Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.
2 Timothy 2:15
The Bible is God’s only inspired, inerrant (i.e., without any errors) written revelation to man. God’s written Word, which is called Scripture, tells us of His plan and purpose for His creation and this will surely come to past. Scripture provides the standard through which history is interpreted. The Bible, being as it is God’s literal Word of His plan for history, must be interpreted literally and historically. God’s plan includes different dispensations of history through which mankind is tested. Therefore, it is believed, that God by His testing is instructing man through the progress of history: as His creation progresses from Eden to New Jerusalem the eternal holy city. However, since all humans are fallen creatures trapped by sin, in order to finally reach the City, each person must individually receive God’s gracious provision of salvation through the death of Christ by believing the Gospel. Thus, Jesus Christ is the only way to a relationship with God. But mankind’s fall into sin also blinded all humanity so that the natural inclination of men’s hearts are rebellion towards God and the things of God. This is why only genuine believers in Christ are open to the teachings of the Bible—the exception being the proclaimation of the Gospel, which sinners must be instructed in before believing in Him (cf. Romans 10:13, 14). Salvation through Christ is a prerequisite to properly understaning God’s Word.
CONSISTENT LITERAL HERMENEUTIC
Hermenuetics is the science behind biblical interpretation. Essential to any God honoring theology is a consistent literal (i.e. normal or plain) hermeneutic—that is, a biblical interpretation that does not spiritualize or allegorize Scripture. Webster’s dictionary defines literal as “adhering to fact or to the ordinary construction or primary meaning of a term or expression." It also says literal interpretation involves the actual meaning of a thing “free from exaggeration or embellishment” (Electronic media, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literal). In this sense, literal interpretation of the Bible simply means to explain the original sense of the Bible according to the normal and customary usages of its language. This is accomplished through the grammatical (according to the rules of grammar), historical (consistent with the historical setting of the passage), contextual (in accord with its context) method of interpretation. Literal hermeneutics looks to the text, the actual words and phrases of a passage. In comparison a non-literal interpretation imports ideas not found specifically in the text of a passage.
Literal interpretation recognizes that a word or phrase can be used plainly (denotative) or figuratively (connotative). Symbols, figures of speech and types are all interpreted plainly in this method and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. After all, the very existence of any meaning for a figure of speech depends on the reality of the literal meaning of the terms involved. Figures often make the meaning plainer, but the literal, normal or plain meaning that they convey to the reader is what is imperative. Some mistakenly think that just because a figure of speech is used to describe an event (i.e., Jonah’s experience in the belly of the great fish in the book of Jonah), that the event was not literal. Such is not the case. An excellent “Golden Rule of Interpretation” has been stated: “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise" (David L. Cooper, The World's Greatest Library: Graphically Illustrated, Los Angeles: Biblical Research Society, 1970, p. 11).
The grammatical-historical system was revived by the Reformers and was set against the spiritual (spiritualized) or deeper meaning of the text interpretive method common in the Roman Catholic Church of the middle ages and sadly remains the mainstay of that church—and many Protestant churches today have returned to this style of interpretation. To those who hold to spiritualizing Scripture the literal meaning is used simply as a springboard to a deeper, so called, “spiritual” meaning, which they view as more desirable. A classic spiritualized interpretation would see the four rivers of Genesis 2: the Pishon, Havilah, Tigris and Euphrates as representing the body, soul, spirit and mind. Coming from such a system, the Reformers saw the need to get back to the literal or textual meaning of the Bible.
The literal interpretation of Scripture, as briefly discussed above, is the first and foremost essential of any theological system that seeks to honor God and His written revelation, which the Bible alone contains. This hermeneutic is the only way of approaching the Bible that allows God to speak, through the progress of revelation, whereby Scripture interprets Scripture and truth is revealed to men. The literal method as opposed to allegory or spiritualization does not approach the Bible through some fantastic interpretational scheme composed of complex symbolism, which reduces God’s Word to a mystic’s fantasy that requires special knosis in order to figure it out.
ISRAEL AND THE CHURCH, TWO EXCLUSIVE PEOPLES OF GOD
Literal Scripture interpretation leads to the second distinctive essential of the theological system here under discussion. This distinctive essential being a clear biblical teaching that God’s single program for history includes: a distinct purpose for Israel and a distinct purpose for the church; God’s program for history has two peoplec; Israel and the church. God’s program for history includes a planned purpose for the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—i.e., Israel. This purpose for Israel includes eternal promises (unconditional covenants), but many of the promises to national Israel are yet future. Additionally, God’s program from all eternity also includes a purpose for the church. We now live in that period of history, which is commonly called the “church age.” In this epoch of history God is forming a “new man” of both Jew and Gentile indviduals (Cf. Ephesians 2:11-22), but the age is a temporary phase on the human time line that began on Pentecost and ends with the Rapture.
The unconditional promises given to Israel in the Old Testament literally refer to the national Jewish people and not to the church. In the Old Testament God pledged to Abraham He would make him the father of a special people whom He would particularly bless. A literal reading of Scripture supports the supposition that God’s pledges or unconditional covenant promises (i.e., treaty grants) for Israel are still intact, though currently unfulfilled. As these covenants remain yet unfulfilled, it is clear that God’s objective for national Israel, which currently remains in dispersion dispite the fact that the nation has been re-establish (Deut.4:27-28; 28:63-68; 30:2-4), is on hold until He completes His current goals for the church and raptures them to Heaven. While the church currently shares in some of Israel’s spiritual blessings (Rom. 15:27), ultimately God will restore Israel to a place of blessing (Rom. 11), and will literally fulfill the land and kingdom covenants granted to Israel in the Abrahamic (Gen. 12:1-3), Land (Deut. 30:1-10), Davidic (2 Sam. 7:12-16), and New Covenant (Jer.31:31). In the present time, God has another purpose for the church that is distinct from His purpose for Israel (Eph. 2-3). After the Rapture, God will then complete His unfinished business with Israel and judge the Gentile nations (Acts 15:16-18) during the seven-year Tribulation period.
Thus, if one does not distinguish between passages in which God speaks to Israel from those intended for the church the results will be an improper merging of the two agendas. The blending of purpose will occur when Scripture is grossly spiritualized. In which case the church is made to be the “New Israel” and replaces “Old Israel” as the heir to the Old Testament promises. Contrary to some who say that the church has superseded Israel, the New Testament never refers to the church as Israel. Furthermore, the church was a mystery kept secret to the Old Testament prophets (Rom 16:25; Eph. 3:9) and they never referred to Israel as the unique Bride of the Lamb (cf. Rev. 19:7). In light of the foregoing, Dr. Fruchtenbaum adds this conclusion to the current topic: “The church is never called a “spiritual Israel” or a “new Israel.” The term Israel is either used of the nation or the people as a whole, or of the believing remnant within. [Israel] is never used of the church in general or of Gentile believers in particular. In fact, even after the Cross there remains a threefold distinction. First, there is a distinction between Israel and the Gentiles as in 1 Corinthians 10:32, and Ephesians 2:11-12. Second, there is a distinction between Israel and the church in 1 Corinthians 10:32. Third, there is a distinction between Jewish [Chrisitans] (the Israel of God) and Gentile [Christians] in Romans 9:6 and Galatians 6:16” (Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Israel and the Church, in Issues In Dispensationalism, p. 126).
GLORY OF GOD IS THE PURPOSE OF HISTORY
The main purpose in God’s master plan for history is to glorify Himself. This is the third essential of the theological supposition presented here. While the central theme of history is Jesus Christ and God’s redemptive act of grace through faith in His Son this is not the ultimate purpose of God in history—His glory is. This essential is the most misunderstood and often thought to be the least necessary. When properly understood, however, it is shown to be an equally important and valid essential of our theology. Especially so, because a thorough understanding of the plan of God reveals that He is glorified in history by all facets of creation—including sin and unbelief—and not merely by the single sphere of His redemptive act (albeit this is likely the most important aspect of God’s plan). Dr. Ryrie explains the importance of this position: “the unifying principle of the Bible is the glory of God and this is worked out in several ways—the program of redemption, the program for Israel, the punishment of the wicked, the plan for the angels, and the glory of God revealed through nature. We see all these programs as means of glorifying God, and we reject the charge that by distinguishing them (particularly God’s program for Israel from His purpose for the church) we have [caused to divide into two branches or divide into two branches or parts] God’s purpose” (Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism, Chicago: Moody Press, 1995, p. 213).
PRE-MILLENNIAL, PRE-TRIBULATIONAL DISPENSATIONALISM
Those who have held the above discussed theological distinctions throughout the church age have come to be known as Dispensationalist. I am a Dispensationalist. And we accept as true that it is the same as saying that we believe what the Bible literally teaches (i.e. God created the universe ex nihilo in seven days, Adam and Eve are the first human pair and progenitors of the race, the Flood was a global event, Christ died a substitutionary death for sinner, etc.).
Ryrie notes: that The Oxford English Dictionary defines a theological dispensation as “a stage in a progressive revelation, expressly adapted to the needs of a particular nation or period of time...also, the age or period during which a system has prevailed” (Charles C. Ryrie, What Is Dispensationalism?, Pamphlet published by Dallas Theological Seminary, 1986), p. 1). The English word dispensation translates the Greek noun oikonoma, often rendered administration in modern translations. The verb oikonom refers to a manager of a household (cf., Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957, p. 562). Ryrie further comments, “dispensation means to manage or administer the affairs of a household, as, for example, in the Lord’s story of the unfaithful steward in Luke 16:1-13.”
Furthermore, the “Greek word oikonoma is a compound of okos meaning house and nomos meaning law. Taken together, the central idea in the word dispensation is that of managing or administering the affairs of a household. The various forms of the word dispensation appears in the New Testament twenty times. The verb oikonom is used once in Luke 16:2, where it is translated to be a steward. The noun oikonmos appears nine times (Luke 12:42; 16:1, 3, 8; 1 Cor. 4:1, 2; Gal. 4:2; Titus 1:7;1 Pet. 4:10), and is translated steward or manager (it is used in Rom. 16:23, where it is translated “treasurer”). The noun oikonoma is used nine times (Luke 16:2, 3, 4; 1 Cor.9:17; Eph. 1:10; 3:2, 9; Col. 1:25; 1 Tim. 1:4). In these instances it is translated variously as stewardship, dispensation, administration, job, commission” (Ibid, p. 25).
Examination of oikonmos in the Gospels finds Christ using the word in two parables in Luke (Lk. 12:42; 16:1, 3,8), and in Christ’s usage of the word we find important characteristics of dispensational arrangement. The characteristics are:
(1) Basically there are two parties: the one whose authority it is to delegate duties and the one whose responsibility it is to carry out these charges. The rich man (or manager) play these roles in the parable of Luke 16 (v. 1). (2) These are specific responsibilities. In the parable the steward failed in his known duties when he wasted the goods of his lord (v.1). (3) Accountability, as well as responsibility, is part of the arrangement. A steward may be called to account for the discharge of his stewardship at any time, for it is the master’s prerogative to expect faithful obedience to the duties entrusted to the steward (v. 2). (4) A change may be made at any time unfaithfulness is found in the existing administration.
Further insight offered by Ryrie cites the following features:
(1) God is the one to whom men are responsible in the discharge of their stewardship obligations. In three instances this relationship to God is mentioned by Paul (I Cor. 4:1-2; Titus 1:7). (2) Faithfulness is required of those to whom a dispensational responsibility is committed (I Cor. 4:2). This is illustrated by Erastus, who held the important position of treasurer (steward) of the city (Rom. 16:23). (3) A stewardship may end at an appointed time (Gal. 4:2). In this reference the end of the stewardship came because of a different purpose being introduced. This reference also shows that a dispensation is connected with time. (4) Dispensations are connected with the mysteries of God, that is, with specific revelation from God (I Cor. 4:1; Eph. 3:2; Col. 1:25). (5) Dispensation and age are connected ideas, but the words are not exactly interchangeable. For instance, Paul declares that the revelation of the present dispensation was hidden for ages meaning simply a long period of time (Eph. 3:9). The same thing is said in Colossians 1:26. However, since a dispensation operates within a time period, the concepts are related. (6) At least three dispensations (as commonly understood in dispensational teaching) are mentioned by Paul. In Ephesians 1:10, he writes of “an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth” which is a future period. In Ephesians3:2, he designates the “the stewardship of God’s grace,” which was the emphasis of the content of his preaching at that time. In Colossians 1:25-26, it is implied that another dispensation preceded the present one, in which the mystery of Christ in the believer is revealed (Ibid, pp. 26-27).
Therefore, building upon the above biblical observations, dispensationalism as succinctly defined by Ryrie: “views the world as a household run by God. In this household/world God is dispensing or administering its affairs according to His own will and in various stages of revelation in the process of time. These various stages markoff the distinguishably different economies in the outworking of His total purpose, and these different economies constitute the dispensations. The understanding of God’s differing economies is essential to a proper interpretation of His revelation within those various economies” (Ibid, p. 29).
Dispensational theology provides the believer with a biblical worldview and a fuller understanding of God’s working in history: our past, present times and future events predicted in Scripture. It developes a clearer understanding of God’s purpose in every era of history and developes in the believer a Divine perspective, thus enabling the born again student of Scripture to know what God expects of him in every area of life in our present day. The dispensationalist, for example, does not live in this age of grace as if he was still under the rule of the Mosaic Law. Instead we understand that we are now under the hundreds of commands that the New Testament calls the Law of Christ (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2), which provides to the New Testament believer a complete biblical framework for understanding how to glorify God in every area of life.
CONCLUDING STATEMENT
Dispensationalism is a system of theology that has been properly developed from the Bible itself. Theology is righly formed by prayful, reverent and Spirit-illuminating readings of Scriture; doctrines are structured out of one’s theology; and what one teaches aligns to what one believes is truth. John quotes Christ as saying: “the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you; When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me; But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.” With regard to the inspired writers of Scripture John says: “We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” (John 14:17; 15:26; 16; 13; 1 John 4:6).
My theology system, doctrines and teachings arise from the sine quo non of: a literal hermenuntic; a Israel/church distinction; and God’s glory being the purpose for his creative act. As a concluding thought: “There is no need to dodge the plain meaning of a passage or to reinterpret or spiritualize it in order to resolve conflicts with other passages. God’s commands and standards for me today become even more distinct, and His program with its unfolding splendor falls into a harmonious pattern. The history of dispensationalism is replete with men and women who love the Word of God and promote its study, and who have a burden for spreading the gospel to all the world” (Ryrie, What Is Dispensationalism?, p. 7).
Founder
CHRIST’S CHURCH BIBLE MINISTRY
