Conference: Miscellaneous
 |
Modern,systematic Dispensationalism is approaching two hundred years of expression anddevelopment. We live at a time in which Dispensationalism and some of itsideas have been disseminated and adopted by various theological traditions. This is not surprising since our day is characterized by anti-systemization andeclecticism in the area of thought. It may be surprising, to some, to learnthat Dispensationalism was developed and spread during its first 100 years bythose within a Reformed, Calvinistic tradition. It had only been in the last75 to 50 years that Dispensationalism and some of its beliefs were disseminatedin any significant way outside of the orbit of Calvinism.
Definitions Beforeproceeding further I need to provide working definitions of what I mean byCalvinism and Dispensationalism. First, by Calvinism, I am speaking mainly ofthe theological system that relates to the doctrine of grace or soteriologicalCalvinism. This would include strict and modified Calvinism (i.e. four andfive point Calvinism). I am referring to that aspect of Calvinism that speaksof the fallen nature of man and the elective grace of God. Second,by Dispensationalism, I have in mind that system of theology that was developedby J. N. Darby that gave rise to its modern emphasis of consistent literal interpretation, a distinction betweenGod's plan for Israel and the church, usually a pretribulational rapture of thechurch before the seventieth week of Daniel, premillennialism, and amultifaceted emphasis upon God's glory as the goal of history. This includessome who have held to such a system by may stop short of embracingpretribulationism. The focus of this article will be upon Dispensational premillennialism.
Theological Logic Inconcert with the Calvinist impulse to view history theocentricly, I believethat dispensational premillennialism provides the most logical eschatologicalending to God's sovereign decrees for salvation and history. SinceDispensational premillennialists view both the promises of God's election ofIsrael and the church as unconditional and something that God will surely bringto pass, such a belief is consistent with the Bible and logic. A covenanttheologian would say that Israel's election was conditional and temporary. Many Calvinists are covenant theologians who think that individual electionwithin the church is unconditional and permanent. They see God's plan withIsrael conditioned upon human choice, while God's plan for salvation within thechurch is ultimately a sovereign act of God. There is no symmetry in suchlogic. Meanwhile, Dispensational premillennialists see both acts as asovereign expression of God's plan in history which is a logically consistentapplication of the sovereign will of God in human affairs. SamuelH. Kellogg, a Presbyterian minister, missionary, and educator wrote of thelogic between Calvinism and "modern, futurist premillennialism,"which was in that day (1888) essentially dispensational. "But ingeneral," notes Kellogg, "we think, it may be rightly said that the logical relations of premillennialism connect it moreclosely with the Augustinian than with any other theological system." Thisis not to say that Dispensationalism and Calvinism are synonymous. I merelycontend that it is consistent with certain elements of Calvinism which providea partial answer as to why Dispensationalism sprang from the Reformed womb. C.Norman Kraus contends,
There are, to besure, important elements of seventeenth-century Calvinism in contemporarydispensationalism, but these elements have been blended with doctrinal emphasisfrom other sources to form a distinct system which in many respects is quiteforeign to classical Calvinism.[6]
Nevertheless,Dispensationalism did develop within the Reformed community and most of itsadherents during the first 100 years were from within the Calvinist milieu. Kraus concludes: "Taking all this into account, it must still be pointedout that the basic theological affinities of dispensationalism are Calvinistic.The large majority of men involved in the Bible and prophetic conferencemovements subscribed to Calvinistic creeds." [7] Iwill now turn to an examination of some of the founders and proponents ofDispensationalism?
Darby and the Brethren Modernsystematic dispensationalism was developed in the 1830s by J. N. Darby andthose within the Brethren movement. Virtually all of these men came fromchurches with a Calvinistic soteriology. "At the level of theology,"says Brethren historian H. H. Rowdon, "the earliest Brethren wereCalvinists to a man."[8] This is echoed by one of theearliest Brethren, J. G. Bellett, who was beginning his association with theBrethren when his brother George wrote, "for his views had become moredecidedly Calvinistic, and the friends with whom he associated in Dublin wereall, I believe without exception, of this school."[9] Whatwere Darby's views on this matter? John Howard Goddard observes that Darby"held to the predestination of individuals and that he rejected theArminian scheme that God predestinated those whom he foreknew would beconformed to the image of Christ."[10] In his "Letteron Free-Will," it is clear that Darby rejects this notion. "IfChrist has come to save that which is lost, free-will has no longer anyplace."[11] "I believe we ought to hold tothe word;" continues Darby, "but, philosophically and morallyspeaking, free-will is a false and absurd theory. Free-will is a state ofsin."[12] Because Darby held to the bondageof the will, he logically follows through with belief in sovereign grace asnecessary for salvation.
Such is the unfolding of this principle ofsovereign grace, without which not one should would be saved, for noneunderstand, none seek after God, not one of himself will come that he mighthave life. Judgment is according to works; salvation and glory are the fruitof grace.[13]
Furtherevidence of Darby's Calvinism is that on at least two occasions he was invitedby non-dispensational Calvinists to defend Calvinism for Calvinists. One ofDarby's biographers, W. G. Turner spoke of his defense at Oxford University:
It was at a muchearlier date (1831, I think) that F. W. Newman invited Mr. Darby to Oxford: aseason memorable in a public way for his refutation of Dr. E. Burton's denialof the doctrines of grace, beyond doubt held by the Reformers, and asserted notonly by Bucer, P. Martyr, and Bishop Jewell, but in Articles IX-XVIII of theChurch of England.[14]
Onan other occasion Darby was invited to the city of Calvin-Geneva,Switzerland-to defend Calvinism. Turner declares that "He refuted the'perfectionism' of John Wesley, to the delight of the Swiss Free Church." Stillyet, when certain Reformed doctrines came under attack from within the Churchin which he once served, "Darby indicates his approval of the doctrine ofthe Anglican Church as expressed in Article XVII of the Thirty-NineArticles"[17] on the subject of election andpredestination. Darby said,
For my own part, I soberly think Article XVII tobe as wise, perhaps I might say the wisest and best condensed human statementof the view it contains that I am acquainted with. I am fully content to takeit in its literal and grammatical sense. I believe that predestination to lifeis the eternal purpose of God, by which, before the foundations of the worldwere laid, He firmly decreed, by His counsel secret to us, to deliver fromcurse and destruction those whom He had chosen in Christ out of the human race,and to bring them, through Christ, as vessels made to honour, to eternalsalvation.[18]
Dispensationalism inAmerica Darbyand other Brethren brought dispensationalism to America through their manytrips and writings that came across the Atlantic. "In fact themillenarian (or dispensational premillennial) movement," declares GeorgeMarsden, "had strong Calvinistic ties in its American origins."
This enthusiasm came largely from clergymen withstrong Calvinistic views, principally Presbyterians and Baptists in thenorthern United States. The evident basis for this affinity was that in mostrespects Darby was himself an unrelenting Calvinist. His interpretation of theBible and of history rested firmly on the massive pillar of divine sovereignty,placing as little value as possible on human ability.[20]
Thepost-Civil War spread of dispensationalism in North America occurred throughthe influence of key pastors and the Summer Bible Conferences like Niagara,Northfield, and Winona. Marsden notes:
The organizers ofthe prophetic movement in America were predominantly Calvinists. In 1876 agroup led by Nathaniel West, James H. Brookes, William J. Eerdman, and Henry M.Parsons, all Presbyterians, together with Baptist A. J. Gordon, . . . Theseearly gatherings, which became the focal points for the prophetic side of theirleaders' activities, were clearly Calvinistic. Presbyterians and CalvinistBaptists predominated, while the number of Methodists was extremely small. . .. Such facts can hardly be accidental.[21]
Proofof Marsden's point above is supplied by Samuel H. Kellogg-himself aPresbyterian and Princeton graduate-with his breakdown of the predominatelydispensational Prophecy Conference in New York City in 1878. Kelloggclassified the list of those that signed the call for the Conference asfollows:
Kelloggconcluded that "the proportion of Augustinians in the whole to beeighty-eight per cent."[23] "The significance of this isemphasized," continues Kellogg, "by the contrasted fact that theMethodists, although one of the largest denominations of Christians in thecountry, were represented by only six names."[24] Kellogg estimates that "analyses of similar gatherings since held on bothsides of the Atlantic, would yield a similar result."[25] GeorgeMarsden divides Reformed Calvinism in America into three types: "doctrinalist, culturalist, and pietist."[26] Hethen explains that "Dispensationalism was essentially Reformed in itsnineteenth-century origins and had in later nineteenth-century America spreadmost among revival-oriented Calvinists."[27] This is not to saythat only revival-oriented Calvinists were becoming dispensational in theirview of the Bible and eschatology. Ernest Sandeen lists at least one OldSchool Presbyterian-L. C. Baker of Camden, New Jersey-as an activedispensationalist during the later half of the nineteenth century.
The first convertsto dispensational premillennialism after the Civil War were pietisticevangelicals who were attracted to its biblicism, its concern for evangelismand missions, and its view of history, which seemed more realistic than that ofthe prevailing postmillennialism. Most of the new premillennialists came frombaptist, New School Presbyterian, and Congregationalist ranks, which gave themovement a definite Reformed flavor. Wesleyan evangelicals who opposedpremillennialism used this apparent connection to Calvinism to discredit itamong Methodists and holiness people.[29]
Itis safe to say that without the aid of Reformed Calvinists in Americadispensational premillennialism would have had an entirely different history. Men like the St. Louis Presbyterian James H. Brookes (1830-1897), who wastrained at Princeton Seminary, opened his pulpit to Darby and other speakers. Brookes, considered the American father of the pretribulational rapture inAmerica, also discipled a new convert to Christ in the legendary C. I.Scofield.[30] Others such as Presbyterians SamuelH. Kellogg (Princeton trained), E. R. Craven, who was a Princeton College andSeminary graduate and Old School Presbyterian,[31] and Nathaniel Westprovided great leadership in spreading dispensationalism in the late 1800s.
Scofield, Chafer andDallas Seminary C.I. Scofield (1843-1921), Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952), and DallasTheological Seminary (est. 1924) were great vehicles for the spread ofdispensationalism in America and throughout the world. Both Scofield andChafer were ordained Presbyterian ministers. The "Scofield ReferenceBible, is called by many themost effective tool for the dissemination of dispensationalism in America." Scofield was the major influence uponthe development of Chafer's theology. John Hannah notes that "it isimpossible to understand Chafer without perceiving the deep influence ofScofield."[34] In fact, "Chafer often likenedthis relationship to that of father and a son."[35] This relationship grew out of Chafer's study under Scofield at the NorthfieldConference and from a life-changing experience in Scofield's study of the FirstCongregational Church of Dallas in the early 1900s. Scofield told Chafer thathis gifts were more in the field of teaching and not in the area of evangelismin which he had labored. "The two prayed together, and Chafer dedicatedhis life to a lifetime of biblical study."[36] Scofieldand Chafer were two of the greatest American dispensationalists and bothdeveloped their theology from out of a Reformed background. Scofield is knownfor his study bible and Chafer for his Seminary and systematic theology. JeffreyRichards describes Chafer's theological characteristics as having "much incommon with the entire Reformed tradition. Excluding eschatology, Chafer issimilar theologically to such Princeton divines as Warfield, Hodge, and Machen.He claims such doctrines as the sovereignty of God, . . . total depravity ofhumanity, election, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of thesaints."[37] C. Fred Lincoln describes Chafer's8 volume Systematic Theology as"unabridged, Calvinistic, premillennial, and dispensational." Sinceits founding in 1924 as The Evangelical Theological College (changed to DallasTheological Seminary in 1936), it has exerted a global impact on behalf ofdispensationalism. Dallas Seminary's primary founder was Chafer, but WilliamPettingill and W. H. Griffith-Thomas also played a leading role. Pettingill,like Chafer was Presbyterian. Griffith-Thomas, an Anglican, wrote one of thebest commentaries on the Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Church, Sinceso many early Dallas graduates entered the Presbyterian ministry, there beganto be a reaction to their dispensational premillennialism in the 1930s. Thiswas not an issue as to whether they were Calvinistic in their soteriology, butan issue over their eschatology. In the late 1930s, "Dallas TheologicalSeminary, though strongly professing to be a Presbyterian institution, wasbeing severed from the conservative Presbyterian splinter movement."
A Broadening ofDispensationalism Acceptance Eventhough dispensationalism had made a modest penetration of Baptists as early asthe 1880s through advocates such as J. R. Graves,[46] astrong Calvinist, they were rebuffed by non-Calvinists until the mid-1920s whenelements of dispensational theology began to be adopted by some Pentecostals inan attempt to answer the increasing threat of liberalism. Kraus explains:
Some teachers said explicitly thatpremillennialism was a bulwark against rationalist theology. Thus it is notsurprising to find that the theological elements which became normative indispensationalism ran directly counter to the developing emphasis of the"New Theology."[47]
Upto this point in history, those from the Arminian and Wesleyan traditions weremore interested in present, personal sanctification issues, rather than theCalvinist attention in explaining God's sovereign work in the progress ofhistory. However, the rise of the fundamentalist/liberal controversy in the1920s stirred an interest, outside of the realm of Calvinism, in defending theBible against the anti-supernatural attacks of the liberal critics. Dispensationalismwas seen as a conservative and Bible-centered answer to liberalism, not onlywithin fundamentalism, but increasingly by Pentecostals and others as well. Timothy Weber notes:
But in time, dispensationalism had its devoteeswithin the Wesleyan tradition as well. More radical holiness groups resonatedwith its prediction of declining orthodoxy and piety in the churches; andpentecostals found in it a place for the outpouring of the Spirit in a"latter-day rain" before the Second Coming.[48]
Latter RainPentecostalism Oneof the first non-Calvinist groups to adopt a dispensational orientation can befound among some Pentecostals in the mid-1920s. This development must beunderstood against a backdrop of the Wesleyan and holiness heritage out of whichPentecostalism arose at the turn of last century. The American holinessmovement of the 1800s was primarily postmillennial and if premillennial, thenhistorical premillennial. They were not in any way dispensational. Pentecostalismis at heart a supposed restoration of apostolic Christianity that is meant tobring in the latter rain harvest in preparation for Christ's return. Thephrase "latter rain" is taken from Joel 2:23 & 28 and sometimes James 5:7as a label describing an end-time revival and evangelistic harvest expected bymany charismatics and Pentecostals. Some time in the future, they believe theHoly Spirit will be poured out like never before. The latter rain teaching isdeveloped from the agricultural model that a farmer needs rain at two crucialpoints in the growing cycle in order to produce a bountiful harvest. First,right after the seed is planted the "early rain" is needed to cause the seed togerminate in order to produce a healthy crop. Second, the crop needs rainright before the harvest, called the "latter rain," so the grain will produce ahigh yield at harvest time, which shortly follows. Latter rain advocates teachthat the Acts 2 outpouring of the Holy Spirit was the "early rain" but the"latter rain" outpouring of the Holy Spirit will occur at the end-times. Thisscenario is in conflict with dispensationalism that sees the current ageending, not in revival, but apostasy. It will be during the tribulation, afterthe rapture of the church, that God will use the miraculous in conjunction withthe preaching of the gospel. Thus, latter rain theology fits within apostmillennial or historical premillennial eschatology, but it is notconsistent with dispensationalism. ManyChristians are aware that the Pentecostal movement began on January 1, 1901 inTopeka, Kansas when Agnes Ozman (1870-1937) spoke in tongues under the tutelageof Charles Fox Parham (1873-1929). Yet, how many realize that in the "earlyyears Pentecostalism often took the name 'Latter Rain Movement'"? Thereis no doubt that the latter rain teaching was one of the major components-ifnot the major distinctive-in the theological formation of Pentecostalism. "Modern Pentecostalism is the 'latter rain,' the special outpouring of theSpirit that restores the gifts in the last days as part of the preparation forthe 'harvest,' the return of Christ in glory," says Donald Dayton. Daytonconcludes that the "broader Latter Rain doctrine provided a key . . . premisein the logic of Pentecostalism."[54] In spite of having such a key placein the thinking of early Pentecostalism, "the latter rain doctrine did tend todrop out of Pentecostalism" in the 1920s "only to reappear, however, in theradical Latter Rain revitalization movement of the 1940s."[55] Oneof reasons that latter rain teachings began to wane in the mid-1920s was thatas Pentecostalism became more institutionalized it needed an answer to theinroads of liberalism. As noted above, dispensationalism was seen as a help inthese areas. TheLatter Rain teaching developed out of the Wesleyan-Holiness desire for bothindividual (sanctification) and corporate (eschatological) perfection. Thus,early perfectionist teachers like John Wesley, Charles Finney, and Asa Mahanwere all postmillennial and social activists. Revivalism was gagged bycarrying the burden of both personal and public change or perfection. Itfollows that one who believes in personal perfection should also believe thatpublic perfection is equally possible. Those who believe the latter are postmillennialists.After all, if God has given the Holy Spirit in this age to do either, then whynot the other? If God can perfect individuals, then why not society? However,as the 1800s turned into the 1900s, social change was increasingly linked withDarwin's theory of evolution. The evolutionary rationale was then used toattack the Bible itself. To most English-speaking Christians it certainlyappeared that society was not being perfected, instead it was in decline. Critics of the Bible said that one needed a Ph.D. from Europe before the Biblecould be organized and understood. It was into this climate thatdispensationalism was introduced into America and probably accounts for itsspeedy and widespread acceptance by many conservative Christians. To manyBible believing Christians, Dispensationalism made a great deal more sense ofthe world than did the anti-supernaturalism conclusions of liberalism. Dispensationalism,in contrast to Holiness teaching, taught that the world and the visible churchwere not being perfected, instead Christendom was in apostasy and headingtoward judgment. God is currently in the process of calling out His electthrough the preaching of the gospel. Christian social change would not bepermanent, nor would it lead to the establishment of Christ's kingdom beforeHis return. Instead a cataclysmic intervention was needed (Christ's secondcoming), if society was to be transformed. EarlyPentecostalism was born out of a motivation and vision for restoring to thechurch apostolic power lost over the years. Now she was to experience herlatter-day glory and victory by going out in a blaze of glory and success. Onthe other hand, dispensationalism was born in England in the early 1800sbemoaning the latter-day apostasy and ruin of the church. Nevertheless, withinPentecostalism, these two divergent views were merged. Thus, denominationslike the Assemblies of God and Foursquare Pentecostals moved away fromdoctrines like the latter rain teaching and generated official positionsagainst those teachings. It was in the mid-1920s that dispensationalism beganto be adopted by non-Calvinists and spread throughout the broader world ofConservative Protestantism. Dispensationalismappealed to the average person with its emphasis that any average, interestedperson could understand the Bible without the enlightened help of a liberaleducation. Once a student understood God's overall plan for mankind, asadministered through the dispensations, he would be able to see God's hand inhistory. Thus, dispensational theology made a lot of sense to both Pentecostaland evangelical believers at this point in history.
Post War Development Fundamentalism/Evangelicalismand Pentecostalism/Charismatic movements spread rapidly in America after thesecond World War and since dispensationalism was attached to them, it also grewrapidly. Many baby-boomers within Pentecostal and Charismatic churches grew upwith dispensationalism and the pre-trib rapture as part of their doctrinalframework. Thus, it would not occur to them that dispensationalism was notorganic to their particular brands of restoration theology. Further, asnon-Calvinist Fundamentalism grew after the War, especially within independentBaptist circles, there was an even greater disconnect of dispensationaldistinctives from their Calvinist roots. Wehave seen that the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement has a tradition of bothLatter Rain/restoration teachings as well as the later rise of a dispensationalstream. However, these are contradictory teachings which appear to be on acollision course. Either the church age is going to end with perfection andrevival or it will decline into apostasy, preparing the way for the church tobecome the harlot of Revelation during the tribulation. It is not surprisingto see within the broader Pentecostal/Charismatic movement, since the mid1980s, a clear trend toward reviving Latter Rain theology and a growingrealization that it is in logical conflict with their core doctrine. Many, whogrew up on Dispensational ideas and the pre-trib rapture, are dumping theseviews as the leaven of Latter Rain theology returns to prominence withinPentecostal/Charismatic circles. Pentecostal/Charismaticleaders like Earl Paulk[56] and Tommy Reid, to name just acouple among many, are attempting to articulate the tension over the strugglesof two competing systems. They are opting for the dismissal of dispensationalelements from a consistent Pentecostal/Charismatic and Latter Rain theology. Tommy Reid observes:
This great LastDay revival was often likened in the preaching of Pentecostal pioneer to therestoration promised to Israel in the Old Testament. . . . WhereasDispensationalists had relegated all of these prophetic passages of restorationonly to physical Israel, Pentecostal oratory constantly referred to theseprophecies as having a dual meaning, restoration for physical Israel, ANDrestoration for the present day church. WE WERE THE PEOPLE OF THATRESTORATION, ACCORDING TO OUR THEOLOGY. (emphasis in original)[57]
Atthe same time, the purge of Dispensationalism from Reformed Christianity, begunin the late 1930s, has been pretty much completed. Typical of thispolarization is found in books like John Gerstner's Wrongly Dividing TheWord Of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism.[58] While admitting on the one handthat a "strange thing about Dispensationalism is that it seems to have hadits strongest advocates in Calvinistic churches."[59] Gerstner so strongly opposes dispensationalism, that it has blinded him to thetrue Calvinist nature of such a God-centered theology. Gerstner claims that heand other Reformed theologians have raised "strong questions about theaccuracy of dispensational claims to be Calvinistic."[60] Itappears that since Dispensationalism arose within the Reformed tradition, as arival to Covenant Theology, some want to say that they cannot logically beCalvinistic. This is what Gerstner contends. However, in spite of Gerstner'ssophistry on this issue,[61] he cannot wipe out the historicalfact that dispensationalism was birthed within the biblical mindset of a cleartheocentric theology and by those who held strongly to soteriologicalCalvinism. The fact that Dispensationalism arose within a Reformed context isprobably the reason why the Reformed community has led the way in criticism ofDispensational theology.
Conclusion Thepurpose of this article is to remind modern Dispensationalists and Calvinistsof the historical roots of Dispensationalism. It is precisely becauseDispensationalism has penetrated almost every form of Protestantism that manytoday may be surprised to learn of its heritage. In our day of Postmodernirrationalism, where it is considered a virtue to NOT connect the dots of one'stheology, we need to be reminded that the theology of the Bible is a seamlessgarment. It all hangs together. If one starts pulling at a single thread, thewhole cloth is in danger of unraveling. Ipersonally think that if systematic Dispensationalism is rightly understoodthen it still logically makes sense only within a theocentric andsoteriologically Calvinists theology. After all, Dispensationalism teachesthat it is GOD who is ruling His household, as administered through the variousdispensations of history. However, the reality is that Dispensationalism, orelements of Dispensationalism (i.e., pretribulationism, futurism, etc.), havebeen disseminated throughout a wide diversity of Protestant traditions. Dispensationalism is best seen as a system of theology that sees views God asthe Sovereign ruler of heaven and earth; man as a rebellious vice-regent (alongwith some angels); Jesus Christ is the hero of history as He is saves some byHis Grace; history as a lesson in the outworking of God's glory being displayedto both heaven and earth. Dispensationalism is a theology that I believe isproperly derived from biblical study and lets God be God. [1] Samuel H. Kellogg,"Premillennialism: Its relations to Doctrine and Practice," BibliothecaSacra, Vol. XLV, 1888, p. 253. [2] Kellogg,"Premillennialism," p. 254. [3] Kellogg,"Premillennialism," p. 257. [4] Kellogg,"Premillennialism," pp. 258-59. [5] Kellogg,"Premillennialism," p. 256. [6] C. Norman Kraus, Dispensationalismin America: Its Rise and Development (Richmond:John Knox Press, 1958), p. 59. [7] Kraus, Dispensationalism, p. 59. [8] Harold H. Rowdon, Who Are TheBrethren and Does it Matter? (Exeter,England: The Paternoster Press, 1986), p. 35. [9] George Bellett, Memoir of the Rev.George Bellett (London: J. Masters, 1889),pp. 41-42, cited in Max S. Weremchuk, John Nelson Darby (Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1992), p. 237,f.n. 25. [10] John Howard Goddard, "TheContribution of John Nelson Darby to Soteriology, Ecclesiology, andEschatology," (Th. D. Dissertation from Dallas Theological Seminary,1948), p. 85. [11] J. N. Darby, "Letter onFree-Will," in The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby (Winschoten, Netherlands: H. L. Heijkoop, 1971),Vol. 10, p. 185. [12] Ibid., p. 186. [13] J. N. Darby, "Notes onRomans," in The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby (Winschoten, Netherlands: H. L. Heijkoop, 1971),Vol. 26, pp. 107-08. [14] W. G. Turner, John Nelson Darby: A Biography (London: C. A. Hammond, 1926),p. 45. [15] Ibid., p. 58. [16] Rowdon, Who Are The Brethren, pp. 205-07. [17] Goddard, "The Contribution ofDarby," p. 86. [18] J. N. Darby, "The Doctrine ofthe Church of England at the Time of the Reformation," in The CollectedWritings of J. N. Darby (Winschoten,Netherlands: H. L. Heijkoop, 1971), Vol. 3, p. 3. (Italics are original.) [19] George M. Marsden, Fundamentalismand American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: 1870-1925 (New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1980), p. 46. [20] Ibid. [21] Ibid. [22] Kellogg,"Premillennialism," p. 253. [23] Ibid., p. 254. [24] Ibid. [25] Ibid. [26] George M. Marsden,"Introduction: Reformed and American," in David F. Wells, ed., ReformedTheology in America: A History of Its Modern Development (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997), p. 3. [27] Ibid., p. 8. [28] Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots ofFundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism, 1800-1930 (Grand Rapids: Baker, [1970], 1978), p. 94. [29] Timothy P. Weber,"Premillennialism and the Branches of Evangelicalism," in Donald W.Dayton and Robert K Johnston, editors, The Variety of AmericanEvangelicalism (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991), pp. 14-15. [30]Formore on the life of Brookes see Larry Dean Pettegrew, "The Historical andTheological Contributions of the Niagara Bible Conference to AmericanFundamentalism," (Th. D. Dissertation from Dallas Theological Seminary,1976). David Riddle Williams, James H. Brookes: A Memoir, (St. Louis: Presbyterian Board of Publication,1897). [31] Samuel Macauley Jackson, ed., TheNew Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1952), Vol. III, p. 296. [32] Larry V. Crutchfield, The Originsof Dispensationalism: The Darby Factor,(Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1992), preface. [33] Daniel Reid, ed., Dictionary ofChristianity in America (Downers Grove, IL:InterVarsity Press, 1990), pp. 1057-58. [34] John David Hannah, "The Socialand Intellectual History of the Origins of the Evangelical TheologicalCollege," (Ph. D. Dissertation from The University of Texas at Dallas,1988), pp. 118-19. [35] Jeffrey J. Richards, The Promiseof Dawn: The Eschatology of Lewis Sperry Chafer, (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1991), p. 23. [36] Ibid. [37] Ibid., p. 3. [38] C. F. Lincoln, "BiographicalSketch of the Author," in Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology(Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948), Vol. VIII, p. 6. [39] W. H. Griffith Thomas, ThePrinciples of Theology: An Introduction to the Thirty-nine Articles (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979 [1930]. [40] Cited in Hannah, "Origins ofthe Evangelical Theological College," pp. 199-200. [41] Cited in Ibid., p. 200. [42] Cited in Ibid., p. 346. [43] Cited in Ibid., p. 346, f.n. 323. [44] Ibid., pp. 357-58. [45] Ibid., p. 364. [46] See J. R. Graves, The Work ofChrist Consummated in 7 Dispensations(Memphis: Baptist Book House, 1883). [47] Kraus, Dispensationalism, p. 61. [48] Weber, "Premillennialism,"p. 15. [49] Donald Dayton, Theological Rootsof Pentecostalism, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), p. 27. [50] Dayton, Roots, pp. 22-23. [51] Ibid., p. 27. [52] Stanley M. Burgess and Gary B.McGee, editors, Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988), p. 632. [53] Cited by Dayton, Roots, p. 27. [54] Ibid. [55] Ibid., p. 33. [56] See Earl Paulk, Held In TheHeavens Until . . . God's Strategy For Planet Earth (Atlanta: K Dimension Publishers, 1985). EarlPaulk, Spiritual Megatrends: Christianity in the 21stCentury (Atlanta: Kingdom Publishers,1988). [57] Tommy Reid, Kingdom Now . . . ButNot Yet (Buffalo: IJN Publishing, 1988),pp. xv-xvi. [58] John H. Gerstner, WronglyDividing The Word Of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt Publishers,1991). [59] Ibid., p. 106. [60] Ibid. [61] Ibid., pp. 105-47. |
|
