New Page 1

Christian Chronicles, February 2005 - Volume 7, Issue 109

The Editor's Pen

The division between Covenant theology and Dispensationalism is deep. Both systems of interpretation began to be developed at about the same time in history, and a rivalry has sprung up between them. At times, it has been bitter; at times, personal attacks have been made against the proponents of Dispensationalism by Covenant theology adherents, most notably, John Gerstner, who has declared the eternal damnation of certain Dispensational theologians.

The difference between the two schools of thought lies chiefly in the relationship of the Church to Israel. Covenant theologians contend that the Israel of the Old Testament has been dismissed, and that the Church is the new Israel. Dispensational theologians believe that Israel and the Church are entirely separate entities, and that the prophecies, promises and warnings to one cannot be applied to the other.

The problem has arisen because that age-old issue of hermeneutics has not yet been resolved: whether the Bible is to be interpreted normally, like other written materials, or if it must be somehow “spiritualized.” Dispensationalists take the Bible for what it says, whereas Covenant theologians believe that there must be some spiritual application made in which what it says is not what it means. It is entirely possible to be a Covenant theologian and be saved, or to be a Dispensational theologian and be saved. It is equally possible for either to be unsaved. The difference between the two has much more to do with the way future events are going to unfold than it does with the doctrine of salvation. While there are theological issues that make the methods of interpretation incompatible, both generally teach that one is saved by grace alone through faith alone.

Perspectives

“...if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery... which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel…” (Eph 3:2-6)

The Greek word translated “dispensation” is “oikonomia.” It is a derivative of “oikonomos,” meaning a steward. Thus, a dispensation may be known as a stewardship. Strong’s Greek Dictionary defines it this way: “administration (of a household or estate); specifically, a (religious) “economy”: —dispensation, stewardship.” Dr. Ryrie states, “There is no more primary problem in the whole matter of Dispensationalism than that of definition. By this is meant not simply arriving at a single sentence definition of the word, but rather a complete definition and description of the concept” (Dispensationalism Today, Chas. Ryrie, Moody Press, Chicago, 1965, Pg 22). For many Christians, Dispensationalism is almost a dirty word. This, because opponents of Dispensationalism proclaim that Dispensationalists teach that there have been various methods of salvation, depending upon the dispensation in question. However, the claim is baseless. Salvation has always been by grace through faith. Essentially, Dispensationalism is a means of distinguishing between the various economies God has used in His dealings with mankind. Clearly, His requirements today are different than they were under the Law. We offer no blood sacrifices today as the Jews did under the Mosaic system. Sacrifices will again be offered during the Kingdom Age. Just as clearly, His dealings with men were different in the period from the Flood to the giving of the Law at Sinai than they were either before the Flood or after the giving of the Law. The issue in the various dispensations is not salvation, but testing. Scofield notes, “A dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect to his obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God. Three important concepts are implied in this definition: (1) a deposit of divine revelation concerning God’s will, embodying what God requires of man as to his conduct; (2) man’s stewardship of this divine revelation, in which he is responsible to obey it; and, (3) a time-period, often called an “age” during which this divine revelation is dominant in the testing of man’s obedience to God” (Holy Bible, Scofield Study System, Oxford University Press, New York, 2002, Page 4).

The shift from one form of testing to another, from one dispensation to another, has a very specific purpose. The purpose is the same in every dispensation, just as the manner of salvation is the same also. Salvation, as noted, is by grace through faith (see the center article, Salvation in the Dispensations), and one of God’s apparent purposes in shifting from one dispensation to the next is to show that no matter how simple or complex the test, man fails, and grace becomes necessary if anyone is to be saved. From the state of complete innocence in the Garden of Eden, where the only test was the prohibition of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, to the complex rituals and offerings under the Mosaic law, mankind failed. He ate the fruit in the one, and he killed his Messiah in the other. Even under the benevolent and righteous rule of the returned King, when the curse is lifted from the earth and peace is found among all nations, and when God Himself is seated on Earth’s throne, men and women will still refuse to believe the Word of God and will fail. Even under those perfect earthly conditions, people will be lost, and grace will remain as necessary as it was in the Garden of Eden.

Essentially, opponents of Dispensationalism have little upon which to base their opposition, so they build two straw men: (1) that Dispensationalism teaches various means of salvation, and, (2) that it is a recent development in theology. As to the first, it will be dealt with at length in this issue of Christian Chronicles. As to the second, James Bear, a Covenant theologian, said, “Of course, doctrines may be new and yet not untrue. We believe that the Holy Spirit can lead the Church into new apprehensions of truth. Again, a doctrine may be new in the sense that it is the further development of a previously held doctrine, or it may be new in the sense that it contradicts the previously held views. Even in the latter case it may not be untrue, but certainly its validity must be subjected to a much more searching scrutiny” (James E. Bear, Dispensationalism and the Covenant of Grace, Richmond: Union Seminary Review, 1938, Page 4).

Dispensationalism as a system was developed about the same time that Covenant theology as a system was developed. However, the early Church fathers made reference to the dispensations, though they did not fully develop the theology of Dispensationalism as it stands today. None of the great confessions of our faith prior to the Westminster Confession in 1647 even referred to Covenant theology, and even then it was not developed as fully as it would be by the Reformed theologians later. Most of the opposition to Dispensationalism springs from Covenant theology.

Middle East Update

Ariel Sharon and Mahmoud Abbas met in Egypt, reaching an agreement to announce a ceasefire in the four year old conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis. Patrick Henry, in his famous “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” speech said, “Gentlemen may cry, ‘Peace! Peace!’ but there is no peace…” Even as Israel is removing the roadblocks, allowing traffic in and out of the Gaza Strip, Hezbollah, one of the militant groups among the Palestinians, is offering as much as $100,000 for anyone who will engage in suicide bombings. Their intention is to foil the joint efforts between Israel and the Palestinians to finally achieve Middle East peace.

“We know that Hezbollah has been trying to recruit suicide bombers in the name of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades to carry out attacks which would sabotage the truce,’ said one official, referring to a militant group inside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction.

“Another official said intercepted e-mail communications and bank transactions suggested Hezbollah had raised its cash offers to militants, but it was unclear if this reflected a heightened desire to see violence flare up or a dearth of recruits.

"Now they are willing to pay $100,000 for a whole operation (suicide bombing) whereas in the past they paid $20,000, then raised it to $50,000” (Reuters, Feb 9, 2005).

While those on both sides who are essentially secular are tired of the bloodshed and the insecurity of their lives, there are large factions on both sides who are very zealous in their religion. The former would make whatever compromise is necessary in order to live in peace at last. The latter, however, will make no compromise, but will continue the struggle against those whom they consider to be infidels. And that is why there will be no peace in the Middle East. Oil and water do not mix. Light and darkness cannot occupy the same space.

That there will be a peace treaty is inevitable (Dan 9:27). The world will press Israel until she recognizes a sovereign state of Palestine. The governments there will agree to and ratify a treaty, but it will not end the armed struggle. “For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape” (1 Thes 5:3).

The bulk of the populations on both sides will accept their governments’ claim that safety and prosperity can only be found when the two parties can agree to live side by side in peace. But the religious zealots among both Palestinians and Jews will seek to stir up the ancient filial hatred, and the violence will always simmer just below the surface of their civilities. Like a serpent lurking beneath a rock, militants will strike when they are least expected to do so. Both governments realize that their economies cannot sustain an endless struggle. They increasingly sense that commerce must supplant violence. And so it might be between two Gentile peoples, but there is a far deeper problem in the Middle East. Gentile nations might adjust their borders in a reasonable manner in order to accommodate the requirements of peace, expecting and receiving the acquiescence of their citizens.

But this land is holy land. It is not given to man to compromise, to adjust, to negotiate. The borders of Israel were not determined by man, and man will not successfully arbitrate and remove a single square centimeter of it. Oh, it will happen, but only temporarily. And then those labor pains will come upon them. Joel tells us that one of the primary reasons that the Gentiles will suffer in the tribulation is because they have divided up that land. It is not Israel’s to give away, for God has claimed it as His own (Joel 3:2). The Valley of Jehoshaphat will undergo the dark days of God’s judgment, as its name implies.

Christian friends, it is astounding that there is no discussion in the true Church concerning this peace process. We ought not engage the Church in political processes, but this is not a political process; it is a theological process. It is eschatology unfolding right before our eyes. The Church ought at least to be examining the entirety of its prophetic understanding, but there is a deep and vast silence concerning this most important moment in time since the first Advent of the Jewish Messiah. These are the most exciting times to be Christians since the persecutions ended. We have much reason to be hopeful. Look up!

Fruit of the Vine

Fine gold must taste of the hammer and the torch before it becomes beautiful jewelry. So it is also with Christians. God builds up our faith through trials and troubles. Indeed, most Christians were saved in the first place during a time when they were forced to cry out to God for help, whether because of conviction concerning some sin or because of some other trauma over which they had no control.

Unsaved people will wait until that moment of quiet desperation before coming to a Christian for ministry. But when the Holy Spirit has prepared the soil, He will then turn up the heat until the lost soul seeks one whom he knows to be a committed Christian. It is important for Christians to live moral and godly lives, but it is also vital that God’s children understand sound doctrine.

When a lost person approaches a Christian in the throes of some deeply troubling issue, he must be taken immediately to Calvary. He must be told of the boundless love of God. He will not know what he needs. His mind will be on whatever the issue is that is troubling him, but what he needs is the gospel of grace. To sit down and reason with him about his misery will be fruitless. It is not wrong to be compassionate. The love of God compels us to be. But, just as a physician must give the patient what he needs to make him healthy, so must the Christian relieve the spiritual anguish by leading the lost to eternal life with the Scriptures.

Hermeneutics is the Difference

Whether or not one is a Dispensationalist depends on the method he uses to interpret the Scriptures. In fact, a person’s whole view of prophecy is determined by his hermeneutics (his method of interpretation). One school teaches that the Bible is a spiritual Book, and must be “spiritualized” if it is to be properly understood. The other school teaches that the Bible is already spiritual, and needs only to be interpreted normally, as other written material. The “spiritualizers” contend that the Bible is allegorical, and does not mean what it says, but that a “spiritual” interpretation must be applied.

Dispensationalists hold that God chose human language as the primary means of revealing Himself to mankind. The basic purpose of language is to transfer thoughts from one mind to another. How very cruel it would be if God should choose language to reveal Himself, and then couch that revelation in mystical concepts that we could not grasp without making what He said mean something that He did not say. If the Bible did not make perfect sense, interpreted normally, then there might be some reason to suppose that it must not mean what it says. But if there is a complete harmony of doctrine in a normal interpretive method, then why would anyone suppose that God meant something other than what He said? Someone earlier said, “If the Bible makes sense, why make nonsense out of it?”

Those who employ a normal hermeneutics have a distinct advantage over those who use a “spiritualizing” or allegorical approach to interpretation. That is, by having the Bible mean precisely what it says, the Bible itself becomes the authority for an interpretation. If a person says that a certain doctrine is true, one may go straight to the Scriptures to find out whether or not the interpretation is correct. However, if the Bible does not mean what it says, then there is no way to determine whether or not an interpretation is correct. The only limit to a person’s interpretations would then become the scope of his imagination. If there is no authority other than a man’s word, then we are left with no way to judge whether an interpretation is correct.

A further argument against the “spiritualizers” and the allegorizers is that they are inconsistent. Most use a normal hermeneutical approach to all of the Scriptures except those that relate to prophetic themes. Their approach is necessary simply because the Bible itself does not support their view of prophecy. Most hold correct views of soteriology, but when it comes to prophecy, they must twist the Scriptures in order to make them seem to support their various schemes. Among those who employ a normal hermeneutical approach there is broad uniformity, but among the “spiritualizers” there is a vast array of differing interpretations. And, since none can use the Scriptures to support their positions, they are left to argue among themselves as to who is right and who is wrong.

Those who use a normal interpretive method freely admit that there are types and shadows, and that there are allegories in the Scriptures. The difference is that these people contend that the Bible itself must interpret the type or allegory, as Paul does in Gal 4:22-24. If there is a symbol, the Bible interprets the symbol, so that there is never any room for error on the part of the interpreter.

The most crushing argument in favor of Dispensationalism is that a normal method of interpretation leads invariably and inevitably to a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulational conclusion that clearly separates Israel and the Church.

Eternal Security In John 10:27-29

Editor’s note:

This is an article by one of our subscribers, Lloyd Olson, in response to the August, 2004, issue of Christian Chronicles, in which we dealt with the doctrine of Eternal Security.

John 10:27-29

27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.

Some would point to verse 27 and argue that the two present indicatives show that progressive continuous action makes this a “conditional” promise. This position is represented by the following quotes.

Only as we continue hearing and following Jesus are we secure in His and the Father’s hands.

Although eternal life cannot cease, our participation in that eternal life depends upon our continued hearing and believing in Jesus. If we yield, we perish.

The promise of Jesus’ safeguarding does not relieve His followers from the necessity of following Him. Whoever has fallen away is no longer a sheep.

We cannot be protected against ourselves in spite of ourselves.

Believers may of their own free will fail to follow Jesus to life and victory. Although no power in heaven or earth can ever pull us from God’s lavish grace through Jesus, the forfeiture of that grace “may be brought about by the free-will of the Christian himself.”

But God uses the most powerful Greek constructs to emphasize the impossibility of getting out (or even thinking about getting out) of His hands. The conditional security view makes a serious error: they use a less than first year Greek grammar exegesis.

Their misguided deception emphasizes the wrong thing. Since their overarching system replaces Christ-centered righteousness for a human-centered obedience, they are driven to force this text to agree with their system rather than using this text as the basis of a biblical system. Their approach is to use only a part of the passage and ignore the total context. They choose to emphasize:

the present tense verbs of hearing and knowing in verse 27a,

eternal life never ceases; but we might not apprehend it in verse 28a,

no one is able to steal (snatch) from God verses 28c & 29.

The “conditional security” view shows a blatant disregard for proper Greek exegesis. This is due, in part, from using Scripture to support preset dogmatic views rather than using Scripture to shape dogmatic views.

Although there is wiggle room for Shank’s unusual interpretation of the Greek, there is more in the context that needs to be mentioned. Shank stopped his investigation with the present tense. He failed to mention that the words “they shall never perish” uses a double negative and the aorist subjunctive in combination. This means that it is the most emphatic denial that the Greek can use.

The double negative by itself is used to highlight or underscore the impossibility of the stated action occurring.

“The combination of the double negative occurs 96 times. With the light that the papyri have thrown upon this doubling of the negatives, we can now say unreservedly that the negatives were doubled for the purpose of stating denials or prohibitions emphatically. … people used the doubling of negatives for making categorical and emphatic denials,”

The double negative stresses the total absence of what it negates.

While the simple present mood denotes reality, the simple subjunctive mood denotes a step away from reality into probability. On the flip side, while the negative of the present denies reality, the negative of the subjunctive denies even a step away from reality. Together, the double negative with the subjunctive has the force of a categorical and emphatic denial. Wallace says that the double negative with the subjunctive “rules out even the idea as being a possibility.”

The Greek language is doing everything possible to make a categorical timeless denial that one can get out of Jesus’ hand. Not only can one never again perish, you can’t even think about it! How much clearer does it have to be?

If you look at the total context, you’ll not be deceived by partial explanations. Greek knowledge can really help differentiate between right and wrong – if one’s personal self-righteous human-centered dogma does not interfere.

The Church Age - The Sixth Dispensation - HGS

A new age was announced by our Lord Jesus Christ in Matt. 12:47 - l3: 52. The Church was clearly prophesied by Him in Matt. 16:18, purchased by the shedding of His blood on Calvary (Rom. 3:24-25), and constituted as the Church after His resurrection and ascension at Pentecost when, in accordance with His promise (Acts 1:5), individual believers were for the first time baptized with the Holy Spirit into a unified spiritual organism, likened to a body of which Christ is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-18). Because of the emphasis upon the Holy Spirit, this age has also been called “the dispensation of the Spirit.”

The point of testing in this dispensation is the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, the message of good news about His death and resurrection (John 19:30; 1 Cor. 15:3-5). The continuing, cumulative revelation of the previous dispensations combines with this fuller revelation to emphasize the utter sinfulness and lostness of man and the adequacy of the historically completed work of Christ to save by grace through faith all who come to God by Him (John 14:6; Rom. 3:21-16; Eph. 2:8-9; 1 Tim. 4:10). As those saved individuals who compose Christ’s true Church fulfill the Lord’s command to preach the Gospel to the ends of the earth (Mark 16:15; Acts 1:8), God, during this age, is taking out from Jews and Gentiles “a people for His name” (Acts 15:14), called “the Church” and henceforth carefully distinguished from both Jews and gentiles as such (1 Cor. 10:32; Gal. 3:27-28; Eph. 2:11-18).

The Church Age will be brought to a close by the translation of the true Church from the earth to meet her Lord in the air at a point of time known to God but unrevealed to men, and ever held before believers as an imminent and happy hope, encouraging them in loving service and holiness of life. This event is usually called “the rapture” (see 1 Thess. 4:17).

Speaking of the responsibility and of the condition of the Church today, A. W. Tozer wrote the following regarding “The First Obligation of the Church.”

“The first look of the church is toward Christ, who is her Head, her Lord, and her All.

After that she must be self-regarding and world-regarding, with a proper balance between the two.

By “self-regarding” I mean that the church must examine herself constantly to see if she be in the faith; she must engage in severe self-criticism with a cheerful readiness to make amends; she must live in a state of perpetual penitence, seeking God with her whole heart; she must constantly check her life and conduct against the Holy Scriptures and bring her life into line with the will of God.

By “world-regarding”, I mean that the church must know why she is here on earth; that she must acknowledge her indebtedness to all mankind (Rom. 1:14,15); that she must take seriously the words of her Lord, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, and, ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

The task of the church is twofold: to spread Christianity throughout the world and to make sure that the Christianity she spreads is the pure New Testament kind.

Christianity will always reproduce itself after its kind. A worldly-minded, unspiritual church, when she crosses the ocean to give her witness to peoples of other tongues and other cultures, is sure to bring forth on other shores a Christianity much like her own.

The popular notion that the first obligation of the church is to spread the gospel to the uttermost parts of the earth is false. Her first obligation is to be spiritually worthy to spread it. Our Lord said, Go ye, but He also said Tarry ye, and the tarrying had to come before the going. Had the disciples gone forth as missionaries before the Day of Pentecost, it would have been an overwhelming spiritual disaster, for they could have done no more than make converts after their own likeness, and this would have altered for the worse the whole history of the Western world and had consequences throughout the ages to come.

To spread an effete, degenerate brand of Christianity to pagan lands is not to fulfill the commandment of Christ or discharge our obligation to the heathen. These terrible words of Jesus haunt my soul: Ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

It would appear logical that a subnormal, powerless church would not engage in missionary activity, but again, the facts contradict the theory. Christian groups that have long ago lost every trace of moral fire nevertheless continue to grow at home and reproduce themselves in other lands. Indeed, there is scarcely a fringe sect or heretical cult these days but is enjoying amazing success among the backward peoples of the world.

The evangelical wing of the church has in recent years become world-regarding to a remarkable degree. Within the last twenty years, evangelical missionary activity on foreign fields has been stepped up tremendously. But there is in the whole thing one dangerous weakness. That weakness is the naïve assumption that we have only to reach the last tribe with our brand of Christianity and the world has been evangelized. This is an assumption that we dare not make.

Evangelical Christianity is now tragically below the New Testament standard. Worldliness is an accepted part of our way of life. Our religious mood is social instead of spiritual. We have lost the art of worship. We are not producing saints. Our models are successful businessmen, celebrated athletes and theatrical personalities. We carry on our religious activities after the methods of the modern advertiser. Our homes have been turned into theaters. Our literature is shallow and our hymnody borders on sacrilege. And scarcely anyone appears to care.

We must have a better kind of Christian soon or within another half-century we may have no true Christianity at all. Increased numbers of demi-Christians is not enough. We must have a reformation.” The professing church is preaching a gospel of works and not of grace. But the dispensation of the church is also called, rightly, the dispensation of grace.

Salvation in the Dispensations

There are two primary arguments against Dispensationalism: (1) that it is a recent development in theology, and, (2) that it teaches various methods of salvation, depending upon the dispensation. The former is adequately dealt with in the Perspectives article on the front page of this publication. The latter will be dealt with here.

The Dispensation of Innocence — From the creation of man until the Fall, salvation was not an issue. During this dispensation the test of man was whether or not he would violate the single prohibition of eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Until he did so, salvation was not necessary. But when he ate of that bitter fruit, he was immediately in need of redemption. No longer innocent, Adam had failed the test in the dispensation of innocence. He had to do something in order to be lost, but there was nothing that he could do to save himself. The fig leaves did not hide, but rather advertised his sin.

The Dispensation of Conscience — The first taste of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was crushing. It took Adam and Eve from life to death, from the light of the glory of God to the darkness of spiritual death, from the heights of bliss to the depths of despair, from faith to fear. They hid themselves. They tried to cover their sins with the works of their own hands, with fig leaves. They were lost and they knew it, but they still did not know what death was. God had told them that if they ate that fruit they would surely die. How their hearts must have quaked the first time they looked into the lifeless eyes of some dead animal. Then the reality of death would have struck like a hammer blow. But God made a provision for their sin. He slew an animal, presumably a lamb, but we don’t know that. God surely tore away those fig leaves, ripped the hide from the animal and then wrapped that bloody hide around their naked bodies. They must have been aghast. Without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin (Heb 9:22). Adam and Eve certainly understood that every future sin must be dealt with by blood sacrifice, for their descendants, through Seth’s line, and on through Noah’s line, continued to offer sacrifices. They believed God and, like Abraham, it was accounted to them for righteousness (Heb 11:4). It was not the killing of the animal that effected their salvation, but the faith that prompted the offering. Salvation was still by God’s grace through faith. During the dispensation of conscience, man was required to cling to all known good and to abstain from all known evil, and he was to offer sacrifices for his sins. All down through the generations, from Adam to Seth to Enosh to Cainan to Mahalalel to Jared to Enoch to Methuselah to Lamech to Noah, one bloodline alone continued to offer sacrifices for their sins. Mankind failed in this dispensation as well, until “...the Lord said, ‘My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years’” (Gen 6:3). It would take Noah one hundred and twenty years to build the ark, and the flood waters then came upon the earth, ending the dispensation of conscience.

The Dispensation of Human Government — After the Flood, God ordained human government. Heretofore, men wore their sacrifices, as Adam and Eve had done. Now they began to eat them. It had not rained on the earth prior to the Flood, nor had man eaten meat. Man was now to be ruled by man through government, instituted for the purpose of protecting human life. Capital punishment was ordained (Gen 9:5). In the dispensation of conscience, God’s demands of man were internal, driven by an innate knowledge of good and evil. Having failed in that dispensation, now man would be governed externally, by authorities established by God. The authorities were to rule righteously and fairly, and to resist the authorities was to resist God, then as now (Rom 13:1-2). When man passed from the dispensation of innocence to that of conscience, he took nothing of his innocence with him. But when he passed from conscience into the dispensation of human government, his conscience did not depart from him the way his innocence did when he sinned. It was carried over into the new dispensation. In the former dispensation, the test of mankind was individual, and all failed except Noah, his three sons and their wives. In the dispensation of human government, mankind would fail again by his failure to rule righteously. Every government that man has ever devised has become corrupt and self-serving. Every civilization that sprang from the loins of Shem, Ham and Japheth has failed, and those that exist today are failing at a faster pace perhaps than any that have existed before them. In the dispensation of human government, however, man was still individually responsible to offer sacrifices for their individual sins. The very first thing that Noah did upon leaving the ark was to build an altar and offer burnt offerings of every clean animal and of every clean bird (Gen 8:20). This practice would continue through succeeding dispensations until the Lamb of God should shed His blood for the sins of the world. As in the dispensation of conscience, however, it was not the sacrifices themselves that effected salvation, but the faith that drove the godly line from Seth to Noah to offer them. They believed God, and thus they obeyed Him in that regard. Salvation, as always, was by grace through faith. Works follow faith, but not for salvation but because of it.

The Dispensation of Promise — From Noah, through his son Shem, to the call of Abram, did the dispensation of human government last. Human government did not cease with the beginning of the dispensation of promise, but it continues today. It simply is no longer the test which God has applied to man. God made an unconditional promise to Abram to accomplish three things in particular: (1) He made specific provisions affecting Abram, Isaac and Jacob, declaring that individual blessing depended upon individual obedience; (2) He promised blessing through Abraham’s seed to Israel, to inherit a specific territory; to the Church as in Christ (Gal 3:16, 28-29); and to the Gentile nations (Gen 12:3); and, (3) He promised to bless those who blessed Abraham’s descendants and to curse those who cursed them. Later, God promised that Abraham’s descendants would be as innumerable as the stars. “And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness” (Gen 15:6). Now, it is clear that Abraham failed in many ways to remain righteous. He lied to Pharaoh, to Abimelech, and conspired with Sarah to have a child by Hagar. Thus, he offered sacrifices. But, as in the prior dispensations, those sacrifices were the fruit of his earlier faith, and it was not the act of making the sacrifice that saved him, but his trust in the word of the Lord. He displayed his faith, and righteousness was imputed to him.

The Dispensation of the Law — The dispensation of promise lasted until Moses led the Jews out of captivity in Egypt. He climbed Mount Sinai where he received the stone tablets containing the ten commandments. While there, he saw the pattern of the tabernacle in heaven, which he would use in the construction of the earthly tabernacle. The dispensation of the law involved much more than ten commandments, however. The total amounted to six hundred thirteen ordinances and regulations. It governed all of Jewish life, from civil to criminal to economic to ceremonial and ritual religious laws. Every facet of Jewish life was governed by the Law of Moses. God knew that the Jews would not be able to keep the law and so He made provision for the forgiveness of sins under the law. The law portrayed the righteousness of God Himself (Rom 3: 21), and to keep it perfectly, one would have to be as righteous as God Himself. Those who say that dispensationalists teach various methods of salvation evidently do not understand our grasp of the fact that the law was not given as a means of getting to heaven, but as a means of revealing the sin that is in us all (Rom 3:19-20). As in every dispensation, under the Law of Moses, sacrifices were not offered as a means of salvation, but as a sign of the Jews’ belief in the Word of God. They could not fully grasp the significance of the sacrifices because the ultimate sacrifice of the Lamb of God had not yet been offered, but they trusted that God would impute righteousness to them on account of their faith. Righteousness was not imputed to them on the basis of the sacrifice, but on the basis of the faith that prompted the sacrifices. Oz Mark, a regular contributor to Christian Chronicles, wrote an extensive article on grace during the dispensation of the law on page five of this edition of CC.

The Dispensation of Grace — Also called the dispensation of the Church, the dispensation of grace involves the simplest test to date. A person needs only to hear and believe the Gospel in order to have the same righteousness that was imputed to Abraham imputed to himself. Since the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, no further blood sacrifices are required of man. The simplest of all the dispensations, the dispensation of grace tests man this way: Will you believe that the shed blood was sufficient to pay for all of your sins? If you believe, you are saved; if you do not believe, you are not saved. Our works follow our saving faith.

The Dispensation of the Kingdom — When Christ returns and establishes His kingdom on earth, the dispensation of the kingdom will be initiated by His coronation. Although salvation will remain by grace through faith, sacrifices will again be offered. Those sacrifices, however, will not be viewed as judgmental in nature, but will be seen clearly as celebrations of the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. Rather than a time of remembrance of sins, the sacrifices of the Kingdom Age will be festive in nature, celebrating the love of God toward man. As in every dispensation, in the dispensation of the kingdom, a person will need only to appropriate the sacrifice of a living, visible and resurrected Redeemer to himself in order to be saved.

Dispensationalism is merely a means of showing the marvelous order in the Word of God. Breaking the various economies down into these dispensations makes the Bible easier to understand, but it does not affect sound doctrine otherwise. It draws a clear distinction between Israel and the Church, and non-dispensationalists generally tend to blur that distinction, with many saying that the Church is the “new” Israel. With non-dispensationalists, the promises made to Israel and the prophecies concerning the Jews are transferred to the Church. Dispensationalism teaches that the two entities are separate altogether, and that the promises to one cannot be applied to the other. Even non-dispensationalists agree that if a plain or normal interpretation is the correct method of interpretation, then Dispensationalism must be the correct interpretation. The attacks made against Dispensationalism are straw men, without basis in fact, made by men whose theology cannot be supported by a normal interpretation of the Scriptures. Since a normal interpretation leads inexorably to premillennial Dispensationalism, they must attack it.

Grace Under Law - OMM

We know the ministry of the law is one of death (2 Cor. 3:7) and fear (Heb 12:21). God extended grace during the administration of law. The giving of Torah itself was not an act of grace but a burden (Acts 15:10). That God would forgive transgressors of the law was pure grace. David learned this blessed truth when he exercised faith toward the Lord after he had sinned.

“How blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, Whose sin is covered! How blessed is the man to whom the LORD does not impute iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no deceit! When I kept silent about my sin, my body wasted away… I acknowledged my sin to You, And my iniquity I did not hide; I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the LORD"; And You forgave the guilt of my sin” (Psa 32:1-3a, 5). Then again, David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD." And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die” (2 Sam 12:13).

Also, God did not wipe Israel out entirely for their sin in Exodus 32. This was due to Moses interceding for the people. This taste of grace caused him to hunger for more.

Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend. When Moses returned to the camp, his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, would not depart from the tent. Then Moses said to the LORD, “See, You say to me, 'Bring up this people!' But You Yourself have not let me know whom You will send with me. Moreover, You have said, 'I have known you by name, and you have also found favor in My sight.' Now therefore, I pray You, if I have found favor in Your sight, let me know Your ways that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your sight. Consider too, that this nation is Your people.

And He said, “My presence shall go with you, and I will give you rest." Then he said to Him, "If Your presence does not go with us, do not lead us up from here. "For how then can it be known that I have found favor in Your sight, I and Your people? Is it not by Your going with us, so that we, I and Your people, may be distinguished from all the other people who are upon the face of the earth?" The LORD said to Moses, "I will also do this thing of which you have spoken; for you have found favor in My sight and I have known you by name." Then Moses said, "I pray You, show me Your glory!" And He said, "I Myself will make all My goodness pass before you, and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show compassion on whom I will show compassion.” (Exo 33:11-19).

Please note the Bible states the people in the desert only knew the works of the Lord. But Moses knew His ways of grace!

He made known His ways to Moses, His acts to the sons of Israel” (Psa 103:7).

Even Gentiles (to whom the law was not given! Rom. 2:14) could come to the Lord by receiving grace through Israel under the law.

“Then she fell on her face, bowing to the ground and said to him, ‘Why have I found favor in your sight that you should take notice of me, since I am a foreigner?" Boaz replied to her, "All that you have done for your mother-in-law after the death of your husband has been fully reported to me, and how you left your father and your mother and the land of your birth, and came to a people that you did not previously know. "May the LORD reward your work, and your wages be full from the LORD, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to seek refuge." Then she said, "I have found favor in your sight, my lord, for you have comforted me and indeed have spoken kindly to your maidservant, though I am not like one of your maidservants." At mealtime Boaz said to her, "Come here, that you may eat of the bread and dip your piece of bread in the vinegar." So she sat beside the reapers; and he served her roasted grain, and she ate and was satisfied and had some left” (Ruth 2:10-14).

Here Ruth is allowed to partake of the blessings of the sufferings of Messiah (bread soaked in vinegar) via a kinsman redeemer of Israel. Thereby she is now welcome into the commonwealth of Israel (sitting with the reapers), not by law but grace.

And God demonstrated sovereign grace on the worst of Israel’s enemies because of His great compassion and love.

He prayed to the LORD and said, “Please LORD, was not this what I said while I was still in my own country? Therefore in order to forestall this I fled to Tarshish, for I knew that You are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, and one who relents concerning calamity. Therefore now, O LORD, please take my life from me, for death is better to me than life." The LORD said, "Do you have good reason to be angry?" Jon 4:11 "Should I not have compassion on Nineveh, the great city in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know the difference between their right and left hand, as well as many animals?” (Jon 4:2-4).

Dear Christian, God is pouring out grace on us today. And if God could utterly forgive during the dispensation of law…

“How will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?” (2 Co 3:8)