Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: sheltonmac
BBN's rejection of MacArthur's teaching on God's sovereignty in salvation is based on their dispensational position (soteriologically)....

Ah, that old slander again. Just when you'd think someone would have learned something.

And there's the old false division, from the other side of the fence. Some Dispensationalists misrepresent Calvinism, and then reject that misrepresentation. WAY too many Calvinists misrepresent Dispensationalism (which, I contend, is the natural otugrowth of applied Reformation principles), and then reject that misrepresentation.

While it is true that many Dispensationalists are not five-pointers (and vice-versa), there is nothing inherent in either construct which would exclude the other.

Yes, it's true. I get really, really tired of hearing this. Open up your ears and mind, bro. Listen, and learn something — as you (correctly) want your Dispensational brothers to do.

Dan
The Science of Bible Reading

4 posted on 09/02/2004 5:44:06 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: BibChr

Well, this was the only article I could find on the BBN's decision to give MacArthur the boot. I know where you're coming from, though. One of the strongest Calvinists I've ever met was a Bible professor I had in college. He was also one of the strongest dispensationalists I have ever known. Even one of my favorite pastors, John Piper, is a staunch Calvinist/dispensationalist.


7 posted on 09/02/2004 6:00:47 AM PDT by sheltonmac ("Duty is ours; consequences are God's." -Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: BibChr
While it is true that many Dispensationalists are not five-pointers (and vice-versa), there is nothing inherent in either construct which would exclude the other.

You might want to read Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism by John H. Gerstner. I think he documents the incompatibilities, at least wilth classic dispensationalism. Since the modern progressives are more fluid in some of their thinking it's harder to nail them down.

25 posted on 09/02/2004 6:40:06 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: BibChr
WAY too many Calvinists misrepresent Dispensationalism (which, I contend, is the natural otugrowth of applied Reformation principles), and then reject that misrepresentation.

That may be true, but it is not altogther unexpected.

Unlike Reformed/Covenant theology, dispensationalism has no official creeds. Reformed/Covenant theologians can point to any number of official church documents to describe what they believe, e.g., the Westminster Confession and Catechisms, Canons of Dordt. These documents have been adopted by many church bodies as reflecting an accurate summary of the teachings of Scripture.

Dispensationalism has no such documents. In fact, the irony is that many dispensational churches are also "no creed but Christ" churches, that is, they deny the place of creeds or confession in the church.

Who speaks for dispensationalism? Are Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye less authoritative that Lewis Sperry Chafer and Charles Ryrie? Should we prefer the writings of Robert Saucy over Dwight Pentecost?

So what is a critic left to do by sample representatives of dispensational and fashion a common set of ideas for criticism?

28 posted on 09/02/2004 7:02:06 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: BibChr; jude24
Ah, that old slander again. Just when you'd think someone would have learned something. And there's the old false division, from the other side of the fence. Some Dispensationalists misrepresent Calvinism, and then reject that misrepresentation. WAY too many Calvinists misrepresent Dispensationalism (which, I contend, is the natural otugrowth of applied Reformation principles), and then reject that misrepresentation. While it is true that many Dispensationalists are not five-pointers (and vice-versa), there is nothing inherent in either construct which would exclude the other. Yes, it's true. I get really, really tired of hearing this. Open up your ears and mind, bro. Listen, and learn something — as you (correctly) want your Dispensational brothers to do.

The author's Covenantalist bias is definitely showing here.

MacArthur is a strong Dispensationalist-Calvinist. If Bible Broadcasting kicked him off, it's not due to their Dispensationalism, it is because Johnny Mac is a Biblical-Predestinarian -- which, being Arminians, they cannot stand.

They certainly did NOT boot him because he is a Covenantalist (after all, he isn't a Covenantalist... much as I wish he were).

best, OP

199 posted on 09/06/2004 2:44:34 AM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian (We are Unworthy Servants; We have only done Our Duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson