REGULAR BAPTIST PRESS
3715 N. Ventura Drive
Arlington Heights, IL 60004-7678
- What is dispensationalism?
- How is it different than covenant theology?
- Do the differences really matter if we all make it to Heaven in the end?
Those questions are important. And dispensationalism does matter because it is more than just a list of doctrines or a way to organize history.
Dispensationalism comes from a careful, literal interpretation of Scripture. In fact,
it is defined as much by its literal approach to Scripture as it is by its doctrine.
This course employs that consistently literal interpretation of Scripture to help
your learners understand Israel, the church, Christ’s present ministry, the
Rapture, Tribulation, Second Coming, and the events leading up to the millennial Kingdom.
What Is Dispensationalism?
There is a lot of confusion over what dispensationalism is. This lesson will help
to clarify the topic by presenting what dispensationalism is not before looking
at the three essential elements of dispensationalism.
I. What Dispensationalism Is Not
A. A view of Bible prophecy
B. Christian escapism
C. Dividing time into dispensations
II. What Dispensationalism Is
A. Distinction between Israel and the church
1. The Bible teaches distinctions2. God made promises to distinct groups3. Failure to make distinction leads to anti-Semitism
B. Consistently literal interpretation of the BibleC. Recognition of God’s glory as His unifying purpose
III. What the Dispensations Are
The seven dispensations
Search the Internet for the term dispensationalism and you will find such
hatred and vitriol expressed that you will wonder whether dispensationalism
didn’t ascend out of the very pit of Hell! What has caused such a strong reaction? Is dispensationalism a heresy? Or is it solidly grounded in the teachings
of the Bible?
Dispensationalism is based in the Bible
and is the product of a careful interpretation of Scripture. You will learn that the
dispensational approach to Scripture helps us understand God’s working in such
realms as the church, Israel, the ministry of Christ, and future events.
I. What Dispensationalism Is Not
A. A view of Bible prophecy
Much of the opposition to dispensationalism comes from a misunderstanding
about what it really is. Probably the most common misconception is that dispensationalism is a certain way of thinking about prophecy. Books like Hal Lindsey’s
The Late Great Planet Earth (1970) and Tim LaHaye’s Left Behind (1995) did much
to popularize a dispensational view of prophecy, but they also left many people
with the impression that dispensationalism was merely a prophetic scheme of end
time events. There is a prophetic system that results from dispensationalism, but it
is not essentially a prophetic system.
B. Christian escapism
Another misconception about dispensationalism is that it is Christian escapism. This misunderstanding is based on the dispensational view of the Rapture.
Dispensationalists believe the church will be raptured before the Tribulation commences. Opponents of dispensationalism think that this is simply wishful thinking, pie in the sky, escapist nonsense. Dispensationalists are accused of devising a
system in which God removes believers from the terrible events of the Tribulation.
READ: Revelation 6:3–8.
Which of the occurrences in this snapshot of
the Tribulation would you want to escape?
Wanting to escape the horrible circumstances of the Tribulation does not
mean dispensationalism was developed as a means to do so. It is true that if one
views the Bible from a dispensational perspective, he cannot fail to come to the
conclusion that the Rapture will occur before the tribulation period begins. But
as with the first misconception, dispensationalism is essentially something other
than a prophetic scheme of the end times.
C. Dividing time into dispensations
The third misconception about dispensationalism is that it is a system of
dividing up time according to time periods known as dispensations. Dispensationalists do often make charts to show the divisions of time, but the charts showing
the division of time are a byproduct of a careful study of the Bible. The chart is not
what defines dispensationalism.
Question: What must be true of dispensational charts in order for them to be
useful?
Answer: They must be based on a sound interpretation of Scripture.
Non-dispensationalists, such as those who hold to covenant theology, also
believe that the Bible presents a sequence of varying dispensations throughout
time. So, while the existence of varying dispensations is important to dispensationalism, it is not unique to it.
II. What Dispensationalism Is
In determining what dispensationalism is, we should consider the sine qua non of dispensationalism.
The phrase sine qua non (pronounced, seen´-aye kwa
known) is Latin and means that without which not. It is a phrase used to describe
the absolutely essential components of a system.
Dr. Charles Ryrie, who was dean of doctoral studies and professor of theology
at Dallas Theological Seminary, identified three essentials, or the sine qua non,
of dispensationalism. The essentials are (1) the distinction between Israel and the church, (2) literal interpretation of the Bible, and (3) an identification of the glory
of God as the underlying purpose of God in the world.
Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism, Revised and Expanded,
(Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2007), 46–48
A. Distinction between Israel and the church
READ: 1 Corinthians 10:32
Q; What distinct groups are mentioned by the
apostle Paul?
A; Jews, Gentiles, and the church of God.
If we hold consistently to a literal interpretation of the Bible, we find that Israel and the church form two distinct and separate entities. The term Israel occurs
over 2,500 times in the Old Testament and never refers to the church. The term
church occurs 110 times in the New Testament and never refers to Israel. However,
non-dispensationalists tend to merge these two into one group of the elect people of God. Many non-dispensationalists believe that Israel in the Old Testament
was really part of the church, and the church in the New Testament is what they
describe as the true Israel.
ASK: Have you thought about the implications of confusing Israel and the
church? What concerns, if any, come to your mind? (Q6)
1. The Bible teaches distinctions
At this point, you might wonder if it really matters whether someone distinguishes between Israel and the Church or not. It does matter. First of all, it’s important because the Bible teaches such a distinction, and it’s not up to us to judge
what is important in the Bible and what isn’t important.
READ: 2 Timothy 3:16, 17
Question: Why is interpreting the Bible literally absolutely necessary? (Q7)
Answer: Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable to make us
mature and ready for service.
The key word in 2 Timothy 3:16 is all. No one has the right to relegate any part
of the Bible as unimportant.
2. God made promises to distinct groups
A second reason that maintaining a distinction between Israel and the church
is important is that God made promises to Israel that do not belong to the church,
and He made promises to the church that do not belong to Israel. If we fail to make
the proper distinction between these two groups, we may be expecting God to do
something for us that He never promised. Belief that the promises made to Israel
in the Old Testament have been transferred to the church in the New Testament is
known as supersessionism or replacement theology. Most non-dispensationalists
are supersessionists to a certain extent.
The biggest problem with supersessionism is that in order to make it work,
many of the promises made to Israel need to be interpreted in a non-literal fashion, so that the land of Canaan becomes Heaven, the Jordan River becomes death,
bountiful crops become spiritual blessings, and so forth. This introduces confusion into the way we understand the Bible. If it can’t be understood literally, then
its interpretation is subject to the whim and fancy of each individual interpreter.
Another problem with supersessionism is that it portrays God as being unfaithful. If God made promises to Israel, but then decided to fulfill those promises
with someone else, then it implies that God deceived Israel in the Old Testament.
3. Failure to make distinction leads to anti-Semitism
A third reason for maintaining a distinction between Israel and the Church is
that failure to do so has historically led to racial discrimination against the Jews,
called anti-Semitism. This anti-Semitism is related to the problem of supersessionism as described above. When the apostle Paul encountered anti-Semitic attitudes
among the Gentile Christians in Rome, he wrote to address it (Rom. 11:19, 20).
Those whom he called broken off were the Jews. The Roman Christians believed
they had been grafted in as a permanent replacement for the Jews.
READ: Romans 11:19, 20
Question: What did Paul tell the Christians regarding
their attitude toward the Jews? (Q12)
Answer: That they should fear God instead of being
highminded, or haughty.
A haughty attitude among professing Christians historically has led them to
label the Jews as Christ killers. Professing Christians used that label as justification
for crusades in which they mercilessly slaughtered thousands of Jews.
Finally, recognizing a proper Biblical distinction between Israel and the
Church explains the prophecies of Christ’s future Kingdom on the earth. The Bible
is clear that Christ is returning to rule on earth for a thousand years in a Kingdom
of righteousness, peace, and prosperity (Rev. 20:1–6). This literal view of the kingdom is found not only in Revelation 20, but also in a multitude of Old Testament
prophecies about the kingdom of the Messiah. Failure to recognize a distinction
between Israel and the Church usually leads to a denial of the reality of a future,
literal Kingdom of Messiah on the earth—a position known as amillennialism.
B. Consistently literal interpretation of the Bible
This section will help us understand why some Christians might opt for a
non-literal interpretation for some Scriptures. The answer comes from a review of
key points in history.
Historically Jesus and the apostles held to a literal interpretation of the Old Testament. For instance, Jesus understood the Biblical account of Jonah being swallowed by a great fish as being literally true (Matt. 12:40); He also believed that Adam and Eve were historical people who actually lived in the Garden of Eden and were the first human beings created directly by God (19:4, 5); and the author of Hebrews assumed the literal truth of the account of Abraham offering his son Isaac on Mount Moriah (Heb. 11:17–19). Other examples could be multiplied many times over, but suffice it to say here that the normally accepted method of interpreting the Bible by the Jews of the first century AD was the literal method of interpretation. This resulted in the early church of the first two centuries being almost exclusively premillennial.
One notable exception to this normal practice was a scholarly Jew named
Philo who lived in Alexandria, Egypt (25 BC–AD 50). Philo felt that some of the Old
Testament stories were embarrassing and didn’t adequately honor God, so he borrowed a novel idea from the Greeks. The Greeks had a similar problem with their
religious writings. The Greek gods were capricious, vacillating, lustful, power hungry, and immoral. So the Greek philosophers devised a method of non-literal interpretation whereby they could find hidden behind the literal meaning of the text, a
deeper, spiritual meaning that was more honorable to their national religion. This
method of interpretation is known either as allegorical interpretation or spiritual
interpretation. Philo felt that he could adapt this same method of interpretation to
the text of the Old Testament, and he became quite a popular Bible teacher among
the Jews of Alexandria.
The fact that Paul wrote to Timothy about preaching the Word in light of coming end time events is telling. When the Gentile pastors lost sight of preaching the
Word, they also lost sight of the reasons to do so.
Reformers such as Wycliffe, Luther, and Calvin were of the conviction that the
only acceptable way to understand the Bible was to take it literally. They all rejected the allegorical method that had become the norm through the middle ages. In
the sixteenth century, this led the reformers to rediscover the doctrine of justification by faith. In the nineteenth century, the same devotion to a literal interpretation led John Nelson Darby to begin systematizing dispensationalism. Employing
a literal interpretation of the Bible, Darby noticed both a distinction between
Israel and the Church and a distinction between the Rapture and the Second Coming. These observations led to further conclusions that eventually resulted in what
we now know today as dispensationalism. But many in the Reformed tradition,
despite their honoring of literal interpretation, continued to hold on to the supersessionists and amillennial ideas of the original reformers, and this resulted in
an inconsistent application of literal interpretation. These reformed theologians
were literal in their interpretation of most of the Bible, but when it came to matters
of the second coming of Christ and the Kingdom they continued to practice an
allegorical method of interpretation. Again, 2 Timothy 4:1 and 2 is clear that such a
practice is to violate the command to preach the Word.
C. Recognition of God’s glory as His underlying purpose
The final distinguishing characteristic of dispensationalism is that it views
the glory of God as being the basic underlying purpose of God in all that He does.
This may seem like an obvious point. And it is a point that non-dispensationalists
generally give assent to, at least in word. For example, the major non-dispensationalist catechism, the Westminster Catechism, states that the chief end of man
is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. So you might wonder why this considered
a characteristic of dispensationalism. It is important here to differentiate between
what the Christian’s primary calling is and what God’s primary purpose in working in the world is. To be sure, there is nothing more precious and important to a
sinner saved by grace than the Gospel! When viewed from the perspective of man,
salvation is the most important theme there could possibly be. But things may
look a little different from God’s perspective. There can be no doubt that the work
of redemption is a main focal point of God in the way He relates to His creation.
But salvation is not the only purpose that God has in the world. There are other
purposes of God that really do not pertain to His work of redeeming the lost. For
example, God has a purpose for the family, a purpose for human government,
a purpose for the physical creation, and a purpose for the angels. None of these
really has anything to do directly with the work of redemption. And here is where
dispensationalism has a more comprehensive view of God’s purposes in the world
than non-dispensational systems
Virtually all non-dispensational approaches make salvation the focal point of
their theological systems. In Protestantism, the primary alternative viewpoint to
dispensationalism is covenant theology, also known as Reformed theology. Covenant theology is controlled primarily by what they refer to as the Covenant of Grace.
There are dispensations in covenant theology, but the dispensations are viewed as
various ways of administering the Covenant of Grace. Basically, all of God’s dealings
with His creation is summed up in terms of what God is doing to bring about the
salvation of the elect. Reformed Theology is seeing resurgence in popularity among
many Christians today, and this is reflected, among other things, in the preponderance of Gospel-Centered themes. A recent search of popular Christian books revealed
the following titles: The Gospel-Centered Life, Gospel-Centered Discipleship, Gospel
Centered Leadership, The Gospel-Centered Woman, The Gospel-Centered Community
Participant’s Guide, and Gospel-Centered Family.
This is not to say that there’s anything wrong about our being focused on the
gospel as Christians, but it does reflect the salvation-centered focus of Reformed theology and its influence on today’s Christian world. Dispensationalism does not deny
the importance of the Gospel. If anything, dispensationalists have generally been
known for being very evangelistic. But in dispensationalism, the work of redemption
is understood as being part of a broader theme of glorifying God (1 Cor. 10:31–33).
READ: Ephesians 1:3–14. ASK:
Question: What is the ultimate reason for salvation?
(See verses 6, 12, and 14.)
Answer: To the praise of the glory of God’s grace
Answer: To the praise of the glory of God’s grace
Dispensationalism provides a proper Biblical foundation for understanding
not only God’s purposes in salvation, but also for other means of bringing Him
glory, such as His purposes for the family, human government, the physical creation, and angels.
III. What the Dispensations Are
Before moving past this first lesson, it would be good to survey the seven
dispensations to provide a context for future lessons. When used in a theological
sense, the word dispensation refers to an administration of God, or the way in
which God administers His affairs in the world. Consistently literal interpretation
of the Bible yields seven dispensations.
Innocence. Before the Fall, while Adam and Eve were still in their state of
innocence in the Garden of Eden, God administered his program through the leadership of Adam.
Jerry: Better term is Upright....God made man upright, Eccesiastes 7:29
יָשָׁ֑ר (yā·šār)
Adjective - masculine singular
Strong's 3477: Straight, right
Jerry: Better term is Upright....God made man upright, Eccesiastes 7:29
יָשָׁ֑ר (yā·šār)
Adjective - masculine singular
Strong's 3477: Straight, right
Conscience. After the Fall the administration changed. Worship included
sacrifice. And we can presume that man responded to God based on the dictates of
his conscience since there is no record of an oral or written revelation to man.
Human Government. After the Flood, God gave to human government the responsibility of capital punishment, He gave man the right to eat meat for the first
time, and He promised never to wipe out all living creatures by a flood again.
Promise. God made a promise to Abraham and began to work in the world
specifically through the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Law. Still working through descendants of Abraham, which became known as Israel, God gave specific, detailed laws in the Mosaic Covenant. The laws were to mark Israel out as distinct and separate from other nations so they might be a light to those nations.
Grace/Church. The Mosaic Covenant came to an end at the cross and God began administering His affairs through a new group called the church, or the Body
of Christ. The church consists of individuals redeemed by faith in Christ regardless
of their nationality. This is the present dispensation.
Kingdom. The final dispensation is the future Kingdom of the Messiah, a
1,000-year period of time under the direct rule of Jesus Christ. He will administer a
perfect Kingdom of peace and righteousness. At the end of His Kingdom, the Son
will hand over rule to the Father as all creation enters the eternal state.
BEING A DISPENSATIONALIST
There is much confusion about dispensationalism. In essence it is a consistently literal understanding of the Bible that acknowledges a distinction between
Israel and the Church and views the glory of God as a central, underlying theme.
A True Dispensationalist
Being accurate in interpreting the Bible is not the goal of dispensationalism.
To be a true dispensationalist, correct interpretation must be followed by diligent
application.
Encourage your learners to see this course as an opportunity to become better
equipped to apply God’s Word.
No comments:
Post a Comment