UNIT ONE: ECCLESIOLOGY
SECTION ONE: COVENANT AND DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGIES
I. DEFINITIONS AND DISTINCTIONS
A. Covenant Theology
1. Brief History
- A Fairly recent development. No developed system in the reformation, though one covenant (covenant of grace) was taught.
- Primary early teacher was William Ames (d. 1633) – Dutch/English
- Also a whole line of German teachers
- Cocceius systematized covenant theology in about 1648
a. desired to “muffle” the super-strong sovereignty of God view of the scholastic Calvinists
- First creedal mention is in the Westminster Confession of 1647
Westminster Confession:
“The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God’s part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of a covenant. The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience. Man by his fall having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the Covenant of Grace: whereby he freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ, enquiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved; and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto life his Holy Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe. . . . under the law [this covenant] was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances. . . . Under the gospel. . . the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the word, and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. . . . There are not therefore two covenants of grace . . . but one and the same under various dispensations.”
* Herman Witsius (1636-1708) then extended the covenant of grace concept back into eternity: result was the covenant of redemption, which was a step back into
eternity. Strengthened the sovereign concept.
2. Definitions
Covenant theology – A system of theology based upon, and later three theological covenants: redemption, works an grace
Covenant of Redemption – The Persons of the Trinity entered into a solemn covenant in eternity past wherein each Person of the Godhead assumed a part in the plan of salvation
- The Father gives the Son as the redeemer and Head of the elect
- The Son offers Himself to the Father as a perfect vicarious sacrifice
- The Holy Spirit agrees to administer the plan of salvation
Covenant of Works – An agreement between God and Adam wherein God promises life for perfect obedience and death for disobedience.
-Some covenant theologians say that it is still in existence (as a post-conversion means of sanctification) others do not think so
Covenant of Grace – The gracious agreement after the Fall between God and the elect sinner in which God promises salvation through faith in Christ
- Began with Adam after the Fall
- Continues on and thus God’s contact with man comes through the soteriological covenant
- All Scripture is interpreted through this paradigm
COVENANT OFCOVENANT OF COVENANT OF GRACE
REDEMPTIONWORKS
EternityPre-Fall Old Dispensation New Dispensation
Past
Israel = Church
(Cf., Benware, p. 80)
B. Dispensational Theology
1. Brief history
Many of the basics of dispensationalism have been held sporadically throughout
church history: premillennialism, imminency, dispensational schemes, etc.
However, the system of dispensationalism was dependent upon:
- Consistent Literal Hermeneutics
- Premillennialism
- Futurism in the Book of Revelation
- An understanding of some discontinuity (i.e. differences) between God’s program for Israel and God’s program for the Church
Dispensationalism as a system was refounded around 1830 when a group of Bible
students gathered together at the Powerscourt Conferences in Ireland.
These people, under the leadership of John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), came to believe in a literal hermeneutic, doctrine of difference between programs for Israel and church, some dispensational schemes, pretribulational rapture, etc.
Dispensationalism developed in America through the 19th century Bible
conferences, and the writings of leaders from these conferences.
Dispensationalism was then popularized through the Scofield Reference Bible
(1909, 1917).
Many excellent books on prophecy and related matters have contributed to the
popularity of dispensationalism among evangelicals.
In the 1950’s leading dispensationalists developed what has been called “Revised
Dispensationalism,” or “Essentialist Dispensationalism,” or “Sine Qua Non
Dispensationalism.”
Since the 1980’s, a new kind of dispensationalism, named “Progressive
Dispensationalism” in 1991, has developed.
2. Definitions of a Dispensation
a. General Sense:
* Steward (treasurer)
Romans 16:23— Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother.
Luke 12:42— And the Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and sensible steward, whom his master will put in charge of his servants, to give them their rations at the proper time?
Cf. Luke 16:1-13
1) “Dispensation” is a translation of the Greek word “oikonomia,” which combines
“house” and “to manage.”
2) Tertullian used the Latin word, “dispensatio,” to translate oikonomia.
3) In ancient Greek culture, an oikonomos was a servant, a steward, in charge of a
household.
4) Oikonomia referred to his office or activity of managing the house, his
stewardship.
5) Eventually, these words used more broadly for any type of management or
administration.
6) The management activity of an oikonomos usually involved financial transactions,
requiring careful accounting of funds received and disbursed, the basis of “economy.”
7) “Steward” and “stewardship” also translate oikonomos and oikonomia,
and carry the idea of a financial responsibility.
8) In the LXX, the individual who was put in charge of the palace by the King of
Judah was called an oikonomos.
1 Kings 4:6—“Ahishar, over the household; and Adoniram the son of Abda, over
the labor force.”
1 Kings 18:3__ “And Ahab had called Obadiah, who was in charge of his house.”
His management responsibility (oikonomia) extended to everything having to do with the palace: physical maintenance, furnishings, accommodating guests, coordinating daily activities. Responsible to the king, and if his service was unacceptable, a change in oikonomia occurred (Is. 22:15-25).
b. Biblical Sense
1) The Lord’s parables began to connote a theological sense to oikonomia—thenotion
of a management arrangement between God and the world.
2) Paul uses oikonomos and oikonomia to describe God’s relationship to the world,
usually in regard to Paul’s own responsibility as an apostle.
1 Cor. 4:1-2— 1 Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2 In this case, moreover, it is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy.
Eph. 3:2-7— 2 if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace which was given to me for you; 3 that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. 4 By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; 6 to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel, 7 of which I was made a minister, according to the gift of God's grace which was given to me according to the working of His power.
(Cf. Col. 1:25-29.)
3) Church officers could be seen as part of this ministerial arrangement.
Titus 1:7—“For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money. . . .”
4) All Christians are stewards of God’s grace.
1 Pet. 4:10—“10 As each one has received a special gift, employ it in serving one another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.”
5) The present administration in the overall relationship between God and man is the
dispensation of the mystery of Christ.
Eph. 3:9--and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God, who created all things;
“The relationship between God and human beings should be thought of as a dispensation, a management relationship which He has instituted. It is also a dispensation which is new in time, having been set up through the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ, replacing an arrangement which had previously been in effect. This, of course, implies that the previous arrangement should also be thought of as a dispensation, an implication which Paul makes explicit elsewhere in Galatians 3:23-4:7” (Blaising/Bock, 109).
3. Theological Definition of a Dispensation:
A dispensation is “a distinguishable economy in the outworking of God’s purpose” (Ryrie, Dispensationalism, 28).
Ephesians 1:10-- with a view to an administration [dispensation, KJV) suitable to the fulness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things upon the earth.
Remember
Typical Dispensational Plan (Benware)
Salvation by Grace Through Faith
1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Pre-Fall Conscience Government Patriarchal Mosaic Church Millennial
Timeline: 1890’s- Classic Dispensationalism; 1960’s-Revised Dispensationalism; 1980’s-90’s-Prog.
Mostly just two camps: Classic & Progressive
4. The Bases of Traditional (Revised) Dispensational Theology
“Revised” taken from the revision of the Scofield Bible, completed in 1967, and
offering views much more compatible to writers of this second period.
Contributors: Alva J. McClain, John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, J. Dwight Pentecost,
Stanley Toussaint and others.
In 1965, Charles Ryrie published Dispensationalism Today.
- Two purposes (p. 9):
1) To correct “misconceptions” and allay “suspicions”
“. . . Ryrie classified dispensationalists as ‘conservative, evangelical Christians,’ carefully avoiding the label fundamentalist, which was becoming increasingly uncomfortable for many” (p. 23 in Blaising and Bock).
2) “To give a presentation of Dispensationalism as it is being taught today.”
Ryrie’s book was an attempt to take control of the label dispensationalism.”
- It distinguished dispensationalism from Scofieldism and legitimated the changes from Scofieldism.
- It was generally welcomed by American dispensationalists
- Sought to define the unique essence (the sine qua non) of dispensationalism (47):
“The essence of dispensationalism, then, is the distinction between Israel and the Church. This grows out of the dispensationalists’ consistent employment of normal or plain interpretation, and it reflects an understanding of the basic purpose of God in all His dealings with mankind as that of glorifying Himself through salvation and other purposes as well.”
The Sine Qua Non of (Revised) Dispensationalism: (three)
a) Literal interpretation of Scripture
Unlike the classic dispensationalists, revised dispensationalists
completely dismissed the spiritual or allegorical interpretation of
the Old Testament.
Suggested the use of “normal” or “plain” as a good substitute for “literal.”
Insisted that a consistent normal interpretation is what distinguished
dispensationalism from all other systems.
b) The distinction between Israel and the church
He rejects the “eternal dualism” of a heavenly and earthly people.
“The new dispensationalists of the 1950’s and 1960’s, however, were uncomfortable with the notion of eternally separate heavenly and earthly destinies. They believed that after the Millennium, all the redeemed would be together for eternity, although they were not agreed as to where this would be” (p. 25).
The two people are now called “Israel” and the “church.”
He maintained the parenthetical nature of the present age.
He rejected Chafer’s rigid distinction between God’s covenant
promises with Israel and his covenant promises with the church.
Three Debatable Passages (Textual Excursus)
“The term ‘Israel’ is used a total of seventy-three times in the New Testament, and in each case it refers to ethnic Israel. Out of these seventy-three occurrences only three are used by covenant theology to prove that Israel equals the church, which could hardly be seen as overwhelming evidence for an Israel-equals-church idea. Interestingly covenant theologians are not in agreement in two out of these three references. Some see two of them (Rom. 9:6 and 11:26) as referring to ethnic Israel” (Benware, 87).
Romans 9:6: “For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel.”
-Point: not all Jews are believers
-That is, not all descendants of Israel are truly spiritual Israelites
-There are both believing and unbelieving Jews
-But the text says nothing about the Gentiles or the Church
-See further Romans 2:28-29
Romans 11:26: “all Israel shall be saved.”
-Teaches that there will be a great revival at the Second Coming so that the Jews who enter the millennial kingdom will all be believers
-Nothing about the Church
-
Galatians 6:16: “Israel of God”
-
Only one of the 73 passages over which there is agreement among covenant theologians = church.
a. Much of the debate centers on the conjunction, kai.
- Covenant theologians insist that “and” means “even in this verse
-So, “even” equates these believing Gentiles with the “Israel of God”
-Thus, the “Israel of God “ is another name for the Church
-Most knowledgable dispensationalists take the “kai” to be a simple “and.”
-Thus Paul is blessing two groups: Gentiles in the Church and believing Jews in the Church
-“Israel f God” is simply another way of speaking of godly Jews
-Some Knowledgable dispensationalists take the “kai” slightly differently – as emphatic: “and especially”
-In either case, dispensationalists believe that Paul is blessing all who reject Judiazing beliefs, both Jews and Gentiles
b. Also, the flow of thought supports the dispensational view.
- Warning new believers against Judiazers
Warning is especially directed toward the benefit of the Gentile Christians (v. 12)
-As he comes to the end, prounces a blessing on these Gentile Christians in Galatia
-“Them n verse 16 is Gentile Christians
-And upon… Israel of God” is another group in the Church – the Godly Jews
-The “Israel of God” is thus not another name for the Church, but a reference to believing Jews in the Galatian churches who reject the Judaizers
c. Also, remember the other 72 uses of the word.
d. Thus we can conclude, “Israel” is never used as a term for the church.
(See further, S.L. Johnson, “Paul and the ‘Israel of God’” in Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost.)
(End of Excursus)
c) God’s purpose is doxological rather than soteriological.
C. Progressive Dispensationalism
1. The Basis for The Name: More Progressive Continuity
Other terms include “New,” “Kingdom”
Adherents: Robert Saucy, Darrell L. Bock, Craig A. Blaising, and authors in Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church.
a. Between Past and Present Dispensations
There is continuity from promises about Israel and the Gentiles under the old covenant to the
fulfillment of those promises upon Israel and the Gentiles under the new covenant.
Less of an abrupt break between the program for Israel and the program for the church.
- So, the Church is not that distinct from Israel as the “revised” disp. Thought
- Overlap in promises
- In Fact, some of the promises to Israel, (about Israel’s kingdom) may even have initial fulfillment in the Church
b. Between Present and Future Dispensations
1)A belief that the NT teaches a strong continuity between the present dispensation of the church and the future dispensation
2) Both dispensations are unified under the one new covenant
3) Both dispensations are also united as aspects of the messianic reign of Christ
4) Both dispensations are also united as fulfillments of promises made under the old dispensation
c. Between the Millennium and the FinalState
- P.D. sees a greater continuity between the Millennium and the eternal state.
“The transition from the former to the latter is not the change from the material to the spiritual, the substantial to the ethereal, but the completion of the redemption (not annihilation) of the whole created order” (Bock/Blaising, DIC, 383).
2. The Reasons for the Development of Progressive Dispensationalists
a. Rapprochement
The act of coming together, trying to understand one another and work out
differences.
Dispensationalists have historically emphasized discontinuity, stressing the
difference between Israel and the church.
Covenant theologians have historically accentuated the continuity in God’s
program, placing all of God’s working under the umbrella of the theological covenant of grace: church is a direct continuation of Israel.
Would ostensibly mean covenant theologians are asserting greater discontinuity,
and dispensationalists are asserting more continuity.
Some dangers: Always a danger that important theology will be compromised for
the sake of unity.
Moreover, from a dispensationalist viewpoint, there does not seem to be much
movement from the covenant side.
Covenant theologians are, more often than dispensationalist, creedal oriented, so it is difficult to move away from the historic creeds.
On the other hand, we are for unity as much as possible.
And no one should shy away from trying to understand the Bible better.
Ryrie: “Much of the dialog has been between progressives and covenant theologians, who have openly expressed pleasure that progressives have moved away from normative dispensationalism, though covenant theologians clearly have not moved from the tenets of their position” (Dispensationalism, 162).
(What do you think about this?)
b. Changes in the Theological Scene
1) Change in methodology: from systematic theology to exegetical and Biblical theology, especially taking the New Testament statements of fulfillment seriously.
2) The abandonment of the two new covenants view by some of the dispensationalists who held this view