Defining dispensationalism

[Iosias]

What is dispensationalism?
It is a system of theology that recognizes different stewardships of man under God. According to Charles Ryrie “dispensationalism views the world as a household run by God. In His household-world, God is dispensing or administering its affairs according to His own will and in various stages of revelation in the passage of time. These various stages mark off the distinguishably different economies in the outworking of His total purpose, and these different economies constitute the dispensations.”

What is a dispensation?
A dispensation is a distinguishable economy in the outworking of the purpose of God. They are, according to P. Nevin, “God’s distinctive method of governing mankind or a group of men during a period of human history, marked by a test, failure and judgement.”

What are the features of a specific dispensation?

• There are two parties: the one whose authority it is to delegate duties (God), and the one whose responsibility it is to carry out these charges.
• There are specific responsibilities.
• There is accountability: a steward may be called into account for the discharge of his stewardship.
• The stewardship can be removed: a change may be made at anytime unfaithfulness is found in the existing administration.

How do we know that one dispensation has been replaced by another?
There will be (1) a change in God’s administrative relationship with man; (2) a resultant change in man’s responsibility, and; (3) a corresponding revelation necessary to effect the change.


What is the dispensational scheme?
The following is the popular scheme of C. I. Scofield:

Name: Innocency
Scripture: Genesis 1:3 – 3:6
Responsibilities: Keep garden, do not eat one fruit, fill and subdue the earth, fellowship with God
Judgements: Curses, and physical and spiritual death.

Name: Conscience
Scripture: Genesis 3:7 – 8:14
Responsibilities: Do good
Judgements: Flood

Name: Civil government
Scripture: Genesis 8:15 – 11:9
Responsibilities: Fill the earth, capital punishment
Judgements: Forced scattering by the confusion of languages

Name: Patriarchial rule
Scripture: Genesis 11:10 – Exodus 18:27
Responsibilities: Stay in the promised land, believe and obey God
Judgements: Egyptian bondage and wilderness wanderings

Name: Mosaic law
Scripture: Exodus 19:1 – John 14:30
Responsibilities: Keep the law, walk with God
Judgements: Captivities


Name: Grace
Scripture: Acts 2:1 (?) – Revelation 19:21
Responsibilities: Believe in Christ, walk with Christ
Judgements: Death, loss of rewards

Name: Millenium
Scripture: Revelation 20:1-15
Responsibilities: Believe and obey Christ and His government
Judgements: Death, Great White Throne Judgement

How does the dispensationalist read the Bible?
The dispensationalist has a consistently literal method of Biblical interpretation. They give to every word the same meaning it would have in normal usage. Sometimes called the grammatical-historical interpretation since the meaning of each word is determined by grammatical and historical considerations. Symbols and figurative language are interpreted plainly and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. After all, the very existence of any meaning for a figure of speech depends on the reality of the literal meaning of the terms involved. Figures often make the meaning plainer, but it is the literal, normal or plain meaning that they convey to the reader.

What are the key features of dispensationalist eschatology?
A. The Covenants
1. Abrahamic Covenant: This promised Israel a land (further developed in the Palestinian Covenant), a posterity (further developed in the Davidic Covenant) and blessing/redemption (further developed in the New Covenant). The Abrahamic Covenant is found: Genesis 12:1-3; 13:14-17; 15; 15; 22:15-18; 26:3-5, 24; 28:13-15; 35:9-12 and 2 Kings 13:23.

2. Palestinian Covenant: Guarantuees Israel’s permanent right to the land and promises their return to it. Found in Deuteronomy 30:1-10.

3. Davidic Covenant: Promised David an eternal house, an eternal throne, an eternal kingdom, and an eternal descent. It promised Israel that the messiah would come from Judah and have a throne and a kingdom, ruling over Israel. It is found in 2 Samuel 7:11-17 and 1 Chronicles 17:10-15

4. New Covenant: This promised Israel the spiritual means whereby the nation would enter into blessing and receive forgiveness. It is found in Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36. Note that the Church has no relationship (directly) to the New Covenant. R. Decker states that the New Covenant “is made strictly with Israel and will be fulfilled by Israel in the future millennial kingdom. Because of Israel’s unbelief, the covenant is not now in effect with that nation. Instead, the church participates in the New Covenant, not as a legal party to the covenant, but as recipients of the blessings of the covenant which come about by virtue of a union with Christ, the mediator of the covenant, and are placed into effect at the time of his death.”




B. The Rapture
This is found in scripture in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 and it is when Christ returns to the earth prior to His second coming to take away the Church from the earth to return after the tribulation. The rapture must be pre-tribulational because the tribulation is a period of seven years wherein God pours out his wrath on an unrepentant world and we know that God will spare the Church from His wrath (1 Thessalonians 5:9) and therefore we shall not be upon the earth during the tribulation. (See also Revelation 3:10)

C. The great tribulation
This is the seventieth week of Daniel (Daniel 9:20-27) and its major purpose is to reconcile Israel to God (Deuteronomy 4:27-31; Ezekiel 20:37). Another of its functions is to judge unbelieving gentiles. The tribulation begins with the beast and Israel signing a covenant. This beast is likely to be from the European Union.

D. The millennial kingdom
When Christ returns to earth He will establish Himself as King in Jerusalem sitting upon the throne of David (Luke 1:32-33). Only believers will enter the millennium. This kingdom will last 1000 years. All the covenants will have been fulfilled as Israel is regathered, converted and restored.

E. The eternal state
Following the millennium, the eternal state will be ushered in. Here we have the new heaven populated by the ‘resurrected’ church and Old Testament saints, and a new earth populated by Israel and believing gentiles due to the central dualism. I hold the following view: Jesus is the seed of Abraham. He is the spiritual seed resulting in the church that populates the new heaven. He is also the earthly seed pertaining to Israel that populates the new earth.

 

[BT]

Awesome definition AV. I would only add in the schemes that between Responsibilities and Judgements there are "Man's Failure" which are also seen in each dispensation and naturally result in Judgement. Great definition!

 

[msortwell]

AV1611 provided the following descriptions of some dispensations . . .
Name: Mosaic law
Scripture: Exodus 19:1 – John 14:30
Responsibilities: Keep the law, walk with God
Judgements: Captivities


Name: Grace
Scripture: Acts 2:1 (?) – Revelation 19:21
Responsibilities: Believe in Christ, walk with Christ
Judgements: Death, loss of rewards

Name: Millenium
Scripture: Revelation 20:1-15
Responsibilities: Believe and obey Christ and His government
Judgements: Death, Great White Throne Judgement

Based upon your understanding of dispensational theology . . . what makes a man right before God within each of the listed dispensations (Mosaic, Grace, the Millenium)? Or otherwise stated, what is necessary within each dispensation to be justified / declared righteous before God?

By His Grace,

msortwell

 

[Iosias]

What is necessary within each dispensation to be justified / declared righteous before God?

By His Grace,

msortwell

Faith alone

 

[msortwell]

Faith alone

AV1611,

Your answer ("Faith Alone") was a bit more brief than I was hoping for. What is the object of "saving faith" in each of the dispensations that I identified?

Mike

 

[dmiller]

AV1611,

Your answer ("Faith Alone") was a bit more brief than I was hoping for. What is the object of "saving faith" in each of the dispensations that I identified?

msortwell -- actually, that is quite a complete answer, realizing that "different degrees" of faith were required in each of the dispensations mentioned.

example -- The "saving faith" that Adam and Eve needed was simple --"Don't eat of the tree in the midst of the garden". When Moses brought down the 10 commandments, saving faith was believing, and following them. Now that we are in the grace dispensation, the saving faith is in Jesus Christ.

So -- "Faith Alone", is actually an excellent answer, as well as all inclusive, since the "faith required" differed as time progressed, and situations changed on the face of earth -- moving in a steady progression towards the ultimate goal God has in mind for this (and us) His creation.

 

[msortwell]

msortwell -- actually, that is quite a complete answer, realizing that "different degrees" of faith were required in each of the dispensations mentioned.

example -- The "saving faith" that Adam and Eve needed was simple --"Don't eat of the tree in the midst of the garden". When Moses brought down the 10 commandments, saving faith was believing, and following them. Now that we are in the grace dispensation, the saving faith is in Jesus Christ.

So -- "Faith Alone", is actually an excellent answer, as well as all inclusive, since the "faith required" differed as time progressed, and situations changed on the face of earth -- moving in a steady progression towards the ultimate goal God has in mind for this (and us) His creation.

dmiller,

You explained to me what you understand regarding the "faith" that was required of Adam. I am a little confused for a couple of reasons. First, you paraphrased the command given to Adam as an expression of the "saving faith" that he needed. I'm going to need some elaboration on the relationship between the command and the faith required of him.

Second, my original question involved the object of "saving faith" under the dispensations of the Mosiac Law, Grace, and the Millenium. That is, in each dispensation, in what/who must one have faith to be right before God within that dispensation? For example, in the present dispensation we must have faith that Jesus Christ died for our sins, was burried, and rose again. How does that compare to the faith required within the other two dispensations listed?

By Grace,

msortwell

 

[Iosias]

For example, in the present dispensation we must have faith that Jesus Christ died for our sins, was burried, and rose again. How does that compare to the faith required within the other two dispensations listed?

By Grace,

msortwell

Romans 4:3 "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."

 

[Iosias]

I include here Darby on Romans 4:
Rom 4:1-25 - In dealing with the Jew, and even in dealing with the question of righteousness, there was, besides the law, another consideration of great weight both with the Jews themselves and in the dealings of God. What of Abraham, called of God to be the parent — stock, the father of the faithful? The apostle, therefore, after having set forth the relation in which faith stood towards the law by the introduction of the righteousness of God, takes up the question of the ground on which Abraham was placed as well-pleasing to God in righteousness. For the Jew might have admitted his personal failure under the law, and pleaded the enjoyment of privilege under Abraham. If we consider him then thus according to the flesh (that is, in connection with the privileges that descended from him as inheritance for his children) and take our place under him in the line of succession to enjoy those privileges, on what principle does this set us? On the same principle of faith. He would have had something to boast of if he was justified by works; but before God it was not so. For the scriptures say, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not counted of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." For thereby, in fact, he glorifies God in the way that God desires to be glorified, and according to the revelation He has made of Himself in Christ.

Thus the testimony borne by Abraham's case is to justification by faith. David also supports this testimony and speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom righteousness is imputed without works. He whose iniquities are pardoned, whose sins are covered, to whom the Lord does not impute sin — he is the man whom David calls blessed. But this supposed man to be a sinner and not righteous in himself. It was a question of what God was in grace to such a one, and not of what he was to God, or rather when he was a sinner. His blessedness was that God did not impute to him the sins he had committed, not that he was righteous in himself before God. Righteousness for man was found in the grace of God. Here it is identified with non-imputation of sins to man, guilty through committing them. No sin is imputed.

Was then this righteousness for the circumcision only? Now our thesis is, that God counted Abraham to be righteous by faith. But was he circumcised when this took place? Not so; he was uncircumcised. Righteousness then is by faith, and for the uncircumcised through faith — a testimony that was overwhelming to a Jew, because Abraham was the beau ideal to which all his ideas of excellence and of privilege referred. Circumcision was only a seal to the righteousness by faith which Abraham possessed in uncircumcision, that he might be the father of all believers who were in the same state of uncircumcision, that righteousness might be imputed to them also; and the father of circumcision — that is, the first model of a people truly set apart for God — not only with regard to the circumcised, but to all those who should walk in the steps of his faith when uncircumcised. For, after all, the promise that he should be heir of the world was not made to Abraham nor to his seed in connection with the law, but with righteousness by faith. For if they who are on the principle of law are heirs, the faith by which Abraham received it is vain, and the promise made of none effect; [17] for, on the contrary, the law produces wrath — and that is a very different thing from bringing into the enjoyment of a promise — for where there is no law there is no transgression. Observe, he does not say there is no sin; but where there is no commandment, there is none to violate. Now, the law being given to a sinner, wrath is necessarily the consequence of its imposition.

This is the negative side of the subject. The apostle shews that with regard to the Jews themselves, the inheritance could not be on the principle of law without setting Abraham aside, for to him the inheritance had been given by promise, and this implied that it was by faith: for we believe in a promise, we do not ourselves fulfil a promise that has been made to us. Accordingly the righteousness of Abraham was — according to scripture — through this same faith. It was imputed to him for righteousness.

This principle admitted the Gentiles; but here it is established with regard to the Jews themselves or rather with regard to the ways of God, in such a manner as to exclude the law as a means of obtaining the inheritance of God. The consequence with regard to Gentiles believing the gospel is stated in Verse 16 (Rom_4:16), "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, to the end that the promise might be sure to all the seed" of Abraham to whom the promise was made; not to that only which was under the law, but to all that had the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all before God, as it is written, "I have made thee a father of many nations."

Thus we have the great principle established. It is by faith, before and without law [18] ; and the promise is made to man in uncircumcision, and he is justified by believing it.

Another element is now introduced. Humanly speaking, the fulfilment of the promise was impossible, for in that respect both Abraham and Sarah were as dead, and the promise must be believed in against all hope, resting on the almighty power of Him who raises the dead, and calls things that are not as though they were. This was Abraham's faith. He believed the promise that he should be the father of many nations, because God had spoken, counting on the power of God, thus glorifying Him, without calling in question anything that He had said by looking at circumstances; therefore this also was counted to him for righteousness. He glorified God according to what God was. Now, this was not written for his sake alone the same faith shall be imputed to us also for righteousness — faith in God as having raised up Jesus from the dead. It is not here faith in Jesus, but in Him who came in power into the domain of death, where Jesus lay because of our sins, and brought Him forth by His power, the mighty activity of the love of God who brought Him — who had already borne all the punishment of our sins — out from under all their consequences; so that, by believing God who has done this, we embrace the whole extent of His work, the grace and the power displayed in it; and we thus know God. Our God is the God who has done this. He has Himself raised up Jesus from among the dead, who was delivered for our offences and raised again for our justification. Our sins were already upon Him. The active intervention of God delivered Him who lay in death because He had borne them. It is not only a resurrection of the dead, but from among the dead — the intervention of God to bring forth in righteousness the One who had glorified Him. By believing in such a God we understand that it is Himself who, in raising Christ from among the dead, has delivered us Himself from all that our sins had subjected us to; because He has brought back in delivering power Him who underwent it for our sakes.

Note #17

The careful reader of Paul's epistles must attend to the use of this word "for." In very many cases it does not express an inference, but turns to some collateral subject which, in the apostle's mind, would lead to the same conclusion, or some deeper general principle, which lay at the groundwork of the argument, enlarging the sphere of vision in things connected with it.

Note #18

('chooris nomou', Lit: "apart from law," which had nothing to do with it.

 

[msortwell]

AV1611,

Is this "saving faith" that Abraham demonstrated the faith that his discendents would be many? Was it that he believed God in this one specific promise and therefore was considered fully righteous? Were there other things that Abraham must believe? Must he have always believed God . . . in all ways?

And again . . . to address my original question (which did not make reference to Abraham specifically) . . . what was "saving faith" under the Mosaic law? What was the object of Moses faith? Was it different from David's faith . . . from Jeremiah's?

And in what will "saving faith" be held during the coming kingdom of the dispensational model?

Patiently yours,

msortwell

 

[msortwell]

Why is there no one that answers my questions? The first response from AV1611 was understandable, because I had not yet made myself clear. However, since then I believe I have.

Do you . . .

A. Not understand the questions,

B. Not know the answers,

C. Not consider the issue to be important or,

D. All of the above

msortwell

 

[Iosias]

AV1611,

Is this "saving faith" that Abraham demonstrated the faith that his discendents would be many? Was it that he believed God in this one specific promise and therefore was considered fully righteous? Were there other things that Abraham must believe? Must he have always believed God . . . in all ways?

And again . . . to address my original question (which did not make reference to Abraham specifically) . . . what was "saving faith" under the Mosaic law? What was the object of Moses faith? Was it different from David's faith . . . from Jeremiah's?

And in what will "saving faith" be held during the coming kingdom of the dispensational model?

Patiently yours,

msortwell

Appologies for the late reply but I have just returned to University and so have been offline since Friday night. Personally I do not know the answers to the above questions off-hand however Ryrie does deal with it in his Dispensationalism. Personnally I fail to see its significance however if you care to enlighten me?

 

[msortwell]

[From AV1611] Personnally I fail to see its significance however if you care to enlighten me?

It is important (in my opinion) to understand the implications of the theological positions we hold. Relative to "dispenstionalism," we should understand what aspects of God's dealing with man changes (or remains unchanged) from one dispensation to another.

Our concepts of other dispensations can shed important light upon our understanding of God's current means of redemption of men through Christ.

In today's dispensation salvation would be impossible without Christ's sacrifice. The payment for sin must be made. What made payment for sin under the Levitical system? Christ had not yet died. And by what manner will the wages of sin be paid in the coming kingdom?

Was the death of Christ necessary or simply one way in which God determined to work things out? Is there something in the nature of our Creator, in the nature of sin, or in the fallen nature of man that required the sacrifice of Jesus?

Too many that consider themselves dispensationalists today would have responded to my original inquiry by proclaiming the Levitical system, and likely the Kingdom system, as under the covenant of works. Do you consider the Levitical System to be a covenant of grace or a covenant of works?

By His Grace,

msortwell

 

[FreeinChrist]

Based upon your understanding of dispensational theology . . . what makes a man right before God within each of the listed dispensations (Mosaic, Grace, the Millenium)? Or otherwise stated, what is necessary within each dispensation to be justified / declared righteous before God?

By His Grace,

msortwell

Salvation has always been by grace through faith. The OT saints had faith in God, that he would keep His promise of a Messiah, first promised by God in Genesis 3:15 - the seed of the woman.

Abraham was given the commandment to circumcize. But is not what caused his salvation - he was reckoned righteous because of his faith, prior to the command to circumcize.

From Moses on, faith was still required. But the Lord put on the burden of the law, a schoolteacher for the Israelites. To please God and show faith in Him, obedience to Mosaic Law was required. Sin was covered by the sacrifices - but the sacrifices did not remove sin. Salvation for the OT saints came at the cross.

Hbr 9:9 which {is} a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience,

Hbr 9:10 since they {relate} only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.

Hbr 9:11 But when Christ appeared {as} a high priest of the good things to come, {He entered} through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation;

Hbr 9:12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

So to try and say it simply, saving faith was having faith in Jesus Christ (future messiah for the OT saints) shown by obeying the commands God gave for that dispensation.

 

[msortwell]

[FreeinChrist] So to try and say it simply, saving faith was having faith in Jesus Christ (future messiah for the OT saints) shown by obeying the commands God gave for that dispensation.

Dear FreeinChrist (and others)

Do you consider to description provided by FreeinChrist to be consistent with . . . classical dispensationalism, progressive dispensationalism or hyper dispensationalism? Or is it more consistent with Covenant Theology? Or is it more representative of some other view?

(Questions are so much easier than answers )

mrsortwell

 

[BT]

The OT saints were saved through their faith in God. That He was just and would live up to His promises. The OT saint however would not at death be given entrance into heaven, this would be impossible without the shed blood of Christ. Which had not come. I would further say that dispensationalism does not teach that these were saved through the faith in the "coming Messiah". This is clear in NT theology. This is where we depart from covenant theology. In this faith the OT saints were placed at death into "paradise" or "Abraham's Bossom" whichever you like to call it. Now enters in the compartmental grave which contains paradise and torment, seperated by a 'Great Gulf'.

In short. The object of faith (God) was always the same, but the means of faith (degree of revelation) was different.

 

[FreeinChrist]

The OT saints were saved through their faith in God. That He was just and would live up to His promises. The OT saint however would not at death be given entrance into heaven, this would be impossible without the shed blood of Christ. Which had not come. I would further say that dispensationalism does not teach that these were saved through the faith in the "coming Messiah". This is clear in NT theology. This is where we depart from covenant theology. In this faith the OT saints were placed at death into "paradise" or "Abraham's Bossom" whichever you like to call it. Now enters in the compartmental grave which contains paradise and torment, seperated by a 'Great Gulf'.

In short. The object of faith (God) was always the same, but the means of faith (degree of revelation) was different.

I probably should have stated it as faith in God, that He would send a Messiah.

 

[msortwell]

FreeinChrist,

Am I to understand from your response to BT that you consider your position to be consistent with dispensational theology?

Grace,

msortwell

 

[FreeinChrist]

Yes.

To quote Charles Ryrie, from the book Dispensationism:

“The basis of salvation in every age is the death of Christ; the requirement of salvation in every age is faith; the object of faith in every age is God; the content of faith changes in the various dispensations.”

 

[msortwell]

Yes.

To quote Charles Ryrie, from the book Dispensationism:

“The basis of salvation in every age is the death of Christ; the requirement of salvation in every age is faith; the object of faith in every age is God; the content of faith changes in the various dispensations.”

FreeinChrist,

Is this salvation within the Levitical system (the requirement for which is faith), salvation by God's grace or by the works of the faithful, or by some other means?

msortwell