That question is asked whenever I happened to mention the word (which is not all that often). But, there is probably no approach to Scripture that has influenced Evangelical Christianity in the last 150 years more than has Dispensationalism. Most references to it currently are negative and at best are biased and at worst grossly unfair and vicious. Anyone who remembers the middle years of the 20th century, as I do, knows that in a typical evangelical (then called "fundamentalist") church service at least half of the people carried Scofield Reference Bibles. And, as the president of a major (nondispensational) evangelical seminary admitted in print around 20 years ago, the people who were doing the work of the Gospel in those days were most likely carrying Scofield Reference Bibles. By their fruits you shall know them.
The original Scofield Reference Bible of 1909/1917 was the main source of Dispensational teaching. The second main source was Larkin's Dispensational Truth, a book of charts that was used as a text at many Bible colleges from the 1920's to the '60's. I got my first copy of both of these when I was 17 years of age. Does this mean that I cannot give a fair and accurate appraisal of Dispensationalism? Without an ounce of pride I can say that I am probably as qualified as anyone to assess both the weaknesses and the strengths of this view of Scripture.
The word "dispensation" appears only four times in the Authorized (King James) Version: I Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10 & 3:2; Col. 1:25. It never appears in the NIV. The words 'administration', 'commission' and 'trust' are used instead. That is one of the reasons you rarely hear the word now. If you seek a lengthy history of Christian beliefs about the subject of biblical dispensations I refer you to books by Charles Ryrie and Frank Gabelein. Most Christians believe that there are at least two dispensations; Law and Grace. What is commonly called Dispensationalism believes in seven.
Innocence (from Creation until sin began); Conscience (until the Flood); Human Government (until the call of Abraham, but in a sense still in effect); Promise (until Moses); Law (until Christ); Church or Grace (until the Great Tribulation); and The Kingdom (beginning with the Coming of Christ and continuing until the New Heavens and New Earth). Three things are seen as essential to a dispensation: a DEPOSIT of Divine Revelation; human stewardship of this revelation; and a TIME PERIOD.
At this point in history I see that the MAIN THINGS about Dispensationalism are NOT how many dispensations or even the differences between them. The lasting impact of Dispensational teaching is the almost universal belief among biblical, evangelical Christians in an IMMINENT RAPTURE of the church. The second, and equally important, impact is the widespread support of Evangelicals for Israel as a nation and the Jews as an ethnic group.
Before I go further there is one criticism of Dispensationalism that I should deal with now. This is the accusation that Dispensationalists taught that there have been seven different ways of salvation. A few may have possibly implied that but I can say, as one who grew up in this teaching, that Genesis 15:6 was STRONGLY emphasized as teaching that anyone who was ever saved was saved by grace through faith plus nothing. Another criticism, with more merit to it, is that dispensationalists tended to "pigeon hole" passages of Scripture into certain dispensations and either say or imply "that is not for us today". This, I came to believe, was a valid criticism but it does not mean that there is nothing of value and benefit in Dispensationalism as a whole. At worst, some dispensationalists saw only the letters of Paul, and maybe not even all of them, as being "for us today". Both Anabaptists (Mennonites) and Reformed/Calvinists were greatly offended at the original Scofield Reference Bible for saying that "the Sermon on the Mount is neither the duty nor the privilege of the Church today". But those same people will often turn around and explain away the plain commands in the Sermon on the Mount such as "lend to everyone who asks you". So, their criticism is only partially valid.
In my next blog I will deal with one or two more of the strengths of Dispensationalism and will explain the ways I have sought to retain what was good and to correct what was wrong.
