Dallas Theological Seminary
Download these notes here: https://humble-sidecar-837.notion.site/Dallas-Theological-Seminary-273b35a87d6380218866e1bace759e3a?source=copy_link
DTS and the Bible Church Movement
Series goal: evaluate formal theological positions of influential movements/institutions, not question salvation or sincerity.
DTS background
Founded 1924, flagship seminary for dispensational theology.
Trained thousands of pastors, missionaries, teachers.
Most visible influence: network of “Bible churches.”
Bible churches
Not a denomination.
Disproportionately led by DTS graduates.
Strongly shaped by DTS theology.
Importance
DTS doctrinal positions affect countless congregations.
DTS theology often forms foundation of Bible church teaching/outlook.
Disclaimers
DTS does not ordain or oversee alumni churches.
Bible churches
are independent and autonomous.Evaluation is of DTS doctrinal positions, not all graduates/churches.
Purpose: by understanding DTS theology → gain insight into broad swath of evangelicalism; measure convictions against Scripture.
A Word About Doctrinal Statements
Nature of doctrinal statements
Human summaries, not inspired text.
Limited; cannot capture full biblical revelation.
At best: boundaries for fellowship, clarity of convictions.
At worst: calcify into creeds, overshadow Scripture.
Seminary context: a “necessary evil” for institutional framework.
DTS practice: annual faculty/board affirmation.
Healthy: allows yearly agreement without lifelong binding.
Recognizes possibility of growth in biblical understanding.
Balances clarity with freedom of conscience.
Analyzing The DTS Statement of Faith
Statement is extensive: 21 articles.
Covered in booklet: Articles I, IV, V, XIII, XIV, XVII, XVIII, XXI.
Focus on practical issues shaping local churches.
Article I — The Scriptures
Affirmations
All Scripture inspired; holy men “moved by the Spirit.”
Inspiration extends to every part.
Whole Bible in originals without error.
All Scripture centers on Christ.
Designed for practical instruction.
Critiques
2. Christ-centered hermeneutic overreach → forces allegory/spiritualization.
3. Purpose of Scripture mis-stated → reduced to “practical instruction.”
4. Canon undefined → “whole Bible” ambiguous.
Summary: strong verbal inspiration, but weaknesses: lost originals, Christ forced into all texts, sufficiency downplayed, canon vague.
Article IV — Humanity, Created and Fallen
Affirmations
Humanity created in God’s image, male and female, equal dignity.
Marriage = one man/one woman until death.
Sexual acts outside marriage prohibited.
Critiques
Suggests humanity lost God’s image entirely at fall → contradicted by Gen 9:6, James 3:9.
Marriage/singleness treated as divine “callings” → Scripture presents as choices.
Spiritual death overstated → OT saints still interacted with God.
“Subject to power of devil” careless—Satan deceived before fall.
Calvinistic “total depravity” language problematic:
“No spark of divine life” foreign to Scripture.
“Essentially and unchangeably bad” creates Christological problem.
Summary: begins well, but slips into Reformed categories that don’t match biblical detail.
Article V — The Dispensations
Affirmations
Dispensations = stewardships of God’s purpose.
Observed in biblical record.
Law (past), Grace (present), Kingdom (future) distinct/successive.
Critiques
Inconsistency: dispensations said not to be mixed, but salvation language blurs them.
No boundary markers given (when Law began? when Grace began?).
Defined as human failures/tests rather than God’s administrations.
Salvation “always by grace through faith…shed blood of Christ” → undermines meaning of dispensations.
Old Testament faith content inconsistent:
Saints couldn’t consciously trust in crucified Christ.
DTS admits difference but insists on sameness → muddled soteriology.
Internal contradiction: all Scripture “center on Christ” vs. OT saints couldn’t see Him.
Summary: doctrinal verbiage repeated; fails to explain why dispensations matter.
Article XIII — The Church, A Unity of Believers
Affirmations
All believers united to Christ = church.
Began at Pentecost.
Distinct from Israel.
Spirit-baptized into one body.
Duty: keep unity, rise above sectarian differences.
Critiques
Emphasis on invisible “universal” church; local church minimized.
Ekklesia = assembly, not invisible organism.
“Rise above sectarian differences” = ecumenical mush, dismisses doctrine.
Summary: Romanticized invisible church undermines biblical ecclesiology and purpose of doctrinal clarity.
Article XIV — The Sacraments or Ordinances
Affirmations
Baptism and Lord’s Supper = ordinances/sacraments, scriptural testimonies.
Critiques
“Sacrament/ordinance” conflated → confuses categories (grace vs testimony).
If church = invisible, ordinances detached from local context.
Leads to free-floating, individualistic practice.
Contradicts biblical pattern (1 Cor 11, baptism in assembly).
Summary: careless terminology and universal-church view render ordinances rootless.
Article XVII — The Great Commission
Affirmations
Believers sent into the world.
Christians = strangers, pilgrims, ambassadors, witnesses.
Critiques
Inconsistency: Commission given pre-Pentecost, yet church “began at Pentecost.”
Content ignored: commands included miraculous signs.
Evangelism/testimony sufficient without importing Great Commission.
Summary: inconsistent dispensationalism, blurring dispensations to fit evangelical clichés.
Article XVIII — The Blessed Hope
Affirmations
Next great prophetic event = Christ’s coming in air (rapture).
Encourages looking to rapture, not headline-hunting.
Critiques
Wording “next great event” leaves wiggle room.
Proof texts problematic:
John 14:1–3: Jewish context, pre-mystery.
1 Cor 15: resurrection focus, not rapture.
Best foundation: 1 Thess 4:13–18.
Summary: commendable direction, but proof-texting weakens clarity.
Article XXI — The Eternal State
Affirmations
Believers: conscious bliss with Christ until resurrection.
Unbelievers: conscious condemnation, await judgment.
Eternal punishment in lake of fire.
Critiques
Narrow scope: only believers in present dispensation addressed; OT saints omitted.
Israel absent again: resurrection of Israel ignored.
Confusion of intermediate vs eternal state.
Summary: orthodox in basics, but dispensational distinctions blurred, eternal state reduced to afterthought.
Conclusion
Doctrinal statements inherently flawed: brevity forces generalizations, omissions, contradictions.
DTS statement illustrates this—confusion, careless language, swallowed distinctions.
Not unique to DTS; applies to all doctrinal summaries.
Believers should not look to doctrinal statements as “savior of orthodoxy.”
Only Scripture—faithfully translated, rightly divided, literally interpreted—provides the sure, precise, and sufficient foundation.
