Dispensationalism is that interpretation of biblical history that there is much variety in the divine economy of how God dealt with man in different eras of biblical history. A dispensation is defined by C. I. Scofield. as "a period of time during which man is tested in respect to obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God." The word "dispensation" occurs in the KJV in I Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10; 3:2; and Col. 1:25. In each occurence, it translates the Greek noun oikonomia, from which we get our English word "economy." This Greek noun is derived from the Greek verb oikonomeo which is the compound of the Greek noun oikos, house, and the Greek verb, nomo, to manage. Hence the Greek verb oikonomeo means "to manage a household." Thus, the noun oikonomia means either the office of house-steward, or the management and administration of household. Hence in the Greek New Testament where the word occurs twenty times, it means "to manage, regulate, administer, and plan the affairs of a household." This concept of human stewarship is illustrated in Luke 16:1-4, where the ideas of responsibility, accountability, and the changes of stewardship are detailed. Theologically, the term is used to designate the divine plan or system for the management of the world, or a period of time, an age, in which God administers or manages the world.
Although there is some variety among dispensationalists, they ususally follow Scofield's scheme of seven dispensations. These are
At least three dispensations (as understood in dispensationalism)
are mentioned by Paul;
(1) one preceding the present time (Col. 1:25-26): the Law,
(2) the present dispensation (Eph. 3:2): Grace, and
(3) a future administration (Eph. 1:10): the Kingdom.
These three require a fourth -- one before the law -- and this pre-law
dispensation would seem to need to be divided into a pre-fall and post-fall
dispensations. The usual sevenfold scheme also includes a dispensation after
the Noahic Flood and another with the call of Abraham.
John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) is usually regarded as the founder of dispensationalism, although some of its elements can be found in the writings of Augustine and of some other church fathers. But as a system dispensationalism did not begin to be developed until the early part of eighteenth century in the writings of Pierre Poiret, John Edwards (1637-1716), and Issac Watts (1674-1748). But it was in the writings of John Nelson Darby in the nineteenth century that it was systematized into an interpretation of the whole Bible. His work became the basis for later dispensationalists such as James H. Brookes, James M. Gray (1851-1935), C. I. Scofield (1843-1921), L. S. Chafer (1871-1952).
Dispensationalism historically developed as a expansion of the Calvinistic covenant theology. This covenant theology sees the relationship of God to the human race as a compact or agreement. It said that God appointed Adam, who was the natural head of the human race, to be the federal (foedus, Latin "covenant") head or legal representative of the whole human race. God then entered into a covenant with the whole human race through Adam as their legal representative. According to the terms of this Covenant of Works, God promised to bestow eternal life upon Adam and the entire human race if he, Adam, as their federal head, obeyed God. On the other hand, God threatened the punishment of death, that is, condemnation and a sinful corrupt nature, upon the whole human race if he, Adam, as their federal head, disobeyed. Now since Adam sinned, God reckoned his descendants as guilty, under condemnation to eternal death. Adam's sin is imputed to each member of the human race as their own guilt. And because of this imputation of guilt, each member of the human race has received by inheritance a sinful or corrupt nature. This sinful nature, which is itself sin, leads invariably to acts of sin. And each man in addition to the racial guilt is also guilty for his own personal sins. Thus men since Adam carry a double burden of guilt, of both objective and subjective guilt and condemnation. According to covenant theology God has intervened on behalf of mankind with another covenant, a covenant of grace. Unlike the covenant of works, whose mandate was "Do this and you shall live." the covenant of grace is bestowed on mankind in their sinful condition with the promise that, in spite of their inability to keep any commandment of God, out of sheer grace (unmerted favor) God will forgive their sins and accept them as his children through the merits of His Son, Jesus Christ, upon the condition of faith. This covenant of grace is founded upon another covenant, the covenant of redemption. This covenant is an eternal pact between God the Father and God the Son to provide salvation for mankind. According to this covenant which was made in eternity past God the Son agrees to become a man and to die as a sacrifice paying the penality of mankind's sin providing redemption for those who believe. God the Father promises to accept this sacrifice and to imput to those who believe the the righteousness or merits earned for them by Christ's active obedience during His life on earth. That is, God in Christ has earned for them the salvation that they themselves cannot earned because of their sinful nature. Christ is regarded as the Mediator of the covenant of grace and as the representative of those who put their trust in Jesus Christ as their Savior.
Dispensationalism expands this theological scheme by the introduction of dispensations to distinguish between the plan of God for Israel, the plan of God for the Church, and God's plan for the nations. While it is true that God's plan for the salvation of mankind is the most important aspect of His eternal purpose, according to dispensationalism it is not the whole of God's plan. A more complete view of God's plan of history is that God has revealed His glory not only in saving mankind but by fulfilling His purpose and revealing Himself through His dealing with Israel, with the church, and with the nations. Accordingly, dispensationalism presents the view of history that God reveals His purposes in seven periods of history or dispensations. These seven dispensations are centered on the eight covenants that reveal the distinctive stages in the fulfillment of God's purposes in human history.
Dispensationalism distinguishes between two classes of covenants: conditional
and unconditional covenants. A conditional covenant is one in which
God's actions are in response to some action on the part of those to whom the
covenant is addressed. A conditional covenant guarentees that God will do
His part with absolute certainty when human requirements are met, but if
man fails to do his part, God is not obligated to do His part. Of the eight
covenants, only the Edenic and Mosaic covenants are conditional.
The other six covenants are unconditional.
An unconditional covenant is a declaration of the certain purposes
of God that He will certainly carried out and that the promises of an
unconditional covenant will certainly be fulfilled in God's time and way.
But even under unconditional covenants, according to dispensationalism,
there are conditional elements as applied to the individual. Unconditional
covenants may include certain human contingencies. An unconditional covenant
is distinguished from a conditional covenant by the fact that its ultimate
fulfillement is promised by God and depends upon His power and sovereignty.
Before we present the
dispensations
and an
evaluation of dispensationalism,
let us examine these eight covenants as understood in dispensationalism.
According to dispensationalism, the Abrahamic covenant, like the Adamic and Noahic covenants, is unconditional. In spite of Israel's many failures recorded in the Old Testament, God did reveal Himself to them and caused the Scriptures to be written, and ultimately Christ was born, lived, died, and rose again among them exactly as the Word of God prophesied.
According to dispensationalism, the Davidic Covenant assures that during the millenium kingdom Christ will reign on earth. The resurrected David will reign under Christ as a prince over the house Israel (Jer. 23:5-6; Ezek. 34:23-24; 37:24). According to dispensationalism, the Davidic covenant is not fulfilled by Christ reigning on His throne in heaven, as David has never and will never sit upon God the Father's throne. It is rather an earthly kingdom and has an earthly throne (Matt. 25:31). The Davidic covenant is, accordingly, the key to God's prophetic program yet to be fulfilled.
Dispensationalism builds upon these eight covenants its interpretation of biblical history as eight dispensations. In each of these dispensations God tests mankind so that in each case the results is an unquestionable demonstration of the utter failure and sinfulness of man. Thus every mouth will be stopped and thoughts of the human heart will be shown to be foolish and wicked. Each dispensation begins with man being divinely placed into a new position of privilege and responsibility, and each closes with the failure of man resulting in God's righteous judgment. While there is certain unchanging facts such as the holy character of God which are the same in every age, there are varying instructions and responsibilities which are in their application limited to a given period. This means that not all portions of Scriptures are given for personal and primary application. While spiritual lessons can be learned from every portion of the Bible, it does not follow that the Christian is appointed by God to conform those governing principles that were the will of God in another dispensation. The child of God under grace is not situated as Adam, or as the Israelites when under law; nor is he required to follow the peculiar manner of life which will be required of men when the King shall have returned and set up His kingdom on earth. It is only by rightly dividing the Word of God that the believer under grace will be able to correctly apply the Word to his personal needs.
In studying the seven dispensations, certain principles are essential
to understand this method of interpretation,
First, dispensationalism is based on the normal, literal interpretation
of the Bible. And according to dispensationalism it is impossible to
interpret the Bible in its normal and literal sense without recognizing
that there are different ages and different dispensations.
Second, dispensationalism is based on progressive revelation, that is,
that revelation is given by God in stages.
Thirdly, because of the progressive character of revelation, later
revelation to some extent supersedes earlier revelation with a resulting
change in the rules of life in which earlier requirements may be changed
or withdrawn and new requirements added. For example, while God commanded
Moses to kill a man for gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Num. 15:32-36),
no one would apply this command today because we live in a different
dispensation.
Although there are seven dispensations that are frequently distinguished in Scriptures, there are three that are more important than the others, namely, the dispensation of law, governing Israel in the Old Testament from the time of Moses, the dispensation of grace, the present age, and the future dispensation of the millennial kingdom. Five of these seven dispensations have already fulfilled; and we are now living in the middle of the sixth, probably near its end; and the last, the millenium, is future. These periods are marked off in the Scriptures by some changes in God's method of dealing with mankind, or a portion of mankind, in respect to the two questions of sin and human responsibility. Each dispensation may be considered as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment, marking man's utter failure. Let us now examine each of these dispensations.
The Mosaic law is directed to Israel alone; the Gentiles were not judged by its standards. The law contained a detail system of works including three major divisions: the commands, the judgments, and ordinancies. The sacrifical and priestly system was gracious and legal. Government in this dispensation was a theocracy, a government by God through His prophets, priests, and later kings. The Mosaic covenant was also a temporary covenant, in force until Christ should come (Gal. 3:24-25). The nature of this covenant is conditional; that is, blessing was conditioned on their obedience.
Under law there was continual failure. This is especially evident in the period of the judges, but continued after Solomon and the division of the kingdom into two kingdoms and two lands: Judah and Israel. The law was forgotten and ignored, and idolatry reigned supreme. The New Testament continues the record of failures, culminating in the rejection and the crucifixion of Christ, who in His life completely kept the law.
Many judgments were inflicted during the dispensation of law as described in Deut. 28:1-30:20. The major judgments were the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities from which they returned in due time. The judgments upon Judah also came after the close of the dispensation of law and included the distruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and the world-wide dispersion of Israel. Another time of Jacob's trouble, the great tribulation, is still ahead (Jer. 30:1-11; Dan. 12:1; Matt. 24:22).
According to dispensationalism, the high standards of grace elevate this dispensation above all previous rules of life (John 13:34-35; Rom. 12:1-2; Phil. 2:5; Col. 1:10-14; I Thess. 5:23). Under grace there is failure as grace produced neither worldwide acceptance of Christ nor a triumphant church. Scripture in fact predicts that there will be apostasy in the professing church (I Tim. 4:1-3; II Tim. 3:1-13; II Pet. 2-3; Jude). According to dispensationalism, although God is fulfilling His purpose in calling out a people for His name from Jew and Gentile, the professing but unsaved protion of the church left behind at the Rapture and will be judged in the period called the Tribulation between the Rapture and Christ's Coming to set up His kingdom (Matt. 24:1-26; Rev. 6-19). The true church will be judged in heaven at the judgment seat of Christ (II Cor. 5:10-11).
The dispensation of grace ends with the Rapture of the church, which will be followed by the judgment upon the professing church (Rev. 17:16) during the tribulation. According to dispensationalism, the dispensation of grace is different from previous dispensations, since it is concerned with the Church that is comprised of both Jewish and Gentile believers. By contrast, the dispensation of law was for Israel only; the dispensation of human government was for the entire world, and the dispensation of conscience extends to all people. In the present dispensation of grace the Mosaic Law is completely canceled as to immediate application, but continues to witness to the holiness of God and provides many spiritual lessons by application. Although all the dispensations contain gracious elements, the dispensation of grace is the supreme manifestation of God's grace both in the fulness of salvation and in the rule of life.
In the millennial kingdom, divine grace is also revealed in the fulfillment of the new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34), in salvation (Isa. 12), in physical and temporal prosperity (Isa. 35), in the abundance of revelation (Jer. 31:33-34), forgiveness of sins (Jer. 31:34), and in the regathering of Israel (Isa. 11:11-13; Jer. 30:1-11; Ezek. 39:25-29). The millennial kingdom ends with the destruction of the earth and the heavens by fire, and is followed by the eternal state (Rev. 21-22). The dispensation of the Kingdom differs from all previous dispensations in that it is the final form of moral testing. The advantages of this kingdom include a perfect government, the immediate personal glorious presence of Christ, universal knowledge of God and of the terms of salvation, and Satan is rendered inactive. In many respects the dispensation of the kingdom is climatic and brings to consummation God's dealings with man.
The Scriptures nowhere teaches that God made a covenant with Adam. The covenant theologians claim that Hosea 6:7 teaches that God made a covenant with Adam; but among biblical theologians there are different interpretations of Hosea 6:7. Some take the Hebrew word adam to mean "man"; and that the Hebrew word refers not to the first man, but to men in general. That is the interpretation which the translators of the King James Version held and they translated Hosea 6:7 as:
"But they like men have transgressed the covenant,The NIV translation recognizes that possible translation in their footnote "Like men", but accepts the other intrepretation that it refers to the first man, Adam. And so does the New American Standard translation;
there have they dealt treacherously against me." (Hosea 6:7 KJV)
"But like Adam they have transgressed the covenant;But the verse does not say that God made a covenant with Adam. It says, "like Adam they have transgressed the covenant." What covenant? This is the covenant that God made with Israel; in verse 4 God says,
There they have dealt treacherously against Me." (Hosea 6:7 NSA)
"O Ephraim, what shall I do unto you?The "they" in verse 7 refers to Ephraim and Judah; and it is the covenant that God made with children of Israel (the Mosaic Covenant) that they had transgressed. Their transgression was like Adam's transgression; it was a transgression of the command or commands that God had given them. Adam's transgression was like Israel's transgression in that they both had disobeyed the command or commands of God. The only similarity between Adam's sin and Israel's sin is that their sin was the disobedience of a command or commands that God had given them, not that they both had a "legal" covenant.
O Judah, what shall I do unto thee?" (Hosea 6:4).
Nowhere in Genesis nor in the rest of the Old Testament does it say that God made a covenant with Adam. In the Old Testament there are revealed only four covenants that God made: the Noahic Covenant, the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, and the Davidic Covenant; and the New Covenant was prophesied (Jer. 31:31-34). (See my discussion of the covenants in the section " Covenants of God" in chapter 3 of my book From Death to Life) But it is not revealed that God made a covenant with Adam; God had given Adam a command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This was not a covenant, but a command of God. And it told Adam what would happen if he ate of the tree, but it did not say what would happen if he did not eat of the tree; neither was there any probationary period established by God. This command was not a covenant of works by which God would reward Adam's obedience with eternal life.
But the Scriptures do teach that Adam as the head of the human race brought spiritual and physical death on the whole human race (Rom. 5:12-19; I Cor. 15:21-22); but this was not a punishment for the sins of the human race, neither personally for their own sins nor as a participation in Adam's sin (Rom. 5:13-14). Neither does the Scriptures teach that man inherited a corrupt or sinful nature from Adam. On the contrary, the Scriptures teaches that man inherited death, spiritual and physical, from Adam (Rom. 5:12; I Cor. 15:21-22). And according to Rom. 5:12d ("because of which [death] all sinned"), all men sin because of death ("the sting of death is sin", I Cor. 15:55-56). And this death is not the sinful nature. These are two totally different concepts. The sinful nature is the nature of man that is sinful and the nature of man is what man is - that which makes man what he is and what he does. The nature of anything is that essence of the thing that determines what it is and how it acts. The sinful nature is that nature of man, because it is sinful, makes him sin. Death, on the other hand, is a negative relationship of separation. Physical death is the separation of man's spirit from his body, spiritual death is the separation of man's spirit from God, and eternal death ("the second death," Rev. 20:14) is the eternal separation of man from God. Spiritual death is the opposite of spiritual life, which is to know personally the true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent (John 17:3). That is, spiritual death is not to know personally the true God and Jesus Christ whom He sent. Knowledge is a relationship between the knower and that which is known; it is not a nature nor the property of a nature. A relationship is not a nature. Now it should be clear that spiritual death is not the sinful nature; it is a negative relationship between man and God and not the nature of man.
Spiritual death is not the necessary cause but the ground or condition of sin, the choice of a false god. The Greek preposition epi translated "because" in the last clause of Rom. 5:12 means "on the condition of" or "on the basis of". It does not imply any necessary or deterministic causal connection between death and sin. Man sins by choice, not of necessity. In this state of spiritual death, he chooses freely his false god and thus sins. Then his false god puts him into bondage; he becomes a slave of sin, his false god being his slave master. The Calvinistic doctrine of Total Depravity or Total Inability misinterpretes this slavery of sin and equates it with the sinful nature or the results of the sinful nature, and turns the slavery of sin into a determinism and the denial of human freedom of choice.
Salvation is basically from death to life, and hence from sin to righteousness, since man sins because he is spiritually dead (Rom. 5:12d). As we have just pointed out. this death is not just another name for the sinful nature. Spiritual death is the opposite of spiritual and eternal life. In His great intercessor prayer, Jesus says,
"And this is eternal life, that they may know thee, the only true God,This knowledge is not just a knowledge about God, but a personal knowledge of God. Spiritual death is the absence of this personal knowledge of the true God, so that when a man in spiritual death chooses his ultimate criterion of choice, the true God is not a real alternative to the false gods, and he therefore makes his choice of his ultimate criterion from between false gods. Thus all men sin because of spiritual death, since death, both spiritual and physical, spread unto all men, to all of Adam's descendants. This death is not a punishment for their sins (Rom. 5:13-14), but is the result of Adam's sin (Rom. 5:12bc). Neither is this death a punishment for their participation in Adam's sin; nowhere in the Scriptures does it teach that all men sinned in Adam and that all men participate in Adam's sin. This is a legalistic theological explanation (called the the Federal Headship Theory) of why all men in Adam die (I Cor. 15:22).
and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3 NAS).
After the Reformation, many Protestant theologians reinterpreted the doctrine of original sin put forth by Augustine. During the seventeenth century it became known as covenant or federal theology. Among its earliest advocates were the Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531) and his successor Johann Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575), who were driven to the subject by the Anabaptists in and around Zurich. From them it passed to John Calvin (1509-1564) and to other Reformers; it was further developed by their successors, and played a dominant role in Reformed theology of the seventeenth century. Its emphasis on God's covenantal relationships with mankind was seen as less harsh than the earlier Reformed theology that emanated from Geneva, with its emphasis on divine sovereignty and predistination. From Switzerland the covenant theology passed over into Germany. The German linguist and theologian Johann Koch [latinized to Cocceius] (1603-1669) set forth in his Doctrine of the Covenant and Testaments of God (1648) and in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (1655) the fully developed covenant theology. It spread from there to the Netherlands and to the British Isles where it was incorporated into the Westminster Confession of Faith (1648); it came to have an important place in the theology of Scotland and of New England.
Later in the nineteenth century this covenant theology was replaced with dispensationalism, which replaced the covenant of works with the Edenic covenant. Dispensationalism rejects the covenant of works of Covenant Theology as not having any scriptural support. But neither does the Edenic covenant of dispensationalism have any scriptural support. As we pointed before, nowhere in Genesis nor in the rest of the Old Testament does it say that God made a covenant with Adam. In the Old Testament there are revealed only four covenants that God made: the Noahic Covenant, the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, and the Davidic Covenant; and the New Covenant was prophesied (Jer. 31:31-34). Neither in the New Testament is the Edenic Covenant nor the Adamic covenant referred to or taught. Of course, the Scriptures do teach that Adam as the head of the human race brought spiritual and physical death on the whole human race (Rom. 5:12-19; I Cor. 15:21-22); but this was not a punishment for the violation of a covenant nor for the sins of the human race, neither personally for their own sins nor as a participation in Adam's sin (Rom. 5:13-14).
Neither does the Scriptures teach the seven dispensations. Paul in Col. 1:25-26 does not refer to the dispensation before the present one. He writes,
"25 Of this church I was made a ministerPaul is here not referring to a past dispensation but to his "stewardship" or "commission" (NIV) which he had received from God; and the "mystery" was not "dispensational truth", but is "Christ in you, the hope of glory." Dispensationalism totally misunderstands these verse and they do not teach any dispensational truth. The fact that the KJV uses the word "dispensation" to translate oikonomia in verse 25 does not refer to a period of time of testing but rather to Paul's task as a minister to fully carry out the preaching of the Word of God, that is, the revelation of the mystery: "Christ in you, the hope of glory." This mystery is not dispensational truth.
according to the stewardship [oikonomia] bestowed upon me for your benefit,
that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God,
26 that is, the mystery which has been hidden
from past ages [aionion] and past generations [geneon];
but has now been manifested to His saints,
27 to whom God willed to make known
what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles,
which is Christ in you, the hope of glory." (NAS)
And again in Eph. 3:2 Paul is not speaking of a period of time of testing, a dispensation (as the dispensationalist understand it), but of his stewardship. Paul writes,
"2 if indeed you have heard of the stewardship [oikonomia] of God's gracePaul is here referring to the same mystery that he wrote about in Col. 1:25-27: "Christ in you, the hope of glory." Again the KJV translation of oikonomia as "dispensation" here seems to make the dispensationalist interpretation of this verse as referring to a period of time of testing to be the meaning of this verse. This verse is not speaking of the Dispensation of Grace, but of the stewardship that God in His grace gave to Paul. In I Cor. 9:17 Paul also speaks of his preaching of the gospel as a stewardship forced upon him, if he does not do it willingly.
which was given to me for you;
3 that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery,
as I wrote before in brief." (NAS)
"For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward;
if not of my own will, I am entrusted with a commission [oikonomia]."
(I Cor. 9:17)
In Eph. 1:10, Paul again uses the word oikonomia.
"9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will,Here Paul is speaking of another aspect of the mystery - the universal aspect of the mystery instead of the individual and personal aspect. This universal aspect is God's adminstration, not Paul's, in which God will "gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth." This universal aspect of God's administration is for "the fulness of time" which is usually taken to be in the future (see I Cor. 15:28). This does not take place during the millennium but after the millennium. Again the Greek word oikonomia does not refer to a period of time but to a future act of God's administration of the universe (the heavens and earth that He has created) when "he might gather together in one all things in Christ,"
according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation [oikonomia] of the fulness of times
he might gather together in one all things in Christ,
both which are in heaven, and which are on earth, even in him."
(Eph. 1:9-10 KJV)
There is no dispensationalism taught in these verses, and it is not taught anywhere in the Scriptures. It is read into the Scriptures (eisegesis), not out of the Scriptures (exegesis). It is an interpretation that is force onto the Scriptures as it seeks to rightly divide the Word of God. It draws upon the various covenants set forth in Scriptures to make its scheme seem to be taught by Scriptures. And it creates covenants (Edenic and Adamic) where there is no mention of these covenants in the Scriptures. And in each of those covenants that are unconditional (Noahic, Abrahamic, Davidic, and New), it adds conditions so that they will support their dispensational scheme that each of the dispensations are periods of testing and judgment. This turns these unconditional covenants of the sovereign grace of God into conditional covenants that depend upon man's obedience and not on God's sovereign will. In the one scripture that comes closest to teaching dispensationalism (Eph. 1:10), there is no mention of the testing and judgment of man, but only of God's sovereign will ("the mystrey of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:").
Dispensationalism also misunderstands progressive revelation. It is true that God has not revealed all of His truth all at one time in the past, but at various times and places (Heb. 1:1-2) before the fulness of that revelation in Jesus Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6; etc.). But this progressive revelation does not mean that the partial revelation was done in dispensations, in which those dispensations are intrepreted as salvation by works (man's obedience to the rules to be blessed). In each of the so-called dispensations, dispensationalism interprets them as a testing of man's obedience to live by the rules of the revelation made at the beginning of the dispensation; each dispensation ends when they have utterly fail because they do not keep the rules. This makes each dispensation like the dispensation of law, where it is explicitly said that God's blessing is condition upon their obedience to the law, and God's curses are conditioned upon their disobedience to the rules (Deut. 28:1-30:20). And dispensationalism does this to the present dispensation of Grace to make it fit into the dispensational scheme. In spite of the dispensationalist's claim that salvation in every dispensation is by grace through faith, this is not what their interpretation says of each dispensation as a testing of man's obedience by a different sets of rules that are revealed at the beginning of each dispensation. Faith is interpreted as the condition of keeping the rules to be blessed. This is not faith because faith is trust in God who in His love (by grace) bestows the blessing so that they will obey, not a keeping of the rules in order to receive the blessing. Thus dispensationalism mixes law and grace, and this mixture of law and grace leads to the misunderstanding of the law, called legalism, salvation by works. Legalism is that distortion of the law that salvation is earned by the works of law.
"Now to one who works,Thus does dispensationalism mixture of law and grace leads to a mixture of works and grace. And the Apostle Paul says that works and grace cannot be mixed.
his wages are not reckoned according to grace [as a gift],
but according to debt [as what is earned]." (Rom. 4:4 ERS).
"And if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works;In the preceding verse (Rom. 11:5) Paul is speaking of God's choice of a remnant of Israel by grace, but Paul cannot speak of the grace of God, without speaking of the misunderstanding of the law of God, salvation by works, which is called legalism. It was as a follower of that legalism that Paul persecuted God's remnant. And according to that legalism, God should never have chosen him, Saul; he should have been condemned and destroyed. But God is not a God of justice, but of love, and in His love God chooses to appear to Saul on the road to Damascus. Paul states in Rom. 11:4 a very fundamental truth about the grace of God; grace and works cannot be mixed. They are mutually exclusive; it is either grace or works, but not both. If the mixture of grace and works is attempted, grace is no longer grace. This is what has happened in Christian theology, particularly orthodox Protestant theology. Understanding righteousness legalistic as the merits earned by Christ in His active obedience and imputed to the account of the one who believes, they defined grace as unmerited favor; that is, grace is God being favorable to us because of the merits of Christ, not because our merit. Thus grace is no longer grace. This view of justification by faith is salvation by the vicarious works of Christ. This theology, rejecting salvation by our works, since, because our sinful natures, we cannot ourselves earn and merit eternal life, teaches that it was still must be earned, not by us, but by another, Jesus Christ. It is a vicarious salvation by works. And Paul would have rejected it, as indicated by this verse. Grace and works cannot be mixed. If it is by grace, it is no longer of works. And if is by works, it is no longer by grace. And if they are mixed, "grace is no longer grace." What is grace? Grace is love in action giving that which is needed. The grace of God is more than the favor of God. It is God in His love doing for man what he needs. Man is spiritually dead, and dying physically; he needs life, both spiritually and physically. God has in his love provided the gift of life through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Life is not earned by the merits of Christ, but is the gift of God's grace in the person of God's Son, Jesus Christ.
otherwise grace would be no longer grace." (Rom. 11:6)
"He that has the Son has life,This gift of eternal life is received by faith. This is the righteousness of faith, faith being reckoned as righteousness ( Rom. 4:5).
and he that does not have the Son has not life." (I John 5:12).
"Abraham believed God, and it [his faith] was reckoned to him for righteousness"Paul explains,
( Rom. 4:3; quoting Gen. 15:6).
"22 And that is why his faith was 'reckoned to him as righteousness.'Justification is not God declaring righteousness nor imputing the merits of Christ to our account when we believe, but it is God acting to set right or to put one who believes into right relationship with Himself. To justify is to save ( Rom. 3:24), and justification as salvation is by grace through faith and not by works. (Eph. 2:5, 8-9). Grace and works are mutually exclusive and should not be mixed. Dispensationalism by mixing law and grace causes a confusion about the relationship of grace to works; that is, by mixing law and grace, it implies that grace and works can be mixed.
23 But the words, 'it was reckoned to him',
were written not for his sakes alone,
24 but for ours also.
It will be reckoned to us who believe in him
that raised from the dead Jesus our Lord,
25 who was put to death for our trespasses
and raised for our justification." ( Rom. 4:22-25).
This confusion of law and grace in dispensationalism has lead to a confusion in their understanding of the dispensation of grace, and of the relationship of the Church to Israel and to the Gentiles. Some dispensationalist being aware of this confusion attempt to clear it up by speaking of the dispensation of grace as the great parenthesis; that is, since the economy of grace was not the same as the Old Testament dispensations and thus to set the dispensation of grace apart from the other dispensations, it is called and treated as a great parenthesis in God's dealing with Israel and the Gentiles. During this parenthesis, God is dealing with the Church, not with Israel nor with the Gentiles. Not all dispensationalist (for example, Lewis Sperry Chafer) accept this interpretation of the dispensation of grace as a parenthesis. They just ignore the confusion of law and grace which reduces grace to law so that grace is no longer grace. But this confusion is caused by treating law and grace as dispensations.
What is the difference between law and grace? The difference is not: rules and no rules. The difference is in the relationship of the blessing to obedience. In the covenant of the law the bestowal of the blessing is conditioned upon obedience; obey in order to be blessed (Ezek. 18). In the covenant of grace the blessing is bestowed unconditionally to bring about obedience: obey because you are already blessed (John 13:34; Eph. 4:32; Titus 2:11-12; I John 3:3; 4:11, 19). Grace appeals to the unconditioned prior bestowal of the blessing as the grounds of obedience. Law, on the other hand, appeals to obedience to the law as the grounds of the bestowal of the blessing.
Grace is love in action to give what is needed, the blessing. The grace of God is the love of God in action to give what man needs, eternal life.
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son,Man is dead spiritually and needs to be made alive.
that everyone believing in Him, should not perish,
but have eternal life." (John 3:16 ERS).
"4 But God, who is rich in mercy,God in His love has given His only Son so that we could be made alive to God with Christ whom He raised Him from the dead. This act of God's love is the grace of God by which we are saved through faith.
out of the great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our trespasses,
made us alive together with Christ
(by grace you have been saved)." (Eph. 2:4-5)
"8 For by grace you have been saved through faith;The grace of God is God's love in action.
and this is not your own doing, it [being saved] is the gift of God --
9 not because of works,
lest any man should boast." (Eph. 2:8-9)
"11 And this is the testimony,
that God gave us eternal life,
and this life is in his Son.
12 He who has the Son has life;
he who has not the Son has not life." (I John 5:11-12)
And the law cannot make alive.
"Is the law then against the promises of God?The source of the promises of God is the grace of God and this promise is the promise of Christ who is the gift of life (Gal. 3:16). And the law does not annul this promise to Abraham.
Certainly not, for if the law could make alive,
then righteousness would indeed by the law." (Gal. 3:21)
"16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring.Dispensationalism would have the dispensation of promise annulled by the dispensation of the law, because it treats the promise to Abraham as a dispensation that ended when the dispensation of law began. The covenant of promise to Abraham was not a dispensation and God unconditionally by His grace fulfilled that covenant of promise when Christ came and provided the gift of salvation and life for all men by His death and resurrection. The law did not annul the promises of God, since the law could not make alive. The fulfillment of the promises of God in Jesus Christ did what the law could not do; only God could make alive. Man by keeping the law cannot make himself alive. There is no salvation by the law.
It does not say, 'And to offsprings.' referring to many,
but, referring to one, 'And to your offspring,' which is Christ.
17 This is what I mean:
the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward,
does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God,
so as to make the promise void.
18 For if the inheritance is by the law,
it is no longer by promise,
but God gave it to Abraham by a promise." (Gal. 3:16-18).