You Might Be A Dispensationalist If . . .

Status
Not open for further replies.

DMcFadden

Puritanboard Commissioner
You Might Be a Dispensationalist If . . .
1. you named your first child “Cyrus Ingersoll,” even though it was a girl.
2. when you pray, you turn and face towards Dallas.
3. you’re surprised and embarrassed by Jack Deere.
4. you need charts to teach the Book of Psalms.
5. you think Jesus used PowerPoint for the Sermon on the Mount.
6. you’re familiar with Chafer, but not Schaeffer.
7. when you’re driving home at night and see a bright light in the sky, you unfasten your seat belt and “get ready.”
8. you find prophetic significance in Eliot Spitzer's arrest.
9. you know who John Nelson Darby is and have his synopsis of the Bible.
10. your favorite definition of “economy” comes from Charles Ryrie.
11. when asked for a commentary on the Revelation, you turn to your complete collection of Left Behind books.
12. your prayer group is concerned that Dallas has "gone liberal."
13. when asked a question about Pentecost, your first impulse is to answer Dwight.
 
Last edited:
:lol: That's good stuff. I liked #8. My best friend from high school's mom saw prophetic fulfillment in every news event. Everything that happened was either "a communist plot" or "a fulfillment of prophecy"!
 
11. You've decided on your own study that Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey are the two witnessess in Revelation 11.

12. You have memorized "I wish we all been ready"

13. You've decided to write a commentary on the Left Behind series, only it will be in Greek and Hebrew.

14. You and your friends are going to create Left Behind action figures and sell them on eBay.

15. You've never met a Post-Tribber

16. Each year the Lord lays it on your heart to visit Israel

17. You like reformed churches, but wish they had an altar call

:p
 
18. You think when the Jews left Egypt and entered the Promised Land they found literal streams of milk and rivers of honey there.

(For those unfamiliar with it, Joel 3:18 is fulfilled in volume 13 of the Left Behind series by literal streams of milk and streams of wine that the characters drink from. And Tim LaHaye explains in a note at the end of that volume that "we believe what we have portrayed here will happen someday.")

19. You keep a tennis racket on hand to swat the locusts of Rev. 9:1-9.

(One of the characters does that in volume 5 of the series.)
 
20. You think Joel Olsteen is apostate not because he doesn't preach Jesus and Him crucified, but because he never mentions the rapture!
 
19. You keep a tennis racket on hand to swat the locusts of Rev. 9:1-9.

(One of the characters does that in volume 5 of the series.)[/QUOTE]

274456_front200.jpg


:2cents:
 
21. you have Dallas Theological Seminary as your internet "home page."

Or took it off from having it your home page for years, because some are going progressive Dispensational (aka liberal).

:confused:
Progressive? I never thought I would here about dispensationalists going liberal. As a former Dispensational, that was the worst thing a person could become (other than a Calvinist :lol:).

Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?
 
Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are NOT liberal. Some traditional dispis may consider them so because, rather than embracing the church age as a parenthesis, they perceive that this present dispensation is a key link between past dispensations and the future dispensations.

Progressives, instead of approaching all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as application, attempt to take into account the context and historical-grammatical features of both Old Testament and New Testament texts. Also, you will find that progressive dispensationalism uses much more of the "already but not yet" thinking popular in NT scholarship generally. Some traditional dispensationalists complain that progressive dispensationalism is just covenant theology in sheep's clothing.
 
Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are NOT liberal. Some traditional dispis may consider them so because, rather than embracing the church age as a parenthesis, they perceive that this present dispensation is a key link between past dispensations and the future dispensations.

Progressives, instead of approaching all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as application, attempt to take into account the context and historical-grammatical features of both Old Testament and New Testament texts. Also, you will find that progressive dispensationalism uses much more of the "already but not yet" thinking popular in NT scholarship generally. Some traditional dispensationalists complain that progressive dispensationalism is just covenant theology in sheep's clothing.

Right. In answer to Josiah, I was not claiming that progressive Dispensationalists were liberal. Rather, I was trying to spoof what some traditional Dispensationalists would say about progressives. Apparently, no one saw the humor in it. It was an unsuccessful attempt at humor.
 
Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are NOT liberal. Some traditional dispis may consider them so because, rather than embracing the church age as a parenthesis, they perceive that this present dispensation is a key link between past dispensations and the future dispensations.

Progressives, instead of approaching all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as application, attempt to take into account the context and historical-grammatical features of both Old Testament and New Testament texts. Also, you will find that progressive dispensationalism uses much more of the "already but not yet" thinking popular in NT scholarship generally. Some traditional dispensationalists complain that progressive dispensationalism is just covenant theology in sheep's clothing.

Right. In answer to Josiah, I was not claiming that progressive Dispensationalists were liberal. Rather, I was trying to spoof what some traditional Dispensationalists would say about progressives. Apparently, no one saw the humor in it. It was an unsuccessful attempt at humor.

I saw the humor in it and I think it hits close to home as well. I indeed heard a man say a few years ago that his son was attending Tyndale Seminary in Ft. Worth because "Dallas is going liberal". This probably had reference mostly to the school becoming more progressive and less classicaly dispensationalist (If I recall correctly Tyndale was founded in response to that trend). But by other standards one could argue they are becoming more liberal. Some examples would be having the RC William Bennett speak, the NET Bible adopting the RSV's rendering of Isa. 7:14, and egalitarian and evangelical feminist influence. For the latter, see here and here. Of course much the same could be said of several Reformed seminaries and feminism.
 
Last edited:
You Might Be a Dispensationalist If . . .
1. you named your first child “Cyrus Ingersoll,” even though it was a girl.
2. when you pray, you turn and face towards Dallas.
3. you’re surprised and embarrassed by Jack Deere.
4. you need charts to teach the Book of Psalms.
5. you think Jesus used PowerPoint for the Sermon on the Mount.
6. you’re familiar with Chafer, but not Schaeffer.
7. when you’re driving home at night and see a bright light in the sky, you unfasten your seat belt and “get ready.”
8. you find prophetic significance in Eliot Spitzer's arrest.
9. you know who John Nelson Darby is and have his synopsis of the Bible.
10. your favorite definition of “economy” comes from Charles Ryrie.
11. when asked for a commentary on the Revelation, you turn to your complete collection of Left Behind books.
12. your prayer group is concerned that Dallas has "gone liberal."
13. when asked a question about Pentecost, your first impulse is to answer Dwight.

LOL :lol:
 
21. you have Dallas Theological Seminary as your internet "home page."

Or took it off from having it your home page for years, because some are going progressive Dispensational (aka liberal).

:confused:
Progressive? I never thought I would here about dispensationalists going liberal. As a former Dispensational, that was the worst thing a person could become (other than a Calvinist :lol:).

Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are very respectable theologians who can easily give amils a run for their money. They are continually throwing out challenges that are going unanswered. It was partly PD that moved me towards historic premil.
 
Or took it off from having it your home page for years, because some are going progressive Dispensational (aka liberal).

:confused:
Progressive? I never thought I would here about dispensationalists going liberal. As a former Dispensational, that was the worst thing a person could become (other than a Calvinist :lol:).

Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are very respectable theologians who can easily give amils a run for their money. They are continually throwing out challenges that are going unanswered. It was partly PD that moved me towards historic premil.

What are some of the challenges? (Or should we start another thread about that so as not to hijack this one?)
 
:confused:
Progressive? I never thought I would here about dispensationalists going liberal. As a former Dispensational, that was the worst thing a person could become (other than a Calvinist :lol:).

Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are very respectable theologians who can easily give amils a run for their money. They are continually throwing out challenges that are going unanswered. It was partly PD that moved me towards historic premil.

What are some of the challenges? (Or should we start another thread about that so as not to hijack this one?)

Russ Moore is not PD, but he endnotes the challenges. I have in mind--never mind. I have to get home and look at Moore's book. But Vern Poythress admitted some difficulties in response to one of these challenges.

And I need to further qualifiy: Mark Karlberg wrote a neo-platonic rebuttal to Moore's book (and Mathison's and a few others).
 
Who is behind this leftward move in the dispensational camp? This leads me to ask just how many dispensationalists are fundamentalists (as I was)?

Progressive dispensationalists are NOT liberal. Some traditional dispis may consider them so because, rather than embracing the church age as a parenthesis, they perceive that this present dispensation is a key link between past dispensations and the future dispensations.

Progressives, instead of approaching all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament as application, attempt to take into account the context and historical-grammatical features of both Old Testament and New Testament texts. Also, you will find that progressive dispensationalism uses much more of the "already but not yet" thinking popular in NT scholarship generally. Some traditional dispensationalists complain that progressive dispensationalism is just covenant theology in sheep's clothing.

Right. In answer to Josiah, I was not claiming that progressive Dispensationalists were liberal. Rather, I was trying to spoof what some traditional Dispensationalists would say about progressives. Apparently, no one saw the humor in it. It was an unsuccessful attempt at humor.

I saw the humor and thought it was hilarious. :lol: Pushed to dash off my note before going to lunch with my staff, I only dealt with Josiah's substantive question as to what progressives believe.
 
But by other standards one could argue they are becoming more liberal. Some examples would be having the RC William Bennett speak, the NET Bible adopting the RSV's rendering of Isa. 7:14, and egalitarian and evangelical feminist influence. For the latter, see here and here. Of course much the same could be said of several Reformed seminaries and the feminism.

I LOVE the linguistic notes in the NET Bible but choke on Isa 7:14 also (reminds me of one of my OT profs in seminary). And, the egalitarian impact upon evangelicalism is nearly complete. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) (The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) stands almost alone among evangelical organizations bucking this trend. Other than MacArthur at Masters, what seminaries can say that they have not got at least one prof promoting the egalitarian view?

In order not to hijack my own thread . . .

23. you experienced extreme cognitive dissonance when you learned that John MacArthur speaks at the Ligonier conferences.
 
you know who John Nelson Darby is and have his synopsis of the Bible.

Oh no! :eek:I do know who JND was! (And I have my very own copy of:
A New Translation by J. N. Darby). And Ryrie defines "economy" as follows:

Economy..suggets the fact certain features of different dispensations might be the same of similar.
Dispensationalism Today, page 30.

But I am not a dispensationalist!!!
I'm Not!
Uh uh! No way!
I'm not!!!

I used to be, but that was in a different dispensation of my life!:p
 
But by other standards one could argue they are becoming more liberal. Some examples would be having the RC William Bennett speak, the NET Bible adopting the RSV's rendering of Isa. 7:14, and egalitarian and evangelical feminist influence. For the latter, see here and here. Of course much the same could be said of several Reformed seminaries and the feminism.

I LOVE the linguistic notes in the NET Bible but choke on Isa 7:14 also (reminds me of one of my OT profs in seminary). And, the egalitarian impact upon evangelicalism is nearly complete. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) (The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) stands almost alone among evangelical organizations bucking this trend. Other than MacArthur at Masters, what seminaries can say that they have not got at least one prof promoting the egalitarian view?

Masters is notable for not admitting women to classes at all, as it is an institution dedicated to training preachers.

I would be surprised if Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary and Mid-America Reformed Seminary (MARS) had any egals, although women do attend GPTS (don't know about MARS) and can earn an MA. The fact that GPTS only began in the late 80's and MARS in the 90's (I think) probably has a whole lot to do with it. These institutions seem to broaden as time goes on although some do it very quickly and others over the course of many decades. WSCAL probably doesn't have any either. Does Southern Seminary have anyone now promoting the egalitarian view? I would be surprised since that is such an emphasis for Moore, Mohler, etc. Some if not all of the other SBC seminaries are probably fairly strong on this now too since the "takeover" was in part a reaction against these kinds of influences.

But in some contexts, everything is ok except for a woman assuming the pulpit during worship but they would be shocked if someone considered them egalitarian for them having a woman song leader or women teaching mixed adult classes. Some thought Huckabee defended complementarianism in the Presidential debate when he actually did the opposite and the questioners were probably not knowledgeable on the issue to follow up on his dodge.
 
24. You think MacArthur abandoned Dispensationalism when he started advocating "Lordship Salvation."
 
Your wristwatch has 7 dispensations of time rather than timezones.

You are terrified of flying on a plane (for those familiar with Left Behind) .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top