Dispensationalism links??

I don't know of anything favorable, I have thought of starting one.

The only thing I can find is www.pbministries.org and this site contains writings disfavorable to dispensationalism. At least what I have read of it seems so. You may be able to find some links through that. Also Try the site with a banner here at the BB; Baptist Top 1000, may find some links through that source.

Sorry couldn't help any more than this.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Travis,

My personal study of The Sermon on the Mount was one of the first steps in my departure from dispensationalism. I've got some reading suggestions if you're open to that possibility.

In Christ,

Tim

 

Here is a good one.

Dispensationalism

 

Tim, this is ridiculous. I know what you mean by this statement. Many dispensationalists take this portion of Scripture in the same way they do the rest of the Scripture. It all applies to us. I disagree with the chaferian model (assuming you know what that is) that says the sermon on the mount is for Jews in the millenium. I sure it is also part of the same nonsense of Clarence Larkin and Ruckman.

I believe the Sermon on the mount is one of the most neglected passages in all of Scripture. I have personally taught from it many times.

Just a reminder, I am an unashamed dispensationalist. I would appreciate it if you set a flame to your strawmen.

 

As far as a good site goes, I would recommend anything by the Friends of Israel ministry and Tyndale Theological Seminary.

For the Friends of Israel site, click here

For the Tyndale Theological Seminary site, click here

Anything by John Gerstner is mindless drivel. R.C. Sproul had the nerve to say he would apologize if it misrepresented Dispensationalism. Well, I am waiting.

Basically, Gerstner focuses on the salvation issue. His brilliant conclusion is that all dispies are arminians. Well, someone might like to remind him of a guy in California that goes by Dr. John MacArthur.

You cannot even take Gerstner serious. His credibility has been flushed with this diatribe.

If you do a casual search through Yahoo, you will find articles that point out his (purposeful?) misrepresenations of dispensationalism. It just goes to show how desparate non-dispies are to comfort themselves with bad theology. The only thing that is worse and more ridiculous could be "Before Jerusalem Fell" by Gentry. I think you can find both books in the comedy section of your local bookstore.

 

Preach,

I'm just glad you defend the "present aspect" of the kingdom! Maybe I can keep nudging you in my direction to acknowledge the present kingdom-period. Meanwhile, lighten up!

In Christ,

Tim

P.S. Even though the well may be poisoned, let me still give 2 recommendations--Martin Lloyd-Jones' book, "The Sermon on the Mount", and John Reisinger's "But I say unto you"

 

Tim, the kingdom that Christ said was at hand (I believe) started when he rose from the dead. He proved that he is the sovereign over everything. "All power is given to me in Heaven and on Earth..." However, the kingdom does not exist in its fullness. It is sort of like the New Covenant. It has been started and has been in effect. It will also have a future aspect that does not yet exist.

I like Lloyd-Jones.

 

Preach, I don't want to hijack Travis' thread, so we can hash things out in Gavin's Amillenialism: a Hostile ...etc. thread.

Glad you like Lloyd-Jones. We do have something in common!

In Christ,

Tim

 

Preach! You are one of my favorite and most respected posters, but you have been getting more and more sarcastic and biting of late, YOU HAVE BEEN ON THE BB TO LONG!!!

What you have just lightly explained is slowly becoming the corner stone of my understanding of the Bible. It has been refered to many times by some of my favorite commentators (Hafemann, O'Brien, Lane, Mounce) as "already but not yet". The kingdom of God is already here but not yet in its fullness. We are already seated with Christ in the heavinlies yet wait a future time with him. We are already been justified and are being sanctified yet wait perfect santification. There are so many ways in which our salvation is already but not yet that the Bible makes so much more sense to me now. If I ever write a book on theology, it will be titled "Already but not yet"!

 

Pete,

"Already, but not yet" is pretty much a summary statement of Anthony Hoekema's book, "The Bible and the Future"

In Christ,

Tim

 

Dispensationalists have had several different ideas about the kingdom/church/New Covenant and the relationship between them all. What is most often criticized is the Scofield/Chaferian view on those things.

They are not the standard (or textbook) dispies. They were just some of the representatives of the most God-honoring eschatology (because it is the only right one).

 

Preach's (edited)quote"Dispensationalists have had several different ideas about the kingdom/church/New Covenant and the relationship between them all. What is most often criticized is the Scofield/Chaferian view on those things.

They are not the standard (or textbook) dispies. They were just some of the representatives. . . "

Preach, Honestly, don't you think it's only this current generation of "dispies" who are more flexible on these matters? Chafer was always out in left-field, but Scofield seems to represent the standard view of a generation ago (and there are still plenty of his ilk around). Only recently, as theologians backed off from some of the hardline divisions of dispensations have the views come more in line with other eschatologies on such things as the current aspect of the kingdom.

In Christ,

Tim

 

Tim, I think that the development of dispensationalism has gone to far. Progressive dispensationalism has some interesting but inaccurate views. Bock, Blaising, and Saucy all appear to be trying for acceptance with the covenantly crowd.

I think Chafer spent alot of time developing certain aspects of dispensationalism to the neglect of others. For example, his work on the New Covenant was lacking profusely (I love that word).

My personal take on a couple of the key issues is this:

1. I see the 7 distinctions as general times. I am not hard core about them. I do not think they are necessary to be a dispy.

2. I believe the kingdom and the New Covenant started in seed form when Christ was here on earth. Technically, the N.C. did not begin until his death (see Hebrews) and his kingdom until his resurrection (in my view). Both of these things exist presently but not in their fullness.

3. I definitely shade more towards Ryrie/Pentecost/Walvoord than I do Bock/Blaising/Saucy.

If I had to give myself a name, I would call myself a revised dispensationalist.

On a side note, in your journey away from dispy theology, did you happen to think of dispy as what Scofield and Chafer said?

 

Preach,

I'm not surprised you don't care for those full-blown progressive dispensationalists--it seems that they've basically denied the tenets of their eschatology and just maintained the name for sentimental value. They seem more like classic premils to me.

As far as my journey goes, I was never involved with any Chafer fans (though my Dad does have his classic book). My circles were more into Pentecost and Walvoord. Sorry to say, they were the ones who's writings I didn't like along with Scofield (who's practically inescapable--good grief, his notes are right on the pages of scripture--something I've grown to resent in all study Bibles). So, I guess it's no wonder we don't agree on much eschatologically speaking.

By the way, shortly after leaving the dispensational church I was at when my views changed, I attended a Reformed Baptist church for a while and studied covenant theology. Guess what, I totally disagree with it! They barely notice the distinction between the Old and New covenants. I consider myself a New Covenant theologian. I fervently resist the either/or box with dispensationalsm and covenant theology. Thus I sign:

A believer in the better covenant,

Tim

 

I have really thought long and hard about New Covenant Theology. I think dispy and N.C. theology are almost identical in terms of the Law and Grace and the gospel. There is alot of N.C. theology that I embrace without any question. It is a very solid system.

The problem is that the system is limited. Dispensationalism covers every area of theology in Scripture.

There is a plan for angels, gentiles, Jews, satan, salvation, law, recreation, sacrifices, etc.

Covenant theology is extremely limited and just kind of lumps stuff together. I think N.C. theology is primarily centered around soteriological issues.

Dr. John Piper is a N.C. Theologian who is a classic premillenialist. Why do you reject that?

For a good dispensationalist that I mostly agree with, try Dr. John MacArthur.

Btw, I also am a preacher of a better covenant (2 Cor. 3). For if the ministry of Moses was glorious, how much more the ministry of Christ. Hallelujah!

 

Preach,
I agree that New covenant theology is similar to dispensationalism in regard to Law and Grace. (I don't think dispies are wrong about everything.) And I appreciate the fact that NCT is primarily soteriological--that allows for some flexibility in eschatological views. In fact, among leaders in the movement you can find classic premils (like Fred Zaspel) as well as amills (like Tom Wells).
Besides, the Scripture is primarily soteriological! It is not, as some like Van Impe and LaHaye claim, primarily eschatological.

I attended the Bunyan conference in PA (Zaspel was the host) last April and had a good time agreeing and disagreeing with people there. The superiority of the New Covenant is the one issue I'm probably most passionate about. It has far greater implications than one's millenial view.

As far as John Piper goes--I love his books, and he's a great guy (he's related to my wife by marriage), but I still think that amillenialism is a more consistent eschatology than classic premil.

Glad to hear you're a minister of the New Covenant--would that they all were! I even spoke on that subject this morning.

In Christ,

Tim

 

A minister huh? I didn't know. You might have said something before, and I just missed it.

 

Nope, not a minister, a substitute preacher.
So if I'm on vacation in Florida, I'll let you know, your church could have me as a guest speaker on something like say ... eschatology?

In Christ,

Tim

P.S. My pastor grew up in Tallahasee, just FYI.