Recommended Reading in Dispensationalism

Thanks. A solid annotated bibliography is always valuable.

I must say, though, you really don’t sound that reluctant.

I have always been somewhat perplexed at the favorable view of LaHaye as a Bible Teacher and even more so, a Theologian. Never minding his novel (or should I say re-clothing of Hippocrates’ or Galen’s temperament theory) The Spirit Controlled Temperament (and its off-spring publications) where LaHaye, with no academic training in psychology, was widely received within Fundamentalism(and beyond) as some kind of profound architect of personality studies and its correlation with Christian spirituality which was based on the discredited pseudoscience of physiognomy which alone should have sent up warning flags a mile high, but LaHaye’s foray into the fictional Left Behind series where his very specific interpretations of imprecise descriptions of future things and an insistence that these very exacting interpretations of details are just that and with little room for any other consideration which was based generally on rationalistic conclusions about such descriptions, should have told any serious student of the Bible that LaHaye is not a source to be elevated to any degree (yes that was a long sentence).

This is not to try and humiliate or castigate the man, personally. That is not the point but his work is quite questionable as well as peripheral issues I will not mention.

To me, using Tim LaHaye as a source of dispensational studies is akin to using Joyce Meyer for theological studies, though he is not charismatic.

Great list and appreciate the standards used in eliminating progressive and ultra disp.

I would include in that list any defense of futurism as that is by far the largest criticism being received by dispensationalists (particularly those of the modern preterist and historicist persuasion); that futurism was an invention of John Darby whom based his teachings on a 500 page commentary by a Jesuit named Ribera in the 1500s.

Even though there is no evidence that Darby ever quoted from Ribera or even knew of his works, (and the obvious fact that the RCC has never believed in a pre-trib rapture), nevertheless this is becoming a widely accepted rumor.

I appreciate your kind remarks. Charlie, my reluctance has to do with populism (here I echo Kevin’s ref. to LaHaye) in certain dispy circles, and the problem of defining oneself by dispensations in the first place :)

Other than a basic belief in Ryrie’s 3 sine qua non of dispensationalism, dispensationalism is fractured into dozens of “camps.”

This is the flavor of dispensationalism with which I’m most familiar:

http://pre-trib.org/

and

http://www.bbc.edu/council/

CT is just as fractured. With groups broken down into various camps as well like the Tyler TX theonomists and Federal Visionists. Not to mention how CT is played out in Amillennial and Postmillennial constructs.

Is mostly an independent movement through Bible Churches and bases itself on 2 Tim. 2:15, “Rightly dividing the word of truth.” Some mistakenly think it teaches various ways of salvation, but it more based on the the word ‘economy’ in Ephesians. It seeks to understand how God administrates His people during a particular ‘age.’ “Camps” of dispensationalists are usually distinguished in their eschatology (mid-trib-post-pre, etc.). Salvation is by grace through faith alone.

There were two strong groups in the 20th century that produced many books and pamphlets about dispensations. Both have diminished in numbers but not in their beliefs or zeal.

The first is http://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/ featuring prolific writings of C.R. Stam. Wonderful writings on grace. They have a small college and a number of good current writers.

Next is Grace Gospel Fellowship http://www.ggfusa.org/ -Founder Charles Baker. Both Baker and Stam have books that are well worth being in your library.

Much of the foundational teaching of Dispensationalists is found in the Companion Bible By Bullinger. You can get foto copies of that Bible online for free, and the appendices are worth your while alone.

I don’t pretend to be an expert and I do not represent any organization except in my prayers, but feel free to ask if you have any questions about Dispensations since I have been teaching it for over 40 years.

Jim

artskoe@gmail.com

While any who might wish to may accept Jim’s offer, it needs to be said that the writers he cites are all ultra-dispensationalists who teach the Church didn’t start in Acts 2 but later on in the Book of Acts (Acts 28 in Bulliger’s case). Mainline dispensationalists would disavow this teaching. That is why none find their way into my list. Again, just as with Progressive Dispensationalism etc., this doesn’t mean there are not good things in these men’s writings.

The school of thought that J. T. Hoekstra references can trace its influence largely to the activity of John O’Hair, a Chicago preacher of the early 20th Century. This school of thought, sometimes called ultra- or hyper-dispensationalism, has always been rejected by historic dispensationalists. It’s worth noting that there are different camps within hyper-dispensationalism, just as in historic dispensationalism and covenant theology. For example, O’Hair (rightly) objected pretty vigorously to some of E. W. Bullinger’s teachings.

As uncomfortable as traditional dispensationalists are with covenant theology, they tend to be even less comfortable with hyper-dispensationalism. Harry Ironside even called it “an absolutely Satanic perversion of the truth.” O. W. Van Osdel (founder of the GARBC) carried on a long and sometimes heated correspondence and pamphlet war with O’Hair.

One point of controversy is that, by placing the beginning of the church later in or at the end of the book of Acts, hyper-dispensaitonalists obviate the requirement of baptism for Christians today. In other words (and making allowances for some who may be inconsistent) it is very difficult to be a hyper-dispensationalist and a Baptist at the same time. For that matter, all traditional Protestants value baptism in some form, though they argue about subjects and mode. That’s one reason that hyper-dispensationalism tends to gain its hearing in the Bible church movement.

Paul, what exactly is Dispensationalism Proper? Is it Scofield/Chafer? Is it Ryrie/Walvoord/Pentecost?

I will keep the list and expand my library as money permits! I have read “Dispensationalism” by Ryrie in Seminary, and also another book I did not see on there, “There Really is a Difference” by Renald Showers, which I thought was a very helpful look at dispensational and covenant theology. I learned quite a bit from “Continuity/Discontinuity” by Feinberg. This is a little off the beaten path, but the discussion on continuity and discontinuity from “Hermeneutics of Biblical Interpretation” by Henry Virkler was extremely helpful to me. Virkler’s treatment on that specific subject (dispensationalism isn’t the focus of Virkler’s book) is essentially a distillation from the Feinberg text, but it wrapped up many loose threads for me.

I know many good men who swear by the Scofield notes. I have never even looked inside a Scofield Bible - speaking for my generation (or perhaps just for myself) I appreciate the impact it had in fundamentalism but I have never felt the need to even look at it.

I noticed that Larkin (Dispensational Truth) is missing from the list. Is that intentional?

[DrJamesAch]

I noticed that Larkin (Dispensational Truth) is missing from the list. Is that intentional?

Could be because of this chapter: Chapter 32 - Dispensational Teaching of the Great Pyramid