What is Dispensationalism?

[John of Japan]

John has been granted a special dispensation to make clear this modified view....lol
I still have my laminated copy of the seven d ispensations complete with man's alleged responsibilty,mans failure, leading to judgment....

It's actually the "normative" view, or revised dispensationalism in Ryrie's terminology. It is taught all over the world (very few teachers would stick to Scofield), and is not specific to my teaching.

Straying from normative dispensationalism are progressive and hyper (or ultra) dispensationalism.

 

[agedman]

Now, one strange thing about the opposition to dispensationalism is that the opponents often do not realize that other theologies admit to there being dispensations. They just don't systematize their dispensations into a complete theology.

Covenant theologian Berkhof defines "dispensation" very much as I have in his Systematic Theology (p. 290). He then gives a scheme of three dispensations (p. 292 on).

So to me, most opposition to dispensationalism is strange and uninformed. What actually happens is that the opponents are not really opposing dispensationalism as a system of theology--Internet opponents rarely think that far. What they are opposing is only one facet of dispensationalism: dispensational premillennialism. So they mock us, call us "dispys," and attack us in various nasty ways, whereas they are not really opposed to teaching dispensations per se, but to premillennialism, which is not exclusively dispensational but is held to by anyone who interprets the Bible literally, including the early church fathers, my grandfather, and many others who were or are not dispensationalists.

Perhaps you don’t realize that all modern dispensation thinking came from Darby (called the “father of dispensation” by Ryrie, if my memory is working). At least that is the claim on the B.B. (Sarcasm).


Trouble being, Ryrie was wrong in that appointment, but in the context of what became popular dispensation thinking, Darby was the father.

As you stated, the earliest church teaching was premillennial, and dispensation was not alien to their teaching, and, in my opinion, an intricate part of presenting acceptable service for God’s glory.

What is unfortunate (imo) is the surge to reject Darby, by some, lead to a rejection of premillennialism, when the two are more easily uncoupled and premillennialism be found securely presented in the Scriptures Long with proper dispensation teaching

One positive about Darby, his work in the Scriptures has undergone numerous in-depth reviews and he has not been found unfaithful to the Word. I may disagree with some conclusion or nuance, but at least he did not become heretical as some have uneducatedly pronounced.

 

[John of Japan]

Perhaps you don’t realize that all modern dispensation thinking came from Darby (called the “father of dispensation” by Ryrie, if my memory is working). At least that is the claim on the B.B. (Sarcasm).


Trouble being, Ryrie was wrong in that appointment, but in the context of what became popular dispensation thinking, Darby was the father.

As you stated, the earliest church teaching was premillennial, and dispensation was not alien to their teaching, and, in my opinion, an intricate part of presenting acceptable service for God’s glory.

What is unfortunate (imo) is the surge to reject Darby, by some, lead to a rejection of premillennialism, when the two are more easily uncoupled and premillennialism be found securely presented in the Scriptures Long with proper dispensation teaching

One positive about Darby, his work in the Scriptures has undergone numerous in-depth reviews and he has not been found unfaithful to the Word. I may disagree with some conclusion or nuance, but at least he did not become heretical as some have uneducatedly pronounced.

Good post, and all true. Just a warning: don't try to read Darby's works. They are really turgid!

 

[Iconoclast]

It's actually the "normative" view, or revised dispensationalism in Ryrie's terminology. It is taught all over the world (very few teachers would stick to Scofield), and is not specific to my teaching.

Straying from normative dispensationalism are progressive and hyper (or ultra) dispensationalism.

Well...I suppose I might not be aware of the new wrinkles...I listened to hours of S Lewis Johnson....and the men from believers chapel...william payne...sam storms...mcrae...deffinbaugh...walvoord.etc....so I will pay attention. ..

 

[agedman]

Good post, and all true. Just a warning: don't try to read Darby's works. They are really turgid!

I have taken much time to speed read through a number of his works. They are not for the faint of heart!

Until about a year or so ago, I had never read much if anything that he wrote. I have been looking for error, Something in which to agree to the claim made of him being heretic. Just can’t find anything. Neither have others.

He writes like a lawyer, so he and I wouldn’t get along, and although he leans to some Calvinistic imprints, he was too much into unorganized worship for my taste.

 

[rlvaughn]

Thanks for this useful thread, toward sorting out dispensationalism and its understanding. Not to break into what John is doing, and not intended to divert the discussion here, but this link mentions and discusses a couple different ways that dispensationalism has been subdivided: Things Dispensationalism Does Not Teach.

 

[rlvaughn]

Scofield is not the authority for 21st century dispensationalism, but only one source, often flawed. Why should it be surprising that the theology has been fine tuned and better developed in the 100 some years since Scofield?

Kind of peripheral to your OP, John, but Scofield as a person has been attacked in several books in recent years. The move away from Scofield began long before those books, it seems, but do you think that he has been somewhat discredited -- making an appeal to him even less likely in modern times?

Thanks.

 

[John of Japan]

Well...I suppose I might not be aware of the new wrinkles...I listened to hours of S Lewis Johnson....and the men from believers chapel...william payne...sam storms...mcrae...deffinbaugh...walvoord.etc....so I will pay attention. ..

Not so new. Chafer's Systematic Theology (whose definition of dispensation I quoted as not being a period of time) is from 1947. Ryrie's Dispensationalism Today (a standard textbook) is from 1965, and the revision which is my textbook is copyright 1995 and 2007. (This revision, titled just Dispensationalism, was done to deal with progressive dispensationalism.) One young lady last year made the mistake of using both the original Ryrie and the revision as sources for her paper.

So, going from Chafer, you are about 70 years behind.

 

[John of Japan]

Kind of peripheral to your OP, John, but Scofield as a person has been attacked in several books in recent years. The move away from Scofield began long before those books, it seems, but do you think that he has been somewhat discredited -- making an appeal to him even less likely in modern times?

Thanks.

Yes, he has been somewhat discredited. But the theology does not depend on Scofield's personal life. So attacks on dispensationalism based on the personal life of Darby or Scofield are error in logic of ad hominem. I know many wonderful, godly people who are dispensationalists, and many who hold to other theologies.

Today I got my list of nine students for Dispensational Theology, and they are all wonderful young Christians. I'm delighted to have the privilege of teaching them theology.

 

[TCassidy]

I still have my laminated copy of the seven d ispensations complete with man's alleged responsibilty,mans failure, leading to judgment.

And how and when was that laminated chart "Given by inspiration of God?"

 

[Covenanter]

Interesting thread but based on a word which occurs only 4 times in Scripture, in one of which there is an indication of it being time related. Eph. 1:10 That would appear to be the sense used by Scofield to develop dispensationalism. The theological system that many of us challenge.

If I've counted correctly (& I haven't read every word) we now have FOUR definitions of dispensation, which word is a translation of a Gk word meaning stewardship. I'll quote yours -

This brings us my own concise definition: A dispensation is a stewardship from God in which mankind is given a task to fulfill. Therefore, dispensationalism is a theology in which the dispensations of the Bible are carefully delineated.

There is of course a sense in which a word is defined by its common usage & incorrect usage finds its way into approved, accepted definition. That has clearly happened with "dispensation." Most Christians have a Scofield understanding of D whether they enthusiastically accept it, or reject it.

How are you proposing to correct the definition for the general Christian public?

And have you a suitable word to define what is generally understood as dispensationalism?

 

[Iconoclast]

This chart

Redirect Notice
Redirect Notice

And how and when was that laminated chart "Given by inspiration of God?"

I am trying to paste it.....it announced it was Gods plan for the ages....I obtained at a premill school in clarks summit pa.
Baptist bible college. Notice it clearly says Gods plan TC.....are you suggesting it might not be direct revelation????

 

[TCassidy]

This chart

I am trying to paste it.....it announced it was Gods plan for the ages....I obtained at a premill school in clarks summit pa.
Baptist bible college.

Yes, I know. I have the chart. My question was "How and when was that laminated chart "Given by inspiration of God?"

As baptists we believe our Supreme and Final Authority is the Bible, not a laminated chart from BBC/CS (now Clarks Summit University).

 

[Iconoclast]

I at one time gave this away as a tract...lol...on the back it tried to give an explanation of salvation...

 

[Iconoclast]

Yes, I know. I have the chart. My question was "Hhow and when was that laminated chart "Given by inspiration of God?"

The men at believers chapel explained that if I had the chart...a strongs concordance...and a scofield bible...I was good to go.
Are you suggesting they were mistaken T C.....once I bought Things to Come, walvoord on matthew, late great planet earth, the basis of premillenial faith, I figured I was IN.I drove three states away to hear Jack van impe.... and a man named Marvin Rosenthal.....a couple of Salem Kirban novels.....not sure where I took a wrong turn???

 

[TCassidy]

Are you suggesting they were mistaken T C.

Yes.

 

[Iconoclast]

Yes.

You might be correct sir....lol....I thought I was historic premill for awhile...ie, George Eldon Ladd, then perhaps an optimistic amillennial person.....now drifting toward postmill.....
I am not quite a prophecy expert TC...haha...maybe you noticed.
The thing is They were good men and I did learn some from Each person.

 

[John of Japan]

Interesting thread but based on a word which occurs only 4 times in Scripture, in one of which there is an indication of it being time related. Eph. 1:10 That would appear to be the sense used by Scofield to develop dispensationalism. The theological system that many of us challenge.

The Greek word occurs seven times.

If I've counted correctly (& I haven't read every word) we now have FOUR definitions of dispensation, which word is a translation of a Gk word meaning stewardship. I'll quote yours -

Scofield's was wrong in saying a dispensation is an era or age. The others were all similar, with only the vocabulary being different.

There is of course a sense in which a word is defined by its common usage & incorrect usage finds its way into approved, accepted definition. That has clearly happened with "dispensation." Most Christians have a Scofield understanding of D whether they enthusiastically accept it, or reject it.

And a main point of this thread is that Scofield is 100 years old or so, and those of us who teach the theology don't depend on him. For a better understanding, read Dispensationalism by Charles Ryrie. For a shorter and simpler explanation, see the little book with the same title by Michael Vlatch.

How are you proposing to correct the definition for the general Christian public?

Correct what definition? I gave my own, which agrees with Ryrie and Chafer.

And have you a suitable word to define what is generally understood as dispensationalism?

Don't know what you mean. The term already in use is fine. Just because a view may be mistaken in details (Scofield and others) doesn't mean it is no longer dispensationalism.

 

[John of Japan]

Now, how does a dispensation work? We start with the dispensation of Innocence, which is the time of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. It's a perfect example. We don't know how long they were there--how many years the dispensation was in place, or how long the era was. That's not important; the stewardship and God's glory are important.

God gave mankind (two people at the time) commands, constituting their stewardship.
:
Gen. 1:28--And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
2:16-17--And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

As we all know, Adam and Eve failed at their stewardship, showing mankind as frail and weak, but God Himself as perfect yet full of compassion and justice. In other words, God was glorified by the failure of Adam and Eve, giving us a wonderful picture of who He really is.

More Monday.

 

[Covenanter]

This thread makes very relevant reading -
What do you think of Isaac Watts as a dispensationalist?

The link to the article cited is here.
Thanks A-M for linking to it. Pity there were only a few replies.

It does indicate that dispensation is a commonly used term. He quotes Ryrie -

18For example, Ryrie states, “Age and dispensation are not synonymous in meaning, even though they may exactly coincide in the historical outworking. A dispensation is basically the arrangement involved, not the time involved; and a proper definition will take this into account. However, there is no reason for great alarm if a definition does ascribe time to a dispensation” (Ryrie, Dispensationalism, p. 28).

I think the association of time with dispensation is due to the way Eph. 1:10 reads - the dispensation of the fulness of time implying other dispensations relating to other times.