Many Evangelical Seminaries still believe and teach dispensationalism

Many conservative Evangelical and Fundamentalist seminaries still teach and believe dispensationalism (or at least its underlying hermeneutics).  They are also not ashamed to be premillenialists.  I am not necessarily endorsing nor promoting these seminaries.  I am simply stating that these seminaries still teach and believe this underlying theological system.  You don't have to believe in covenant theology or amillennialism to be an evangelical or a biblical scholar (although there is a growing pressure to conform to these positions).

To my knowledge (please correct me if I am wrong), up to present ETS (Evangelical Theological Society) has had a Dispensationism Study Group and Clark Summit University (see below) has had a yearly Dispensationalism conference (at least up till 2014).  So even on multi-denominational and seminary levels this is still a serious issue to both believe and defend by academically trained pastors and seminary professors.  Many of these same schools produce quarterly theological journals defending these same exegetical-based positions.  

So don't walk away from these Biblically defensible positions.  There are hundreds of seminary students (future local church pastors and missionaries) who share your beliefs.  Don't get drawn into the cool and trendy positions of big name coalitions and groups.  It won't help.  In the end, you still preach the gospel.  But how the book end does determine  how you live now.  If this is your kingdom here and now then no wonder people leave these main line denominations.

I am listing in alphabetical order the positions of seminaries as I find them in printed media or online.  (The multi-changing font is because I copy/pasted them from each seminary website.  Some of them I just couldn't fix the font).

Bob Jones University

(Taken from Course Catalog for Systematic Theology)
"The application of the principles of systematic theology to the doctrines of Christ, salvation, the Church and the end times, following a biblical dispensational hermeneutic"

Central Baptist Theological Seminary

"We believe that there is a radical and essential difference between the righteous and the wicked. Those who are righteous will enter into eternal bliss with Christ and those who are wicked will be lost forever (1). We believe that the Scriptures teach that at death the spirit and soul of the believer pass into the presence of Christ and remain in conscious joy until the resurrection of the body when Christ comes for His own (2). The blessed hope of the believer is the imminent, personal, pretribulational, premillennial appearance of Christ to rapture the Church, His bride, prior to the seventieth week of Daniel (3). God's righteous judgments will then be poured out upon an unbelieving world during the seven years of tribulation (4). The climax of this fearful era will be the physical return of Jesus Christ to the earth in great glory to reestablish the Davidic kingdom (5). Israel will be saved and restored as a nation."

Clark Summit University ("formerly Baptist Bible Seminary")

"We believe the Bible supports using a grammatical, historical method of interpretation in light of the progress of revelation. Thus, we believe that the Bible is the clear, sufficient, and supreme authority for all belief, life, and ministry."

"We believe in the distinction between the nation of Israel and the Church, the Spirit-baptized Body of Christ. The Church is not the collection of all believers of all times."

"We believe that God will fulfill the biblical covenants made with the nation of Israel. Though they are now dispersed among the nations, they will be re-gathered in the land of Israel and saved as a nation at the premillennial coming of Christ to the earth. At that time, Christ will begin his Davidic rule over the world for 1,000 years and continue to reign in the eternal state."

Dallas Theological Seminary

"We believe that the dispensations are stewardships by which God administers His purpose on the earth through man under varying responsibilities. We believe that the changes in the dispensational dealings of God with man depend on changed conditions or situations in which man is successively found with relation to God, and that these changes are the result of the failures of man and the judgments of God. We believe that different administrative responsibilities of this character are manifest in the biblical record, that they span the entire history of mankind, and that each ends in the failure of man under the respective test and in an ensuing judgment from God. We believe that three of these dispensations or rules of life are the subject of extended revelation in the Scriptures, viz., the dispensation of the Mosaic Law, the present dispensation of grace, and the future dispensation of the millennial kingdom. We believe that these are distinct and are not to be intermingled or confused, as they are chronologically successive."

"We believe that the period of great tribulation in the earth will be climaxed by the return of the Lord Jesus Christ to the earth as He went, in person on the clouds of heaven, and with power and great glory to introduce the millennial age, to bind Satan and place him in the abyss, to lift the curse which now rests upon the whole creation, to restore Israel to her own land and to give her the realization of God’s covenant promises, and to bring the whole world to the knowledge of God." 

Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary

"We believe in a dispensational understanding of the Bible, an approach to Scripture based on the progressive unfolding of the divine mysteries or new revelation from God which results in various dispensations or distinguishable administrations/stewardships of God’s revealed truth, such as Promise, Law, Grace, Kingdom, among others. This approach recognizes a fundamental distinction between Israel and the Church in origin, purposes, and destiny."

"We believe in the literal return of Jesus Christ that will take place in two stages. The first stage is the Rapture, or His personal, imminent, and pretribulational coming for all saints of the church age. The second stage is the Revelation or the Second Coming in Glory, which is His personal and public coming at the close of the Tribulation Period to establish the messianic, Millennial Kingdom on the earth when Israel will be restored to covenant favor with God and to her land in faith and the Church will reign with Christ for the thousand years. After the Millennium there will be a new heaven and earth wherein God will dwell eternally with His people.<sup>"

Liberty University</sup>

"It is to be understood by all through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, its meaning determined by the historical, grammatical, and literary use of the author’s language, comparing Scripture with Scripture."

"We affirm that the return of Christ for all believers is imminent. It will be followed by seven years of great tribulation, and then the coming of Christ to establish His earthly kingdom for a thousand years."

^{Maranatha Baptist University}

"The Bible faculty are committed to a dispensational hermeneutic. In every Bible course we teach and demonstrate a normal, historical, grammatical interpretation of the text of Scripture that is the foundation of dispensationalism. This hermeneutic does not preclude or exclude correct understanding of types, illustrations, apocalypses, and other genres within the basic framework of literal interpretation. It does acknowledge the progressive revelation of God’s divine plan through time. Though various stewardships of revelation are acknowledged, the unifying salvific factor for all people for all time is the necessity of responding by faith to the special revelation given. The consequence of this consistent hermeneutic is a distinction between ethnic Israel and the New Testament church. Covenants established between God and ethnic Israel will be fulfilled in the literal sense in which they were given and received. The unique relationship between Christ and His Bride, the church, is acknowledged and preserved. Throughout all of eternity, the ultimate purpose of His universal plan is that of glorifying Himself. We reject covenant theology, its hermeneutic, and the eschatology of amillennialism and post-millennialism. Furthermore, we reject the progressive concept that Christ is already reigning on the Davidic throne."

Masters Seminary

"We teach the literal, grammatical historical interpretation of Scripture which affirms the belief that the opening chapters of Genesis present creation in six literal days."

"We teach that, after the tribulation period, Christ will come to earth to occupy the throne of David and establish His messianic kingdom for a thousand years on the earth. During this time the resurrected saints will reign with Him over Israel and all the nations of the earth."

Piedmont International University

"We believe in accepting the literal teaching of the Word. “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense.” Therefore, every declaration is to be taken in its primary, ordinary, literal, and its most obvious meaning unless the facts of the context and the well-defined laws of language clearly indicate the terms either to be symbolic or figurative and not literal. Whatever is not literal must be explained in the light of other passages which are literal."

"We believe, according to Scriptures, in the sure return of the Lord Jesus Christ; that this second coming will be a literal, bodily, personal return; that His coming for His bride, the Church, constitutes the “Blessed Hope” set before us, for which we should be constantly looking. We believe that His coming will be premillennial."

So don't fret, worry or be intimidated if you can't (with a clear conscience) hold to some confession written nearly 400 years ago or longer.  I would suggest in our current evangelical climate there are many loud and outspoken adherents of both Covenant Theology and Amillennialism (chances are you already have their books on your shelf).  You are not alone in your theological convictions.  If you want to memorize a catechism then make up your own.  If it needs to be dispensational great.    

Read, enjoy, and take comfort.  You are not alone in your beliefs. 

If you know of others I can add to this list please forward me their internet address.

Why I still believe in Dispensationalism? Not Ashamed to Say Hermeneutics Matters.

Chances are if your local church uses a confession (historical or current) you will have to address the issues they teach.  If you are an ardent follower of the SBC, Gospel Coalition or T4G crowd (especially the founding documents) you can'd avoid this issue.  Nearly every document either favors or exclusively addresses Amillennialism or Covenant Theology.  Issues such as the Church and  Pneumatology cannot go untouched in these issues either.
Apart from these groups, both the Westminster Confession and London Baptist Confession are not Dispensational or Premillennial friendly.  So yes they think it matters.

He are some Interpretation basics for reminders (definitely not exhaustive).  All of these to one extent or other must be ignored or selectively applied to produce both Covenant Theology and Amillennialism. 

First, a literal grammatical historical method of scriptural interpretation (including all and not some areas of systematic theology) is most consistently available only within dispensationalism.  Out method of interpretation should include every area of theology.  Ecclesiology (church) is just as important as Eschatology (last things) or Soteriology (salvation).  We don't start with one verse or two and read them into all the Bible.

Second, allowing the local context of any given passage to speak authoritatively and standing on its own (and not subjectively reinterpreted by supposedly "clearer" passages elsewhere) is only possible within dispensationalism.  It is all to common an excuse to interpret multiple passages in light of one (or a couple) that you feel best defends your position.  There are multiple texts addressing the fallacies which are created in this realm.  The most popular fallacy involves word studies (think reading one definition into every place that particular word occurs).  There are good reasons why Bible translators did not translate particular Greek or Hebrew terms the same way every time it occurs.

Third, a premillennial eschatology (which is not exclusive to this system) but is a exegetical and necessary consequence, is the only interpretive system which actually gives weight to (all and not some) of the details of each scripture passage.  This is only possible within dispensationalism.  Premillennialism is the only eschatology that give just weight to all the covenant promises made in the Old Testament.  This includes land promises, the Davidic throne in Jerusalem (not peoples hearts only), and of course the future of the nation Israel.  It is also the only position to best make use of all details in relation to kingdom prophecies (death, pain, suffering, peace, land, longer lifespans, etc...).

Fourth, the entire New Testament can be interpreted in a manner that does not detract, change, or modify in any way the interpretation of the Old Testament.  This includes literal promises made to and not yet fulfilled to the nation of Israel.  This consistent belief in God's promises (including land promises--very relevant today) is only possible in dispensationalism. (See comments in previous point).

Fifth, typology (which is not exclusive to this system) is not contrary to but perfectly complimentary to this system, as long as typology is restrained to the usage and/or implementation of biblical authors (not to the subjective creativity of every reader or a selective governing interpretive grid).  Typology interpreted within the usage of biblical authors is only possible within dispensationalism.  For example, Galatians and Hebrews involve types, with very specific literal Old Testament concepts.  We don't create interpretive grids and reinterpret our Bible based on a New Exodus grid, number patterns, or two-age grids for a couple of examples.  

Articles will be needed to add extra weight and evidence for all the above claims.  Vast numbers of fundamentalist and even evangelical seminaries still teach and advocate dispensationalism.  It is not outdated or archaic.  Look at their doctrinal statements.  Many are still (and for good, sound academic reasons) still dispensational premillennialists.  
I am currently compiling another blog listing of all the seminaries that still teach, believe, and advocate the underlying hermeneutic for dispensationalism and of course premillennialism. 

Feel free to disagree.  Comments as always encouraged.

Premillennialism: Why There Must Be a Future Earthly Kingdom of Jesus (2015) By Michael Vlach

Premillennialism: Why There Must Be a Future Earthly Kingdom of Jesus (2015)
By Michael Vlach
"A case for premillennialism, the view that there will be a future earthly kingdom of Jesus after His second coming yet before the Eternal State. Offers biblical arguments and a rationale for the premillennial view and shows why this perspective coincides with the Bible's storyline."

Other important books written by Michael Vlach:

Has the Church Replaced Israel (Oct 2010)

"The relationship between Israel and the church continues to be a controversial topic led by this question: Does the church replace, supersede, or fulfill the nation of Israel in God’s plan, or will Israel be saved and restored with a unique identity and role?

In Has the Church Replaced Israel?, author Michael J. Vlach evaluates the doctrine of replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) down through history but ultimately argues in favor of the nonsupersessionist position. Thoroughly vetting the most important hermeneutical and theological issues related to the Israel/church relationship, Vlach explains why, “there are compelling scriptural reasons in both testaments to believe in a future salvation and restoration of the nation Israel."

Dispensationalism: Essential Beliefs and Common Myths (Dec 2010)

"A basic introduction to the essential beliefs of Dispensationalism. This work also refutes common myths people have about dispensational theology. A must for a proper understanding of what Dispensationalism is all about."

I am still an academically convinced dispensationlist and as far as I know always will be.  The more I read modern scholarly writing the more you see the myths repeated.  I actually saw these same errors repeated in a doctoral paper.  There is obviously (I hope well meaning) a lack of a gate guard to continue to allow the false caricatures of dispensationalism to be repeated.   

Read, enjoy, and take comfort in the scriptures.  Comments as always encouraged.

The Synagogue and the Regulative Principle of Worship

The Synagogue and the Regulative Principle of Worship

Anyone familiar with the worship wars within Christian circles has no doubt come across the terms: regulative, puritan, and/or normative.  Detailed study will take students back to divisions among great reformers such as Calvin and Luther.  These divisions extend even today in the worship wars of 2016.

Despite my strong convictions as a baptist and dispensationalist there is an institution that puzzles me.  It is called the synagogue.  Consider the roots, beginning and continuation of this worship activity even up to 2016 (you'll need to  look back at the inter-testamental period).  Do we have a command to participate as Christians?  Do we have a command to worship during this event?  How did Jesus and the apostles (both before and after) his resurrection make use or participate in this worship event (this is for the publisher's red letter font is more authoritative types)?  These are truly puzzling questions to consider if we must have a command, principle, or practice to maintain these events as God ordained.

Consider the many references in the gospels to Jesus the Messiah worshipping in the Jewish synagogue.  He attended and even read scripture in their hearing.  The apostles will do the same during his life and after his bodily resurrection.

This is the beginning of thought on this matter.  There are references to the apostles going into a city and evangelizing a city starting with the synagogue.  There are multitude references to the apostles repeatedly teaching weekly at theses same events in the book of Acts.  You also have these same individuals meeting as a church elsewhere on "the first day of the week." 

Where does this fit into the worship wars?  Do we pull a mild-dispensational hermeneutic, "well that was the gospels." Problem is that it happened in the book of Acts also (including after Acts 2).  Luke especially seems to overlap with the book of Acts (same author of both books helps).  Seems to be an issue for post-Acts 2 church-birth Christianity where they are still worshipping in the synagogue.  Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, worshipped in this institution without OT command or precedent.  As far as I can tell he also never attacked or condemned the Pharisees for worshipping in the synagogue (their lifestyles and theology is another issue).

I am simply exploring how do we fit a regulative worship principle with the synagogue?  If your best exegetical response is to say, "that was Bible times" or "that was another context" then your missing the point.  It can't be only for Jews because the apostles are participating throughout the book of Acts.

If we appeal to a "transitional nature of Acts" then when did the transition stop?  The synagogue is still used today in 2016.  James actually uses this term in chapter two συναγωγή.  If you can't read greek then try to see the English gloss "synagogue."  Appears in KJV text as "assembly."

There is no command, principle or precedent for Sunday school.  Do we throw it out?  Do we keep it as a useful tool?  Who decides this, the pastor or congregation?  Do we throw out Wednesday night or Sunday night because we don't agree on how to use scriptures to defend it (or not)?  When does history have a voice in aiding our interpretation?  Must ever generation reinvent their own doctrine from scripture?  Does the current cool kid trends shape our theology and practice (think: trendy small groups)?  At what point does pragmatism take over as a hermeneutical grid to justify any means or methodology?  These are only preliminary thoughts as I look for detailed exegetical texts addressing this issue.

Thoughts encouraged.  Dialogue interesting.  Hope it helps to actually further and build up Christ's body.

Book Review: Dispensationalism: Essential Beliefs and Common Myths

Dispensationalism: Essential Beliefs and Common Myths
By. Michael J. Vlach (Theological Studies Press, 2008)

Unfortunately those who attack Dispensationalism do not go head to head with the current advocates of this particular theological system.  Of course it is always helpful to accurately represent a system you disagree with: Ad hominem arguments and straw men don't help much.  This text is soon to be six years old but it still packs a punch in exegetical and theological truth.  

I would encourage anyone thinking of abandoning Dispensationalism to carefully consider the arguments of this book.

Consider the Book Outline:
Ch. 1 History of Dispensationalism
Ch. 2 Essential Beliefs of Dispensationalism
Ch.3 Myths about Dispensationalism
Ch. 4 Questions and Answers about Dispensationalis

In chapter two, Vlach lists what he believes are six essential beliefs of Dispensationalism.  They are as follows:
1. "Progressive revelation from the New Testament does not interpret or reinterpret Old Testament passages in a way that changes or cancels the original meaning of the Old Testament writers as determined by historical-grammatical hermeneutics.
2. Types exist but national Israel is not a type that is superseded by the church.
3. Israel and the church are distinct, thus, the church cannot be identified as the new or true Israel.
4. There is both spiritual unity in salvation between Jews and Gentiles and a future role for Israel as a nation.
5.  The nation Israel will be both saved and restored with a unique identity and function in a future millennial kingdom upon the earth.
6. There are multiple senses of "seed of Abraham," thus, the church's identification as "seed of Abraham" does not cancel God's promises to the believing Jewish "seed of Abraham."

In Chapter three, Vlach lists which he believes are myths about Dispensationalism.
Myth 1: Dispensationalism teaches multiple ways of salvation
Myth 2: Dispensationalism is inherently linked with Arminianism
Myth 3: Dispensationalism is inherently antinomian
Myth 4: Dispensationalism leads to Non-lordship salvation
Myth 5: Dispensationalism is primarily about believing in Seven Dispensations

Overall the book is greatly appreciated in strengthening the exegetical and theological foundations of Dispensationalism.

May this overview encourage you to remain firmly rooted (assuming you are already) in the beliefs in a Diispensational understanding of the Scriptures.