Editorials -- By: Anonymous
BSac 101:403 (Jul 44) p. 257
Dispensational Distinctions Denounced
The July-September, 1943, issue of BIBLIOTHECA SACRA carried an editorial which cited and to some extent analyzed the report made by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, U.S., respecting so-called Dispensationalism as to whether that form of doctrine is in harmony with the Confession of Faith. That report given by the Committee, which report condemned Dispensationalism, was not accepted by the Assembly, but was turned back to the Committee for further consideration. At the meeting of the Assembly in May, 1944, the Committee, which had been enlarged and its personnel somewhat changed, presented its unanimous report again, which report, though condemning dispensational teaching as effectively as before, was adopted by the Assembly without protest or discussion. Since this report centers almost wholly upon the Editor of BIBLIOTHECA SACRA as the supposed chief exponent of dispensational teaching, this Quarterly offers the following comment:
First, the Committee claims that its criticism is not directed against Premillennialism but is directed against Dispensationalism. This sets up a distinction which for want of a factual basis must be classed as fantastic. As well might it be asserted that the sun will rise in the morning but that it will not be dark before nor will it be light after the sun rises. Doubtless it is possible to give a superficial assent to the general idea that Christ’s return will be before His kingdom is set up on the earth and not to have carried any of the issues which are involved to their logical and Scriptural conclusions. The fact that the men are in the minority who through many years of relentless, unprejudiced study have come to a recognition of these logical conclusions does not mean that the majority is right and the minority is wrong. It is the
BSac 101:403 (Jul 44) p. 258
trained expositor-and they are numbered by hundreds if not by thousands-who accepts the dispensational distinctions and because these distinctions are advanced and sustained in the Sacred Text. It would be of interest if some member of this Committee, after having thus considered the matter sufficiently to be able to sit in judgment on all dispensational teaching, would write a treatise distinguishing between premillennial and dispensational beliefs, basing it on a worthy exposition of the Scriptures.
Second, the Committee’s report continues to ignore, as it did the preceding year, the vital question as to whether Dispensationalism is the teaching of the Bible. It is recognized that the specific task laid upon the Committee was restricted in its formal declaration to whether Dispensationalism is in harmony with the Confession of Faith; b...
Click here to subscribe