NEW Dispensational Theology Base Package

The list goes on.

Thank you for listing these. I found one resource I had overlooked.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592450#Comment_592450

The list goes on.

Thank you for listing these. I found one resource I had overlooked.

No problem. I'm sure I missed quite a few as well. Logos doesn't have "Dispensationalism" as one of their search refiners.

I, also, want to note that those who subscribe to this system of theology in the US is rather large. Craig Blomberg in one of his books estimates that there could be 25 million adherents in the US. The Oxford Handbook of Millennailism has this figure closer to 40 million.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592457#Comment_592457

Bump...there has to be someone else out there that also wants this...[:)]

I found some other resources that could easily be included.

J. Dwight Pentecost Collection

Warren Wiersbe's Be Series

Tom Constable's Expository Bible Notes

Roy Zuck Vital Issues Series

Roy Gingrich's Commentaries in Outline Form

Donald Grey Barnhouse's Expositions of Bible Doctrines...Romans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592568#Comment_592568

Tyndale Theological Studies Collection

Norman L Geisler's 4-volume Systematic Theology

Geisler has two other collections here and here

The Most High God: Book of Danial Commentary by Renald Showers

NAC: Daniel by Stephen Miller

Elmer Towns Collection

Basic Bible Interpretation by Roy Zuck

Continuity and Discontinuity by Charles Feinberg

Systematic Theology of Biblical Christianity by Rolland McCune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592568#Comment_592568

You could also include:
DTS Journal
D. L. Moody life works
R.A. Torrey collection
C.I Scofield collection
Charles Ryrie Collection
H.A. Ironside

Swindoll is also a Dispensationalist IIRC.

Thinking of making a reformed dispensational collection within my installation of logos.

So far I have John MacArthur.... haha

John Piper also holds to a dispensational millennium and is reformed.

[quote]He is probably the furthest away from dispensationalism, although he does agree with dispensationalism that there will be a millennium.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592583#Comment_592583

Thinking of making a reformed dispensational collection within my installation of logos.

Yep. Me too,

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592589#Comment_592589

Thinking of making a reformed dispensational collection within my installation of logos.

Yep. Me too,

Keep me posted on who you put in that collection if you don't mind.

I'm starting with a rule:
Author:(Macarthur,Piper) OR Mytag:Reformed AND Mytag:Dispensational

Which created a collection with 211 resources - mostly by piper and MacArthur - but plenty of others as well.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592659#Comment_592659

Thinking of making a reformed dispensational collection within my installation of logos.

Yep. Me too,

Keep me posted on who you put in that collection if you don't mind.

I'm starting with a rule:
Author:(Macarthur,Piper) OR Mytag:Reformed AND Mytag:Dispensational
Which created a collection with 211 resources - mostly by piper and MacArthur - but plenty of others as well.

Piper classified as dispensational? That would be news to him.

I would put in this category: John MacArthur (and others at Masters College and Seminary), Erwin Lutzer, John D. Hannah, S. Lewis Johnson, Donald Barnhouse, Daniel Wallace, and Steve Lawson. Perhaps James Boice as well.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592677#Comment_592677

Did you see the link to desiring God and the quote of the staffer that was writing about his position?

Maybe I should just leave him as escatalogicaly dispensational.

Here is the rule I used (from the denomination tags thread) to tag the dispensationalists.

Author:("Allen, Ronald B.", "Arnold, Clinton E.", "Bailey, Mark", "Barber, Cyril J.", "Barbieri, Louis A.", "Barker, Kenneth L.", "Benware, Paul N.", "Boa, Kenneth", "Bock, Darrell L.", "Campbell, Donald K", "Chafer Theological Seminary", "Chafer, Lewis Sperry", "Cone, Christopher", "Dallas Theological Seminary", "Darby, John Nelson", "Deane, Andy", "DeHaan, M. R.", "Derickson, Gary", "Dillow, Joseph", "Dyer, Charles H.", "Emmaus Bible College", "Enns, Paul P.", "Evans, Tony", "Farnell, F. David", "Farstad, Arthur", "Feinberg, Charles L.", "Feinberg, Paul", "Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G.", "Gaebelein, Arno", "Garland, Anthony C.", "Geisler, Norman L.", "Gingrich, Roy Edward", "Gromacki, Robert", "Harrison, Everett F.", "Hartman, Fred", "Hendricks, Howard G.", "Hindson, Edward", "Hitchcock, Mark", "Hodges, Zane", "Hoehner, Harold", "House, H. Wayne", "Hughes, R. Kent", "Ironside, H. A.", "Jensen, Irving", "Jeremiah, David", "Johnston, Wendell", "Karleen, Paul S.", "Keathley, Hampton", "Kelly, William", "Kreloff, Steven A.", "Kroll, Woodrow", "LaHaye, Tim", "Laney, J. Carl", "Larkin, Clarence", "Levy, David M.", "Lightner, Robert P.", "Litfin, Duane", "Lopez, René", "Lutzer, Erwin W.", "MacArthur, John F.", "Mackintosh, C. H.", "Malphurs, Aubrey", "Mayhue, Richard L.", "McGee, J. Vernon", "McKenzie, Marni Shideler", "McQuaid, Elwood", "Merrill, Eugene H.", "Mills, M. S.", "Morris, Henry M.", "Olander, David", "Ortlund, Raymond C.", "Pentecost, J. Dwight", "Pfeiffer, Charles", "Radmacher, Earl D", "Rosscup, James", "Ryrie, Charles C.", "Sailhamer, John H.", "Saucy, Robert L.", "Scofield, C. I.", "Showers, Renald E.", "Stanley, Andy", "Stanley, Charles F.", "Stedman, Ray C.", "Strauss, Richard L.", "Swindoll, Charles R.", "Talbot, Louis T.", "Taylor, Kenneth N.", "The Master's Seminary", "Thiessen, Henry Clarence", "Thomas, Robert L.", "Trahan, Kerry", "Tyndale Theological Seminary", "Unger, Merrill F.", "Varner, William", "Vine, W. E.", "Vos, Howard F.", "Wallace, Daniel B.", "Waltke, Bruce K.", "Walvoord, John F.", "Water, Mark", "Waymeyer, Matthew", "Wilkin, Robert", "Wilkinson, Bruce H.", "Willmington, Harold L.", "Wolf, Herbert", "Wuest, Kenneth S.", "Zuck, Roy B.","Ryrie,Charles")

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592677#Comment_592677

Piper classified as dispensational? That would be news to him.

I would put in this category: John MacArthur (and others at Masters College and Seminary), Erwin Lutzer, John D. Hannah, S. Lewis Johnson, Donald Barnhouse, Daniel Wallace, and Steve Lawson. Perhaps James Boice as well.

I notice Hannah, Johnson, Barnhouse, Lawson, and Boice are not listed under dispensational in the current iteration of the rule - if you have sources that show these people as dispensational the guy that manages the rules will add them to the list which benefits the whole community.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592678#Comment_592678

Did you see the link to desiring God and the quote of the staffer that was writing about his position?

Maybe I should just leave him as escatalogicaly dispensational.

I think you would be mischaracterizing him. Out of all the positions, he is the "furthest away from dispensational". Believing in a future millennial age doesn't make one dispensational, as any classic premillenialist will tell you (like Spurgeon or Ladd). If you search Google you will find Piper being attacked by classic dispensationalists for having "replacement theology" and being "supercessionist", and Piper has indicated elsewhere that he believes that Jews and Gentiles will share in the eschatological land promises. This may make him akin to a progressive dispensationlist although I've always thought of him as a non-confessional reformed baptist, however he's probably somewhere in between. He seems to not want to categorize himself because he does teach elements of covenant theology while denying other parts of it. His views tend to not match common category definitions.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592583#Comment_592583

[quote]He is probably the furthest away from dispensationalism, although he does agree with dispensationalism that there will be a millennium.

Yes, John Piper is premillennial, but premillennialism does not mean dispensational. Premillennialism was the dominant eschatology in the early church, but dispensationalism didn't come until the 19th century. That's why it says John Piper is the furthest away from dispensationalism.

Some premillennialists are very anti-dispensational, such as George Ladd. See also Craig Blomberg and Sung Wook Chung's book A Case for Historic Premillennialism: An Alternative to "Left Behind Eschatology."

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592680#Comment_592680

I notice Hannah, Johnson, Barnhouse, Lawson, and Boice are not listed under dispensational in the current iteration of the rule - if you have sources that show these people as dispensational the guy that manages the rules will add them to the list which benefits the whole community.

You could even add Skip Heitzig, Greg Laurie, and Ray Comfort to that list as well. Skip and Greg have their own sermon archives on Logos.

https://www.logos.com/product/33978/greg-laurie-sermon-archive

https://www.logos.com/product/36350/skip-heitzig-sermon-archive

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592701#Comment_592701

IF they aren't listed in my earlier post, suggest them here, with a link demonstrating that they are dispensational (a bio, curriculum vitae, a book with an obvious title, wiki page, etc).

Some of the names I recognize as being dispensational, but the person who adds them to the list wants more than just a couple guys recognizing them as such.

Author:("Allen, Ronald B.", "Arnold, Clinton E.", "Bailey, Mark", "Barber, Cyril J.", "Barbieri, Louis A.", "Barker, Kenneth L.", "Benware, Paul N.", "Boa, Kenneth", "Bock, Darrell L.", "Campbell, Donald K", "Chafer Theological Seminary", "Chafer, Lewis Sperry", "Cone, Christopher", "Dallas Theological Seminary", "Darby, John Nelson", "Deane, Andy", "DeHaan, M. R.", "Derickson, Gary", "Dillow, Joseph", "Dyer, Charles H.", "Emmaus Bible College", "Enns, Paul P.", "Evans, Tony", "Farnell, F. David", "Farstad, Arthur", "Feinberg, Charles L.", "Feinberg, Paul", "Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G.", "Gaebelein, Arno", "Garland, Anthony C.", "Geisler, Norman L.", "Gingrich, Roy Edward", "Gromacki, Robert", "Harrison, Everett F.", "Hartman, Fred", "Hendricks, Howard G.", "Hindson, Edward", "Hitchcock, Mark", "Hodges, Zane", "Hoehner, Harold", "House, H. Wayne", "Hughes, R. Kent", "Ironside, H. A.", "Jensen, Irving", "Jeremiah, David", "Johnston, Wendell", "Karleen, Paul S.", "Keathley, Hampton", "Kelly, William", "Kreloff, Steven A.", "Kroll, Woodrow", "LaHaye, Tim", "Laney, J. Carl", "Larkin, Clarence", "Levy, David M.", "Lightner, Robert P.", "Litfin, Duane", "Lopez, René", "Lutzer, Erwin W.", "MacArthur, John F.", "Mackintosh, C. H.", "Malphurs, Aubrey", "Mayhue, Richard L.", "McGee, J. Vernon", "McKenzie, Marni Shideler", "McQuaid, Elwood", "Merrill, Eugene H.", "Mills, M. S.", "Morris, Henry M.", "Olander, David", "Ortlund, Raymond C.", "Pentecost, J. Dwight", "Pfeiffer, Charles", "Radmacher, Earl D", "Rosscup, James", "Ryrie, Charles C.", "Sailhamer, John H.", "Saucy, Robert L.", "Scofield, C. I.", "Showers, Renald E.", "Stanley, Andy", "Stanley, Charles F.", "Stedman, Ray C.", "Strauss, Richard L.", "Swindoll, Charles R.", "Talbot, Louis T.", "Taylor, Kenneth N.", "The Master's Seminary", "Thiessen, Henry Clarence", "Thomas, Robert L.", "Trahan, Kerry", "Tyndale Theological Seminary", "Unger, Merrill F.", "Varner, William", "Vine, W. E.", "Vos, Howard F.", "Wallace, Daniel B.", "Waltke, Bruce K.", "Walvoord, John F.", "Water, Mark", "Waymeyer, Matthew", "Wilkin, Robert", "Wilkinson, Bruce H.", "Willmington, Harold L.", "Wolf, Herbert", "Wuest, Kenneth S.", "Zuck, Roy B.","Ryrie,Charles")

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592706#Comment_592706

Based on what Gabe Martini said, "Keep in mind, base packages are going to be more specifically defined along denominational/church/traditional lines, while bundles, add-on products, and collections will continue to be marked more specifically to 'viewpoints' (Calvinism, Arminianism, Christology, etc.)."

I'm now thinking this would be best marketed as a bundle or collection instead of a base package.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592753#Comment_592753

I'm now thinking this would be best marketed as a bundle or collection instead of a base package.

I think so.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592753#Comment_592753

Based on what Gabe Martini said, "Keep in mind, base packages are going to be more specifically defined along denominational/church/traditional lines, while bundles, add-on products, and collections will continue to be marked more specifically to 'viewpoints' (Calvinism, Arminianism, Christology, etc.)."

I'm now thinking this would be best marketed as a bundle or collection instead of a base package.

Perhaps, but I think you underestimate how much dispensationalism breaks down along denominational/church lines. Dispensationalism used to transcend denominations, and you had Anglican dispensationalists, Congregational dispensationalists, Presbyterian dispensationalists, etc., but that has changed drastically.

Dispensationalism is now practically non-existent in Presbyterian and Anglican churches. While there are a few denominations that have some dispensational and some non-dispensational (Southern Baptist, Evangelical Free), a great number of dispensational churches are organized into their own groups: Grace Brethren, Plymouth Brethren, Calvary Chapel, fundamentalist Baptist, and non-denominational Bible churches.

Jeremy

Yes I would buy it!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598279#Comment_598279

I've thought of dispensationalism as a hermeneutical filter rather than a denomination even though it is centered in particular denominations. Therefore, it seems to me to be more appropriately a bundle rather than a base package.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598321#Comment_598321

I've thought of dispensationalism as a hermeneutical filter rather than a denomination even though it is centered in particular denominations. Therefore, it seems to me to be more appropriately a bundle rather than a base package.

I agree.

Evan Boardman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/592583#Comment_592583

John Piper also holds to a dispensational millennium and is reformed.

D.A. Carson also holds to a millennium, but I wouldnt call him dispensational.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598321#Comment_598321

I've thought of dispensationalism as a hermeneutical filter rather than a denomination even though it is centered in particular denominations. Therefore, it seems to me to be more appropriately a bundle rather than a base package.

Ultimately, aren't all denominations hermeneutical filters? I would call "Reformed" a hermeneutical filter.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598321#Comment_598321

Therefore, it seems to me to be more appropriately a bundle rather than a base package.

I think the idea of having multiple base packages is that each denomination would have their own base package (Reformed, Anglicans, Lutherans, Seventh Day Adventists, and Catholics) I think part of that reasoning is that denominations are generally mutually exclusive of each other, with minor exceptions (some Anglicans are Catholic, some Baptists consider themselves Reformed, etc.)

Most dispensationalists simply don't fit into any denominational category, and certainly not the ones that have base packages already. While there is some overlap between dispensationalists and Baptists today, I think each is distinct enough in terms of history and doctrine to warrant their own base package.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598356#Comment_598356

Ultimately, aren't all denominations hermeneutical filters?

Yes, no and maybe [;)]

Many filters are not connected to even specific groups of denominations - structuralist, rhetorical, traditional senses, reader-response, feminist, text criticism .... Some denominations specifically claim a particular filter - confessional hermeneutics. Some denominations depend upon social pressure to enforce an unspoken filters Some denominations depend upon very minutely defined filters Some large denominations share filters and differ only by culture and history ...

IMHO Most filters control primarily what questions you think to ask more than the control the answers to those questions. I tend to label as "conservative" those who are uncomfortable asking the questions and "liberals" as those comfortable considering unconventional answers to the questions. I know that is not the standard definition/description of conservative vs. liberal ... its a personal rule of thumb quirk.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/598358#Comment_598358

I think that Dispensationalists should have their own base package in the same way other churches do. They constitute one of the largest groups of churches within evangelicalism today.

Think of all these major denominations, most of which are getting base packages: Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Wesleyan/Methodist, Reformed/Presbyterian, Pentecostal/charismatic, and Campbellite/Restoration movement. Where do dispensational churches fit in? None of the above.

That you can view dispensationalism as a hermeneutical filter is irrelevant. If Logos is really serious about having a base package for every type of church, they need to have a Dispensational base package.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/599048#Comment_599048

Where do the Standard base packages fit in? Are they dispensational? Not dispensational? Do they have a future, or are they destined to go dodo?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/599052#Comment_599052

Where do the Standard base packages fit in? Are they dispensational? Not dispensational? Do they have a future, or are they destined to go dodo?

The Standard base packages will be left behind.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/599048#Comment_599048

If Logos is really serious about having a base package for every type of church,

I see no reason to believe this is their intent. Rather it appears to be their intent to cover major historical branches of Christianity ... and not necessarily all of them e.g. Anabaptists, Moravian, Quaker. When I start seeing "dispensational" as a major category in denominational handbooks, lists and charts, I will change my mind. Until then, I will see it as more appropriately a bundle or library builder.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/599354#Comment_599354

If Logos is really serious about having a base package for every type of church,

I see no reason to believe this is their intent. Rather it appears to be their intent to cover major historical branches of Christianity ... and not necessarily all of them e.g. Anabaptists, Moravian, Quaker. When I start seeing "dispensational" as a major category in denominational handbooks, lists and charts, I will change my mind. Until then, I will see it as more appropriately a bundle or library builder.

The Handbook of Denominations in the United States, by Mead, Hill, and Atwood, and The Complete Guide of to Christian Denominations, by Ron Rhoads, each have a major category called "Fundamentalist and Bible Churches," which, I'm sure you know, are comprised of all those independent dispensational churches.

If you're not okay with a Dispensational Base Package, would you be okay with having a Base Package with the name "Fundamentalist and Bible Churches" that have plenty of dispensational resources?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/599411#Comment_599411

would you be okay with having a Base Package with the name "Fundamentalist and Bible Churches" that have plenty of dispensational resources?

Yes, because that is a name that is compatible with the other package titles. I didn't make the jump from Fundamentalist to dispensational