# A Dispensational Plug for Calvin



## bookslover (May 28, 2011)

"The Good Book Blog" is a blog sponsored by Talbot School of Theology (part of Biola University in La Mirada, California). Now, Talbot (founded in 1952 and originally called Talbot Theological Seminary) is, officially, a classic-dispensationalist school. 

However, if you go to the blog (The Good Book Blog) and scroll down the right-hand column to "Most Commented Posts," you'll see one called "A Defense of Calvin(ism)". One of the school's profs waxes eloquent about Calvin - but it's the comments that follow that are most revealing. Many commentors say, in effect, that they thought Calvin was a bad guy - until they actually read him.

A Dispensational school spreads the Calvin word - whodathunkit?


----------



## torstar (May 28, 2011)

I forget, which horse of the Apocalypse do they teach this kind of shocking news represents???


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (May 28, 2011)

bookslover said:


> A Dispensational school spreads the Calvin word - whodathunkit?



In reading the comments, it appears to me that this seems like students responding to their professors post in fulfilment of an assignment. These kinds of assignments are more and more common these days. The tenor of their remarks coupled with the profs repeated commendation of their remarks (e.g. "Thanks, Calvin Class, for all your comments. I will miss our class discussions"), leads me to believe this is more obligatory than spontaneous. Though I am glad to see a Talbot prof giving good PR to Calvin!


----------



## Kiffin (May 29, 2011)

Dispensationalism does not necessitate anti-Calvinism. In fact, I went to a Classic dispensational school for my undergrad and it was there where I was taught and convinced of Calvinism. 

I guess it all comes down to what "calvinism" means to people. If all we're talking about is TULIP, then it's more common then you think.


----------



## Grimmson (May 29, 2011)

Dispensationalism, in it's roots here in the United States was actually supported and spread by Presbyterians. The first american church (1864) that heard a dispensational speak was when Darby visited 16th and Walnut Avenue Presbyterian Church in St. Louis (who was pastored by James H. Brookes).


----------



## elnwood (May 29, 2011)

I don't think Talbot is "officially a classical dispensationalist school." Robert L. Saucy, Distinguished Professor of Systematic Theology at Talbot, authored _The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism_ in 1993.


----------



## DMcFadden (May 29, 2011)

In So Cal the rep for Talbot is that it is an historically dispensational school, but of a different nuance than Dallas or Masters. In the old "Lordship" controversy of the 1980s/90s, Talbot was decidedly on the "Lordship" side against the antinomianism of places like Dallas. As to hermeneutics, the type of progressive dispensationalism common to Saucy and others was at odds with the Robert Thomas dispensationalism common at Masters. Remember that MacArthur received his theological education at Talbott before turning into a 5 pt soteriological Calvinist.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (May 29, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> the antinomianism of places like Dallas



That is an understatement.


----------



## Pilgrim (May 30, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> In So Cal the rep for Talbot is that it is an historically dispensational school, but of a different nuance than Dallas or Masters. In the old "Lordship" controversy of the 1980s/90s, Talbot was decidedly on the "Lordship" side against the antinomianism of places like Dallas. As to hermeneutics, the type of progressive dispensationalism common to Saucy and others was at odds with the Robert Thomas dispensationalism common at Masters. Remember that MacArthur received his theological education at Talbott before turning into a 5 pt soteriological Calvinist.



Wasn't Thomas at Talbot before moving to Masters? 

To me MacArthur is at best somewhere in between normative dispensationalism and progressive dispensationalism. I think he said he was a "leaky dispensationalist" because he doesn't seem to think that the hard line 7 dispensation scheme was helpful. For him the _sine qua non_ seems to be that there is a distinction between the church and Israel. From what I've seen he doesn't appear to be into the inaugurated eschatology and the already/not yet hermeneutic of the progressives.


----------



## DMcFadden (May 30, 2011)

Yes, Thomas started out at Talbot but went to Masters when MacArthur "appropriated" the Talbot branch at Grace Community Church and took it virtually en toto over to become Masters.

[This history is a bit more complicated. Both the Biola people and MacArthur tell the story to their best interests, making each side sound in the "right" in the whole affair. But, the simple explanation is that MacArthur was unhappy with "concessions" Talbot was making to satisfy accreditation concerns and began a new seminary with many of the former Talbot profs (including Thomas)].


----------



## bookslover (May 30, 2011)

I studied under Dr. Saucy during my time at Talbot (graduated with the M.Div in 1994). He is a very gracious person to deal with. Now 81, I hear he's been working on a book about Heaven for several years - and he still teaches part time.

Yes, Talbot is still, officially, a classic-dispensationalist school, even if Dr. Saucy was the point man for the progressive dispensationalist cause. So, it shows that the school is willing to be not too dogmatic on what dispensationalism is. Heck, the current president of Biola has a certain level of charismatic-ness in his background! 

"The times, they are a'changin'" as a certain now 70-year-old ex-folk singer once wrote...


----------



## Pilgrim (May 30, 2011)

DMcFadden said:


> Yes, Thomas started out at Talbot but went to Masters when MacArthur "appropriated" the Talbot branch at Grace Community Church and took it virtually en toto over to become Masters.
> 
> [This history is a bit more complicated. Both the Biola people and MacArthur tell the story to their best interests, making each side sound in the "right" in the whole affair. But, the simple explanation is that MacArthur was unhappy with "concessions" Talbot was making to satisfy accreditation concerns and began a new seminary with many of the former Talbot profs (including Thomas)].



Over the years I've heard a few insinuations from MacArthur that seemed to indicate that Talbot may have been going soft on inerrancy. But you seem to be much more familiarity with that situation than I. Until you posted it a couple of years ago, I didn't know that TMS had its origins as a Talbot branch.


----------



## DMcFadden (May 30, 2011)

Just depends on which side you are listening to.

From Biola's side it sounded like a theft of an extension for trumped up excuses (one of MacArthur's specific "reasons" was that Talbot was willing to change their curriculum to accommodate mandates from the accreditation people. This would result in not covering EVERY book of the Bible in a systematic way).

From MacArthur's perspective, it sounded as if there were 100 seminarians committed to the Word of God who needed rescue from a school grown soft enough to be willing to sell their souls for a little accreditation porridge.

I am NOT real close to it, but gather that both sides have come to a "let bygones be bygones" accommodation. They both see themselves as dispensational beacons, albeit positioned in different niches in the spectrum.


----------



## Pilgrim (May 30, 2011)

Richard, am I right in thinking you went to Talbot? What would the reaction be to Calvin when you were there? Or did it simply not come up much. 

I've found that a good many academics in those kinds of places don't tend to have the degree of Calviphobia that you'll find in certain SBC circles and other ministries that tend more toward Arminianism. They will have obvious disagreements with Calvin, but many of them nevertheless have a lot of respect for him. Also, at least in my experience, most of the Bible church Dispensational types tend to eschew altar calls and the like. A lot of the ones I'm familiar with are more Calvinistic than the average evangelical. Some are 5 pt. and a lot of others hold more or less Amryaldian views. On the other hand, some of the less Calvinistic ones can't represent Calvinism accurately and don't seem interested in even trying. I think the latter tends to be the case in those who strongly identify with the "free grace" camp.


----------



## sastark (May 30, 2011)

I had several Calvinist professors during my time at Biola/Talbot. One can emerge from Talbot/Biola with a rather Calvinistic education if one knows which professors to study under.


----------



## bookslover (Jun 3, 2011)

Pilgrim said:


> Richard, am I right in thinking you went to Talbot? What would the reaction be to Calvin when you were there? Or did it simply not come up much.


 
Yes, I attended Talbot. I graduated with the M.Div _cum laude_ in 1994. In my courses, Calvin just didn't come up much at all (maybe I just missed those courses where he would). But there were no discussions of dispensationalism, either. None whatsoever - even in my theological courses. At a dispensationalist school! My feeling is that dispensationalism is, generally speaking, pretty much dead at the academic level (although guys like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsay are trying to keep it alive at the popular level).

Talbot offers some self-study courses in which you listen to recorded lectures and turn in written assignments (for people who need to pick up an extra course or are trying to stay on their schedule). Interestingly, several of those courses are taught from an explicitly Reformed perspective.

Also, Talbot just offered a special seminar on Calvinism, in which the main text was the Institutes! Go figure! The course got a lot of positive response from students.

---------- Post added at 02:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:51 AM ----------




sastark said:


> I had several Calvinist professors during my time at Biola/Talbot. One can emerge from Talbot/Biola with a rather Calvinistic education if one knows which professors to study under.


 
That's true. One of my favorite professors there is Alan Gomes (he teaches church history from an historical theology perspective). He's pretty Reformed, in my view. In fact, just a few years ago he edited the new one-volume edition of Shedd's _Systematic Theology_ (published by Zondervan). Gomes took his Ph.D at Fuller Seminary, where he studied under Richard Muller before Muller left for Calvin Seminary.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 3, 2011)

bookslover said:


> My feeling is that dispensationalism is, generally speaking, pretty much dead at the academic level (although guys like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsay are trying to keep it alive at the popular level).



It's not quite dead yet, but it is much less prominent than it was a few decades ago. It's still taught at The Masters Seminary, some smaller seminaries that were set up by Dallas Seminary grads who are disgruntled with Dallas' shift toward progressive dispensationalism, and some other schools. There are still a good many dispensationalist professors in the SBC, moreso of the progressive persuasion. It's also taught at probably all of the IFB schools, perhaps most notably (from an academic standpoint) Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.


----------

