What is Dispensationalism? Is it Heretical?

Rev. Ronald Hanko

[Originally published in the Covenant Reformed News, vol. 3, nos. 5-7]

What is Dispensationalism?

The name “dispensationalism” refers to the belief that history is divided into different and separate periods (or “dispensations”) in which God deals with mankind in different ways (N.B., few dispensationalists agree on the exact number of dispensations). These dispensations are not just clearer revelations of what preceded, but entirely new and different revelations, that have little or nothing to do with what preceded. For example, the Old Testament (the old dispensation) has little or nothing to say for the New Testament (or new dispensation) believer. It is primarily, even exclusively, for national Israel.

There are several teachings, then, that are basic to all dispensationalism:

(1) That all Scripture is to be interpreted literally. By this, dispensationalists mean that nothing in Scripture can be figurative, symbolic, or spiritualized—e.g., Israel always means Israel and never refers to the church (yet the Bible says that parts of itself are symbolic—Revelation 1:2 says, “he sent and signified it”).

(2) That God has two peoples, Israel and the church (but see Acts 7:38, which calls Israel “the church in the wilderness”). Whether the two are forever separate is a matter of debate. Some would say that “never the twain shall meet” even in eternity; others say that they will be together in eternity, but, even then, they are nevertheless two different and distinct groups with different revelations, different promises, different futures, and different relationships to God and Christ (e.g., He is “King and Lord” of Israel, but “Head” of the church).

(3) That God has more than one plan in the Old and New Testaments for Israel and the church. The church, in other words, is not part of God’s initial plan, but a kind of “parenthesis” (the dispensationalists’ own word) in history. Classical dispensationalism, as represented by the Scofield Reference Bible, even teaches a different way of salvation for Israel than by faith in Jesus Christ (cf. Acts 4:12)—i.e., God’s plan for them is different to the extent of providing another way of salvation.

(4) That different parts of Scripture have reference to different groups of people—e.g., the Sermon on the Mount is for the Jews, not for the church. Especially dispensationalism would emphasize that none of the promises and prophecies of the Old Testament have reference to the New Testament church; they are all part of God’s revelation to Israel alone and their fulfilment is for the Jews in the earthly land of Israel also.

(5) That law and grace are opposites (cf. Gal. 4:21). This means, obviously, that the Ten Commandments have no application or authority for New Testament Christians (Jesus’ statement about the law in Matthew 5:17-18 is one reason most dispensationalists would say that the Sermon on the Mount is “Jewish”).

With all these distinctions between dispensations, between Israel and the church, between law and grace, etc., dispensationalism claims to be “rightly dividing the Word of truth” (II Tim. 2:15). We believe it wrongly divides the Word.

Is Dispensationalism Heretical?

Is dispensationalism heresy? We believe it is.

We believe, first, that the literalism of dispensationalism is wrong. The writer who said, “We can best criticize the literalists by saying that none really exist,” was exactly right. It is impossible to take everything in Scripture in a strictly literal sense. What could possibly be wrong, anyway, with spiritualizing some things in Scripture (without denying their historical reality), when we are told that understanding the things of God is a matter of “comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (I Cor. 2:13)?

Their literalism is especially wrong where it really matters, e.g., in the relationship between Israel and the church. In many passages, Israel is simply a synonym for the church (Acts 7:38; Heb. 12:22-23). What is more, the Bible plainly tells us that not all are Israel that called Israel, but only the children of the promise, i.e., the Bible itself “spiritualizes” Israel (Rom. 9:6-8). The Bible even identifies believing Gentiles as part of the true Israel in some passages (Gal. 3:7-9; Phil. 3:3).

Dispensationalism’s view of Israel is a very dangerous view as well. Given the influence dispensationalism has had with its view that the church is only a kind of “parenthesis” in history, it is no wonder that the visible church is so much neglected today. How can the unity, life, and work of the church be of any real importance if the church is only a “mystery parenthesis” in God’s plan?

The disjunction between Israel and the church leads to a further abuse of the Word of God. If, in view of the difference between the church and Israel, large parts of Scripture really do not apply to the church and to believers in the New Testament (except perhaps as matters of curiosity), then what Paul says in II Timothy 3:16-17 is simply not true for us as New Testament believers, i.e., that “all Scripture … is profitable.”

Dispensationalism is also, both in its disjunction between law and grace and in its teaching about Christ, destructive of godliness and sanctification. Its teaching that Christ is not Lord and King of the church means, in practice, that one can have Christ as Saviour without having Him as Lord—that one can be saved without ever surrendering his whole life to Christ and serving Christ as Lord in every area of life. Thus, the notion that there are “carnal Christians,” i.e., those who have been justified, but who continue to live wicked and sinful lives, continues to be popular among dispensationalists.

Though many modern dispensationalists insist that there is only one way of salvation, they always hedge at this point, tending to deny that salvation in the Old Testament was really by faith in Jesus Christ. One writer, for example, says that although faith in Christ is the only way of salvation, the content of faith was different in the Old Testament. But is not Christ also the content of faith? And by changing the content of faith, is not this writer really denying what he has just affirmed—that Christ is the only way of salvation?

For all these reasons, especially the last, we consider dispensationalism to be “another gospel,” a fundamental departure from the truth of God’s Word. We say this, however, not to put dispensationalists beyond the hope of salvation, but to emphasize the seriousness of their errors.

How Were Old Testament Believers Saved?

What is the view of Reformed believers of the dispensational teaching that before the cross man was saved in prospect of Christ’s atoning sacrifice, though believing the revelation thus far given him?

Modern dispensationalism would put more emphasis on this.  Older dispensationalism tended to teach that salvation in the Old Testament was not through faith in Christ. We say “tended,” because there is a lack of clarity at this point. On the one hand, even the older dispensationalists affirmed that salvation is only through Jesus Christ. Yet in their theology of “dispensations” they constantly denied it.

The Scofield Reference Bible, for example, says, “As a dispensation, grace begins with the death and resurrection of Christ … The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works as the fruit of salvation” (p. 115).

Newer dispensationalists are much more careful at this point, explicitly repudiating any kind of “works” salvation in the Old Testament and insisting that salvation is only by faith in Jesus Christ. Yet even they deny it. Charles Ryrie, for example, says that the content of faith was different in the Old Testament, and explains by saying, “We believe that it was historically impossible that [the Old Testament saints] should have had as the conscious object of their faith the incarnate, crucified Son, the Lamb of God (John 1:29), and that it is evident that they did not comprehend as we do that the sacrifices depicted the person and work of Christ” (Dispensationalism Today, p. 123).

What about John 8:56: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it and was glad”?  What about Isaiah 53:7: “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth”? Certainly, the Old Testament believers did not see as clearly as we do, but it is a denial of Christ as the only way of salvation to say that the content of faith was different in the Old Testament.  Christ Himself, in His suffering, death, and resurrection, is the content of saving faith. That is the only reason faith justifies and saves. “There is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

The problem is inherent in dispensationalism.

One writer speaks of “[the] foundational assumption that there is a strong dichotomy (separation—RH) between Israel and the church, such that the Old Testament saints will not be in the Body and Bride of Christ in eternity.”  This means, he says, that “the dispensational system imposes on its consistent adherents the necessity of explaining Old Testament salvation in such a way that Old Testament salvation does not involve covenant membership in the Body of Christ, and to be in the Body and Bride of Christ is to be in the church universal, and for the Old Testament saints to be in the church universal is to deny dispensationalism.”

The statement that the Old Testament believer was saved in prospect of Christ’s sacrifice is not in itself wrong, therefore. The problem is that dispensationalism continues to use such statements to hide its teaching that salvation in the Old Testament was not in Christ. For this reason, especially, we continue to reject dispensationalism as an unbiblical departure from the truth.

*       *       *       *       *       *

The Covenant Reformed News is a free monthly periodical dealing with biblical and theological subjects. First published in 1992, over 400 issues have been produced and sent to people in all the 6 continents of the world. (The News is also distributed by various churches in the US, Canada, the Philippines and the Republic of Ireland, plus Hungarian translations go out each month by e-mail.)

If you would like to receive the News free each month by e-mail or post (if in the British Isles), please send an email to Rev. Angus Stewart at pastor@cprc.co.uk or click the following link: https://cprc.co.uk/covenant-reformed-news-sign-up/.