his magnificent ability to chart what he was given from the Bible. What is it exactly you are saying? :rolleyes: [​IMG] :rolleyes: [​IMG]

    [ May 04, 2003, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]
     
  5. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,652
    Likes Received:
    188
    I find it very difficult to believe that a "hyper-dispensationalist" could be a "liberal" -- unless "liberal" is simply used as a derogatory name for someone who does not believe the way you do. :confused:
     
  6. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Clarence Larkin:

    Link

    Clarence Larkin lived for 74 years and walked closely with the Lord the majority of those years. His attitute, as noted above, was a "kind and gentle man." (not arrogant). I've said it before & will note again, Clarence Larkin probably had a closer & longer walk with the Master than many who post on this Board, myself included.
     
  7. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hyper in the sense that he bought into that lie about the earth, the chaotic earth, and then the present earth. He was not hyper in the number of dispensations.
     
  8. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sheeagle, it wasn't that long ago that you were perhaps the loudest voice in starting this forum. Why? Because of those who questioned the integrity of Scripture with their own bizarre ideas. If someone had started a thread on what Larkin's chart teaches, you would not have appreciated it. Do you believe what his chart teaches? Do you believe in the chaotic earth scheme?

    Btw, does your opinion about him being godly allow you to dismiss liberal theology? If a liberal on here based their theology and approval of theology upon the "godliness" of a person, you would have been all over them.

    Finally, did he not teach that people that get saved during the tribulation need to have faith and works to be saved?
     
  9. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is the motive of the originator of this thread? We all can see that the defamation of Clarence Larkin is at the forefront. Maybe Daniel David has some superior knowledge worth the endeavor?

    Since Brother Larkin isn't here to defend his stand, maybe this endeavor proves to be fruitless. It's just my personal opinion in this particular matter, but to discuss hyper-dispensationalism by defaming an individual serves absolutely no purpose but only a means to lift oneself up by putting another down.

    A debate or a discussion can be entailed without the mentioning of names of the deceased as to prove a point! :( How sad!
     
  10. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Istherenotacause, is someone forcing you to participate? I raised a question based on one of his charts.
     
  11. Dan Todd

    Dan Todd
    Expand Collapse
    Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    14,452
    Likes Received:
    0
    Quote from Daniel David:
    The "lie" you speak of is called the "Gap" Theory. There have been a lot of good men of God who have believed this theory - including my departed dad - who now knows the truth.

    One of the reasons this theory was proposed - was to rationalize the 24/6 creation account in Genesis 1 with the millions/billions of years that the so called "scientists" of today propose.

    I believe Larkin was wrong in his "earth, the chaotic earth, and then the present earth" stance - but his books and research have much value to them.

    I own several of Larkin's books - given to be by my dad - he first was introduced to Larkin's work at Pratical Bible Training School (now Pratical Bible College) in Binghamton, NY.

    I do not think that I have ever found a Bible teacher/preacher that I have completely agreed with - including John MacArthur - whom I think is one of the best.

    God bless each of us as we "rightly divide the Word of Truth."

    In Christ,
    Dan Todd
     
  12. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Okay, he believed in the Gap Theory and Recreated earth. Exactly HOW does that make him "liberal"? Not in any definition I have personally of a "liberal" :eek:

    Appreciate more insights on why he would be so libeled? :confused:
     
  13. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,652
    Likes Received:
    188
    Maybe Daniel David/Kal El/Preach the Word is a liberal?
     
  14. Refreshed

    Refreshed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    901
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think I read this guy's book. It was a huge book with lots of charts. He lost me when he said that Jesus Christ was coming back in 2001 or something like that. I'll have to re-borrow the book and look it up again unless one of you have the book and know where it is. I just can't take someone seriously who tries to date the return of the Lord. I just wish everybody would stop guessing and maybe he would come back. :D It seems to me the book was about 100 years old, and a very large folio-type book.

    Jason :D
     
  15. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    DD please answer my question about the differences in your view and his. I honestly don't know about the man and on my screen his charts are so small that I can't read the print very well. Please tell me more about his theory. Concerning the gap theory if this is his belief I too would consider such a person to have a liberal view of scripture. Some other poster mentioned that this theory was an effort to rationalize the scientists millions of year theory. So that in itself leads me to say they are liberal for the Bible should not be rationalized. Once again please tell me more on this subject but be careful not to throw stones even a dead people. And please don't remind people that nobody is forcing them to post, we all know this is a free exchange.
    Murph
     
  16. Bartholomew

    Bartholomew
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2002
    Messages:
    714
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe the gap theory is false; but it is not liberal. Those who believe in the gap theory generally do so because they want to hold on to the literal creation account. They do not generally claim that it is a myth; nor that God was 'accommodating' his language to 'simple' men; nor that the 'six days' are allegorical; but simply assert that some unspecified amount of time ellapsed between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

    Bart notice my post I said I would consider this a liberal view and even after your reply I still do. I appreciate your opinion that people have held this view in an attempt to hold a literal 6 day creation but that in itself is describing their belief as liberal. A liberal in my view is one who looks at the literal statement of scripture and instead of accepting it they fabricate an alternative understanding of the scripture. The Bible says 6 days so what is wrong with that?
    Murph

    [ May 05, 2003, 05:10 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]
     
  17. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ethics of character "force" me to participate. I believe your motive needs to be exposed.

    I have gained much knowledge from Dr. Larkin, though I don't agree with everything he's said, I have the utmost respect for his endeavors to try and explain what the Lord has given him. When I see some one such as you demeaning the character of such a well renowned individual, I have a hard time NOT participating by my direct opposition to the demeanor, Why? your topic isn't open for discussion? Only open to those who agree with you? Or maybe also to those you feel you can overide with confidence that you convince them to be the less informed? Isn't this a public domain? where the posts are viewed openly and within the guidelines of the rules set forth open to reply?

    Ah-hah! A very closeminded approach to discussion we have here!


    Try and explain either contrary or in agreement with the Anti-diluvian age,

    ***aggressive comments removed***

    [ May 05, 2003, 10:37 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]
     
  18. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm pretty sure that Daniel David is correct that Larkin taught salvation by grace + works for the tribulation people. I have found a few websites that have taught such and they all reference (and only reference) Larkin's "Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth". Anytime someone uses that phrase (much less write a book entitled such) you can usually guess they are ultra-dispensational. I use that term for those who believe we are only saved by grace in the church age. They generally believe Hebrews, James, and Peter were not written for church age saints but for tribulation saints (and hence, make easy the works and losing your salvation tension that can arise in these books). I am only stepping lightly here because I haven't actually found this being taught by Larkin himself, only second hand sources of his teaching.

    If true though, I will defend Daniel David that Larkin had some messed up theology. That doesn't mean he wasn't "godly" in his actions or sincere, just that he wasn't perfect and the Holy Spirit does not lead to perfect theology (otherwise there would be a little more agreement on this board). I will defend John Calvin under the same light though surely we disgaree with much of his theology.
     
  19. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would like more references to proofs instead of one's opinion Let's hear the issues and try to discuss them ***attacks removed***Clarence Larkin would have to backslide to fellowship with most conservatives today. :rolleyes:

    [ May 05, 2003, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]
     
  20. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, calm down, and give me a little time. The copyright is up for "Rightly dividing the Word of truth" we might be able to find it online.
     

Share This Page

Loading...