Rapture Fever

by Gary North by Gary North

12.07.2013 Views

The Strange Disappearance of Dtipensational Institutions 201 repeated. Debt is the lure. Debt is the killer. “I have faith that God will bless this ministry later if I make a leap of faith now - with other people’s money.” Jerry Falwell is a decent man. He just forgot the rule: “Owe no man any thing but to love one another” (Remans 13:8a). He was under grace, not biblical law, he thought. Scofield stties again! In 1982, I wrote an essay, “The Intellectual Schizophrenia of the New Christian Right.” It was published in Christianity and Civilization. There I predicted the break-up of the New Christian Right. I argued that its politically activist stance could not be defended by its dispensational theology. One by one, the leaders of that short-lived phenomenon have faded away. Those few who remain rarely talk about eschatology. (In Beverly LaHaye’s case, her husband talks about it; she doesn’t. Not with 400,000 on her activist mailing list!) Conclusion I will say it again: Di@ensationalism is dying. The leaders who write the paperback prophecy books won’t admit it, but it’s true. One by one, institutions that long maintained the old position have revised, restructured, and retreated from the intellectual battlefield. This doesn’t prove that theonomy is winning. It means that our most consistently antinomian, anti-victory, anti-activism opponents are retiring, in every sense. Sensational paperback books plus a Canadian tabloid newspaper filled with prophecies that never come true cannot preserve the old theology. Hype is not a substitute for scholarship. It is just a matter of time. We have plenty of it. Dispensationalism doesn’t. As those old travelogues used to end: “And so it’s time to say, ‘Sayonara, Scofield!’ “

CONCLUSION . . . ye are dull of hearing. For when for the time ~e ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For evay one that useth milk is unskilful in. the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil (Heb. 5:11-14). It is my contention that Christians today are in the same spiritual condition as the readers of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the author’s day. They have become theological milk-drinkers who are content with the ABC’s of faith. They are unskilled in the word of righteousness. They are out of shape judicially. There is a reason for this. They hate three-quarters of the Bible: the law and the prophets. Hating God’s law with all their heart, they also hate the thought of victory, which has been promised by God to those cultures that obey God’s revealed law (Deut. 28:1-14). Hating victory in history, they necessarily have come to regard themselves as principled losers in history. “Who is on the Lord’s Side?” So asks a popular Protestant evangelical hymn. The correct answer, as far as modern evangelicalism teaches in public, is this: htitotical losers. For over two centuries, Protestant evangelical have seen themselves as members of a culturally impotent Church and a religiously neutral civil order. They have had far greater faith in the civil order -

The Strange Disappearance of Dtipensational Institutions 201<br />

repeated. Debt is the lure. Debt is the killer. “I have faith that<br />

God will bless this ministry later if I make a leap of faith now -<br />

with other people’s money.”<br />

Jerry Falwell is a decent man. He just forgot the rule: “Owe<br />

no man any thing but to love one another” (Remans 13:8a). He<br />

was under grace, not biblical law, he thought. Scofield stties<br />

again!<br />

In 1982, I wrote an essay, “The Intellectual Schizophrenia of<br />

the New Christian Right.” It was published in Christianity and<br />

Civilization. There I predicted the break-up of the New Christian<br />

Right. I argued that its politically activist stance could not<br />

be defended by its dispensational theology. One by one, the<br />

leaders of that short-lived phenomenon have faded away. Those<br />

few who remain rarely talk about eschatology. (In Beverly<br />

LaHaye’s case, her husband talks about it; she doesn’t. Not with<br />

400,000 on her activist mailing list!)<br />

Conclusion<br />

I will say it again: Di@ensationalism is dying. The leaders who<br />

write the paperback prophecy books won’t admit it, but it’s<br />

true. One by one, institutions that long maintained the old<br />

position have revised, restructured, and retreated from the<br />

intellectual battlefield.<br />

This doesn’t prove that theonomy is winning. It means that<br />

our most consistently antinomian, anti-victory, anti-activism<br />

opponents are retiring, in every sense. Sensational paperback<br />

books plus a Canadian tabloid newspaper filled with prophecies<br />

that never come true cannot preserve the old theology. Hype is<br />

not a substitute for scholarship.<br />

It is just a matter of time. We have plenty of it. Dispensationalism<br />

doesn’t. As those old travelogues used to end: “And so it’s<br />

time to say, ‘Sayonara, Scofield!’ “

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!