Leaving Baptist Bible Seminary for Friends of Israel

Many people already know. But I need to make an announcement here just in case. I have resigned my position as Dean of Baptist Bible Seminary effective June 1 and have accepted the position of Director of International Ministries for Friends of Israel.

I worked for BBS for 22 years. Never been treated better any place I have been. So I am thankful for the many paths the Lord has led me down in the best ministry I’ve had to this point in my life. When I think of my students at the seminary and the students from the college that worked with me in Mission Scranton, I have no regrets. God has been more than gracious to me.

But a new challenge awaits. I hope I am up to it. Cindy and I will live for the time being in Clarks Summit.

Reflections on the Life, Ministry, and Influence of Dr. Charles Ryrie

RyrieWord has traveled widely about the home going of Dr. Charles Ryrie. As someone whom he befriended and who has defended his overall approach to the Bible, I thought it appropriate for me to share my thoughts here.

I came to Christ in 1974 partly through the ministry of a local church – West Huntsville Baptist Church in Huntsville, Alabama. It was that church and the pastor of that church, Dr. Sam Wolfe, who pointed me in the direction of reading books by “Dallas Seminary men.” Dr. Ryrie was of course one of them.

Early in my Christian life, I was an aerospace engineer/computer programmer who shared an office with a Reformed Presbyterian friend Mark Scot. We swapped resources. He gave me a copy of G. I. Williamson’s Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith and I gave him a copy of Ryrie’s Dispensationalism Today.

I have never left my traditional dispensational roots although I have grown in my faith and in understanding the Scriptures. When I went into ministry and eventually became a pastor, seminary professor and then Dean, I found increasing opportunities to use some of Dr. Ryrie’s insights in my teaching. I have for over 20 years used his book on dispensationalism as a text in a course I teach on dispensational premillennialism. I have defended some of Ryrie’s points (such as the famous sine qua non) at conferences, in sermons, in print, to my students, and in conversation with other Bible scholars.

I had the wonderful honor to be a speaker at conferences where he also spoke. He came to our Baptist Bible Seminary on at least three occasions to do lecture week or special conferences. When we started the Council on Dispensational Hermeneutics in 2008, he came to help support our beginning steps. He was gracious and humble and always let us know that he was not a pastor but a lay teacher.

He graced me with his presence in my office and let me pester him with theology questions. While some of the scholarly world viewed him as oversimplifying biblical truth, I found him committed to the Reformation cry to get the Bible in the hands of the common man so he can understand it for himself. He wrote and spoke so people could understand him. His approach was, in a word, refreshing.

In my presence, I never heard Dr. Ryrie make a disparaging mark about anybody. Disagreement, yes. Disparagement, no. He was a quiet and unassuming man. He was flawed like all of us are, but not fatally flawed since he had trusted in Christ as payment for his sin. He was in love with Christ and His Word. He has helped many of us find the Bible more approachable through his teaching.

Dr. Ryrie supported my school financially from time to time as he did many ministries across the world. But that large heart also cared for individuals like my own children who still remember the humor he showed in a lunch we all had together. It is hard to think of him gone from us. It is easier to think of him as with his Lord. The world has lost a great man. It is a loss for me personally. “Dispensationalism today” will never be the same. But many of us believe in the literal promises of the Bible like Dr. Ryrie did – promises for both Israel and the Church. And as long as there are folks like us who do, Dr. Ryrie’s legacy will continue.

More on the binding of Satan in Revelation 20

Below is a section from my upcoming paper at the Pre-Trib Study Group.  My paper analyzes Sam Storms’ book Kingdom Come.  In particular, this section talks about 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 and how its interpretation should be integrated with the teaching of Revelation 20 about the binding of Satan.  I think this is a difficult passage for amillennialism to address.  I know I have my problem passages, but I would prefer my problem passages to their problem passages.

“The case is more problematic for the amillennialist when Pauline teaching on the matter is examined. Paul in 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 states the issue rather clearly: “And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” On the face of things following literal interpretation, this passage seems to suggest that the god of this world (Satan) is currently deceiving individuals within the nations. In fact, the Apostle seems to suggest that all lost individuals among the nations of the world are being blinded by Satan. To diminish the direct import of the passage, Storms makes some assumptions. First, he assumes that good angels may actually aid in hindering Satan: “we may rest assured that in some way they [good angels] are present to strengthen, guard, and encourage those who proclaim the gospel and perhaps even to restrain the adverse influence of the demonic who would seek to undermine the reception of the gospel (2 Cor. 4:4).”[1] This almost sounds as an admission that Satan’s dominion is actually deceiving individuals within the people groups of the world, something he has denied in his discussion in Revelation 20.

Second, Storms relativizes the deceiving ministry of Satan. In another place in the book, he comments: “In other words, it is the influence of the Church, as a result of the universal preaching of the gospel, which inhibits the activity of Satan in this particular regard. Though Satan still blinds the minds of the unbelieving (2 Cor. 4:4), he is providentially restricted from hindering the pervasive expansion of the gospel throughout the world. Satan may win an occasional battle, but the war belongs to Christ!” The premillennialist looks at such a comment and interprets Storms’ words as teaching a partial deceiving of the nations. Blinding means deceiving. Revelation 20:3 teaches that for one thousand years, Satan will do no deceiving of the nations. Storms is attempting to have his cake and eat it too. However, such partial deception by Satan is not consistent with the binding of Satan taught in the Bible for the millennium.

In the end, the premillennialist remains confident that his approach to the structure of the book of Revelation, especially chapters 19-20, is correct. Satan will be bound in a future time that begins at the second coming of Christ. The premillennialist will continue to believe the amillennialists have not made their case.”

[1] Storms, Kingdom Come, 271. Storms is discussing the meaning of “messengers” in Matthew 24:31 when he makes this statement.

The Binding of Satan

The binding of Satan in Revelation 20 has always been a major issue of debate between premillennialists and amillennialists.  Premillennialists, like me, insist on the chronological nature of chapters 19-20. So the second coming of Christ in Revelation 19 precedes the 1000 years of Revelation 20.  Amillennialists, many of them following the Augustinian recapitulation view of the literary structure of the book of Revelation, argue that Revelation 20 begins over again with a discussion of the present age.  Hence, the 1000 years (as an indefinite period of time) describes the present or Church age.  This means that the binding of Satan described in Revelation 20 is happening now at the present time.

Consequently, there is a debate between premillennialists and amillennialists over the activity of Satan during the present time.  For example, in the excellent book (in my view) Competent to Counsel by Jay Adams, he honestly affirms that, because he is an amillennialist, he does not recognize demon possession when he counsels people.  Now, his views as well as others, always get qualified in later writings or expressions, but the sentiment is generally a limitation of Satan’s activity in the present age.

Read the rest of this entry »

Friends of Israel

Yesterday, I was approved to be on the board of the Friends of Israel outreach ministry to the Jews.  It was a delightful day of interaction.  I have published some articles in their excellent magazine Israel My Glory, but I am happy to be, in a more direct way, part of an organization that I have followed and supported for many years and which has stood by the central dispensational truths of the Word of God.  Their heart to reach Jewish people with the gospel of Christ is beyond question.  They have a great relationship with the nation of Israel.  God is doing many wonderful things.  I ask my friends to pray for me as I enter into this new and important responsibility.

Israel, the Church, and the Kingdom

I have been working through some dispensational commentaries on the book of Revelation, especially in chapters 20-22, to see how the distinction between Israel and the Church plays out in the minds of various dispensationalists.  I am looking at both recent writers as well as older ones going back to John Nelson Darby.  I need to review this issue for the sake of my paper for the upcoming Council on Dispensational Hermeneutics and for my commentary for the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary.

One issue that intrigues me is the interpretation that the New Jerusalem, the holy city, of  Revelation 21:2 is part of the millennium and not the eternal state beginning at the end of the millennium.  This is not my view, but I have heard it and read it in the literature.  Many prominent men have held to it.  Darby seems to be one of them.  In his Synopsis of the Books of the Bible 5:560, when he gets to that point in the book of Revelation, he comments, “What follows is the description of the heavenly city, as before we had that of Babylon.  Its heavenly character and millennial connection with the earth is revealed” (emphasis mine).  I hope to eventually write an article on this topic showing the history of interpretation of this passage within modern dispensationalism.  I think it is something that is needed.

Balance Between Academics (Content) and Ministry

I recently finished reading The Pastor Theologian: Resurrecting an Ancient Vision (Zondervan) by two pastors Gerald Hiestand and Todd Wilson.  It was quite interesting.  I recommend it to you for your consideration although at certain points, which I will not go into here, I have some disagreements.  But the good thing about the book is its desire to have theological thinking done by pastors in our churches.  In fact, the divide between the Academy (the Seminaries) and the Church is a concern they are trying to address.  There is a ditch on each side of the road.  I have seen men who can parse every Greek and Hebrew verb but don’t seem to have any great desire to walk across the street and tell somebody about Jesus.  On the other hand, I have had lunch with pastors who, after we have gone through the Roman’s Road, have nothing to talk about.  Academic minutiae on one side.  Shallowness on the other.  God spare us from both.  At Baptist Bible Seminary where I serve we have tried to bring balance to our training of pastors.  Even our seminary journal is named The Journal of Ministry and Theology for a reason.  We are a resource for the Church.  The book I mentioned at the start of this blog is one attempt to bring balance from one side of the ledger.

Distinction Between Israel and the Church as an Argument for the Pre-Trib Rapture

I am going to try to pick up my blogging again and perhaps speed it up, Lord willing.  I plan to do more personal things on Facebook (where my activity has picked up) but more academic/technical things on our-hope.org.  I have been asked to speak at the Pre-Trib Study Group this coming December giving an analysis of Sam Storms’ book Kingdom Come which I blogged about a few times.  I hope to finish my string of blogs in response to Sam’s points which I had started to do.  My paper at the Pre-Trib Study Group will be an expansion of the paper I delivered at the Council on Dispensational Hermeneutics last year.  I want to be constructive in my criticism and not bombastic in my disagreements.  Please pray for me on this.

For this blog post, however, my main thought goes ahead to the upcoming Council meeting in September which I advertised in my last blog.   My presentation is entitled “What Do Israel and the Church Share from a Traditional Dispensational Viewpoint?”  I want to help traditional dispensationalists do a full-blown theology and not just hammer the distinction between Israel and the Church (which I firmly accept) as a matter of polemics in our debate with replacement theology.  In doing this, one area that gives me pause is the constant use by dispensationalists of the distinction between Israel and the Church as a theological switch that provides proof for the pre-trib rapture.  This argument would be more plausible if the distinction has been proven to be absolute on other grounds before we get to the rapture question.  To be sure, some dispensationalists in the tradition have argued for a pretty absolute distinction by keeping the Church out of the future earthly kingdom.  In addition, Lewis Sperry Chafer’s view of two distinct new covenants was at least partly caused by his desire to make the Israel-Church dichotomy more absolute.  As to the idea that the Church as a heavenly elect will have no part in the future earthly kingdom, this seems to be countered by Luke 19:11-27 and like passages.  As to the idea of two new covenants, very few dispensationalists today hold such a view.  The book I edited entitled “Dispensational Understanding of the New Covenant” shows three views defended, none of which are the two new covenants view.  No one showed up to defend this view at the Council when we discussed it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Council on Dispensational Hermeneutics

The eighth annual Council on Dispensational Hermeneutics has been scheduled for September 16-17, 2015 at Baptist Bible Seminary in Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania.  Our topic this year is “Dispensationalism, Israel, and the Church.”  I am doing a paper on what Israel and the Church share from a traditional dispensational point of view.  I believe that we often times spend all of our time discussing the distinctions.  This is appropriate since it marks dispensationalism as unique.  However, Israel and the Church do share some things in God’s design for those institutions.  We must not lose sight of that side of things.  I am looking forward to the interaction at our Council.  Anyone is welcome to attend as an observer.  There is no charge for the two-day Council.  For more information for registration see http://www.bbc.edu/councilCouncil

On Death and Dying

There are seasons of life.  As one gets older, the opportunity for losing good friends to the vicious enemy of death increases. I have experienced the death of five friends in the last year or so:  Bill Quick, Patsy Hayes, Dick Engle, Rod Decker, Belva Donahue.  Names on a page.  Representing people that many of you reading this do not know.

Bill Quick was a friend who had a complicated past and an interesting sense of humor.  Part of our church, his testimony was that the Lord had changed him, but he, like all of us, worked through the issues of life.  He served faithfully in our church on the Praise Team and the Lord used him.

Patsy Hayes was a dear believer in my local church.  She was in the hospital for around eleven months fighting some form of skin disorder and other issues.  She eventually came out of it.  We were excited about seeing her back on her feet again.  She was a person full of energy and a heart who knew the Lord but wanted to know Him more deeply.  However, he chose to help her go deeper by calling her home.  She died of a heart attack when we thought things were going so well.

Dr. Dick Engle was for many years one of the Old Testament and Hebrew professors at Baptist Bible Seminary.  He was a man that never said a bad word about anybody in my presence.  He was a kind, gentle spirit who loved deeply.  He showed patience toward me as I tried to help him with his computer many times.  And he loved the Bible, especially the First Testament as he called it.  The Lord took him this past spring.

Dr. Rod Decker was a close, personal friend.  In fact, he preached the funeral of Dick Engle mentioned above.  Recently (a few months ago), cancer took my friend Rod before his time.  The loss stings me, although I am sure not as much as it hurts his own family.  Rod was a great scholar and taught me much.  I will always remember the conferences we attended together and the conversations as we traveled.  He will be missed much.

Belva Donahue is the one on the list that was closest to me.  My mother-in-law.  She feigned anger at my “mother-in-law” jokes from time to time, but the truth was she was the best mother-in-law the husband of a daughter could ever want.  She was kind yet feisty.  She had her opinions but did not hate.  And she shared her faith in God to the end, when she passed away this summer at the age of 89.  She will be remembered.

All of these folks had put their trust in Christ as Savior.  I will see them again when I get to heaven.  Death, that great enemy the Bible tells us, has been conquered through Christ (1 Cor. 15:54-57).  Its sting is only momentary.  Its attack futile.  The sorrow is only for a night.  Eternity awaits…in glory and grandeur.  The true believer has a special relationship to death.  Dying is not our destiny (Rev. 21:4).