Today I want to give an overview of what is meant by the term “dispensationalism.” Yesterday we looked at covenantalism (here at this link), and tomorrow we will look at why these differences matter. If you can’t wait for that, or if you want this presentation in audio form, here it is as a sermon I preached last month.
And, as I mentioned yesterday, it is surprisingly difficult to find helpful overviews of this topic. Many are overly snarky and equally ignorant (“dispensationalists believe that locusts are helicopters and God has two brides!”). However here is an overview from Michael Vlach that I did find helpful.
Like covenantalism, dispensationalism is an approach to interpreting the narrative of the Bible. It is a framework that helps the reader understand how the meta-narrative of scripture is progressing. I define dispensationalism this way:
Dispensationalism is an evangelical theological system that sees biblical history as the progress of revelation from creation to consumation, with a particular focus on how God works through different eras/economies/ages. It stresses the distinction between those eras, particularly between the church and Israel.
Although the concept of dispensations as an interpretive grid is in the Westminster Confession (7.6), dispensationalism itself didn’t really develop until the 1800’s. While covenantalism is the system found inside of Presbyterianism, dispensationalism is what is generally found inside of fundamentalist, evangelical, non-denominational, or Bible churches–although, non-denominational as they are–there are always exceptions to that. Major seminaries that teach dispensationalism are Dallas Theological, Moody Bible Institute, and (of course!) The Master’s Seminary. Well known dispensationalists include Chuck Swindoll, John Feinberg, Erwin Lutzer, and John MacArthur.
In a nutshell, dispensationalism views the progression of history in stages that begin in the Garden of Eden and ends in the paradise of the New Heavens and New Earth. Through those stages, God is revealing one plan of salvation (faith in the Messiah) but he has worked out that plan differently in different times and with different people. In other words, the expression of faith under the Mosaic Covenant is not the same as the expression of faith in the New Covenant, or in the New Heavens and New Earth, for example. Thus dispensationalism tends to stress discontinuity between those stages, as it asks “what has changed?” or “what remains to be fulfilled?”
A key component of dispensationalism is that the church is seen as a new era, and it begins in Acts 2. Thus, the church is not seen as a continuation of Israel, but rather as a new economy in salvation history. Moreover, in dispensationalism, we are not now in the final stage of world history. Rather there remains future eras where God’s promises to Israel will be fulfilled.
This chart gives an overview of some of the different dispensations. Whereas covenantalism saw the covenants as an unfolding expansion, dispensationalists see them as more of a progression through history. Each is different and distinct, thus the term “discontinuity” or even “dispensations.” Another helpful contrast is this–while covenantalism sees all of the covenants as fulfilled directly in Christ, dispensationalism approaches them this way:
And of course a key component of dispensationalism is that some of the promises given to ethnic Israel in the Old Testament will in fact be fulfilled for Israel in the future. In other words, Jesus will return, reign on the earth from Jerusalem over the nations in the future millennial kingdom.
Tomorrow we will look at a few practical implications of the differences between dispensationalism and covenantalism.
