THE HISTORY AND STRUCTURE OF PROGRESSIVE

DISPENSATIONALISM CONSIDERED

APOLOGETICALLY

__________________

A Paper

Presented to

Dr. Craig Blaising

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for CHAHT 4363

__________________

by

Michael Metts

May 9, 2014

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

A Brief History of the Dispensationalist Tradition .....................................................1

John Nelson Darby (1800-82) .............................................................................5

James Hall Brookes (1830-97) ............................................................................7

C. I. Scofield (1843-1921) ..................................................................................8

Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952) ......................................................................8

Summary .............................................................................................................9

From Classical to Revised Dispensationalism ............................................................9

The Earthly and Heavenly Dualism of Classical

and Revised Dispensationalism ................................................................11

The Parenthetical Nature of the Church in Classical

and Revised Dispensationalism ................................................................11

Progressive Dispensationalism and Hermeneutics ....................................................12

The Inaugurated Eschatology of Progressive

Dispensationalism .....................................................................................13

The Structure of Progressive Dispensationalism .......................................................14

The Covenants of Progressive Dispensationalism ............................................15

The Dispensations of Progressive Dispensationalism ......................................20

BIBLIOGRAPHY .....................................................................................................23

1

THE HISTORY AND STRUCTURE OF PROGRESSIVE

DISPENSATIONALISM CONSIDERED

APOLOGETICALLY

A Brief History of the Dispensationalist Tradition

It is probably best to dispel some common misunderstandings of

dispensationalism before digging more deeply into the traditions history. To begin with,

understanding Scripture as an unfolding of dispensations is neither a novel idea, nor

without scriptural warrant. Regarding the former, in the work of church father Irenaeus

(d. 202) dispensations are explicitly connected with the Law of Moses and the new

covenant in Christ, and implicitly associated with Irenaeus subsequent periodization of

biblical history around central covenantal, biblical figures.1 Augustine (354-430) also

identified a periodization schema recognizing important pivotal points in biblical history

around the covenantal figures; and The Westminster Confession of Faith of 1646 speaks

of dispensations explicitly: There are not, therefore, two covenants of grace differing in

substance, but one and the same under various dispensations.2

1Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids:

BridgePoint Books, 1993), 116. See n. 4 and 5, p. 308: Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.10.2, 4; 3.11.8. Cf.

also the history of revised dispensationalist Charles Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today (Chicago: Moody

Press, 1965) 68-74; Ryrie includes additional fathers (with references) such as Justin Martyr (110-165) and

Clement of Alexandria (150-220). But see his careful qualification: It is not suggested nor should it be

inferred that these early Church Fathers were dispensationalists in the modern sense of the word (70).

2Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 117. Cf. n. 8 on p. 308, The Westminster

Confession of Faith (1646) chapter seven, Of Gods Covenant with Man, paragraph six. (Emphasis

added.)

2

While it may surprise some that works of Augustine and the Westminster

Assembly (1643-1653) readily made use of dispensational ideas, the reason for this is

quite simply that the word is biblical terminology, and technical in proximate theological

fashion to dispensationalist usage. The Greek word is which, in a non-

technical sense, means the office of household administration, and secondarily, and in

the more technical sense, means Gods plan of salvation, or administration of

salvation.3 The latter sense is the one that doctrinal dispensationalism emphasizes.

Because of the influence of Augustinian supersessionism it was common

practice up to this time to interpret New Testament references to Israel as a reference to

the church in an exhaustive replacement sense. But with the recognition of specific

theological dispensations operative throughout biblical history, in addition to concerns

for proper historical interpretations of Scripture, a growing theological awareness for

Israel ethnically understood soon resulted. This growing awareness continued throughout

the Reformation era and is exemplified in numerous works including the Geneva Bible

(1560; New Testament 1557).4 The Geneva Bible had a study note identifying ethnic

3Gerhard Friedrich, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, trans. and ed. by

Geoffrey W Bromiley, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1967), s.v. , and ,

by Otto Michel. The identifies a steward or slave who is over the household of his master. Cf.

Blaisings definitions, Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 108: From these various

sources we can summarize the general sense of oikonomos as any type of manager or administrator. The

term oikonomia, which we translate dispensation, referred generally to the activity of a manager and the

overall organizational arrangement in which that activity was carried out. Its sense can be properly

conceived by words such as administration, arrangement, order, plan, and management. Cf. also Blaising,

308, n.1.

4Because of religious persecution in England, this English translation was done in Geneva. It

remained the English Bible of Reformed Protestantism until the King James Bible became highly

influential.

3

Israel as the Israel mentioned by Paul in Romans 11:26.5 Reformed Protestant

theologian Theodore Beza (1519-1605), a student of John Calvin, also taught that

Romans 11:26s all Israel will be saved was a reference to ethnic Israel; Martin Bucer

(1491-1551), a student of Martin Luther, further arrived at this conclusion;6 as did Peter

Martyr (1499-1562) who also argued for a literal rather than a figurative understanding

of the term Israel.7 Increasing favor for ethnic Israel and her theological and

eschatological significance continued throughout the centuries of reform, as did general

favor for the Jewish people of Europe. The full gravity of this growing tolerance was felt

in 1655 when Parliament granted readmission of the Jewish people once again into

England.

In addition to identifying ethnic Israel in New Testament teaching, the concern

for careful eschatological interpretations further resulted in increasingly millennial and

premillennial readings of Revelation 20.8 Joseph Mede (1586-1638) of Cambridge

5Cf. Bruce M. Metzger, The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions (Grand

Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 64-6. As Metzger notes, Geneva was the headquarters for the Reformed

type of Protestantism The work is mainly credited to William Whittingham, a brother-in-law of John

Calvin [and] successor of John Knox The Geneva version was equipped with copious notes in the

margins, most of which were explanations of difficult points in the text (64-5).

6George Kroeze, The Variety of Millennial Hopes in the English Reformation, 1560-1660

(Ph.D. diss., Fuller Theological Seminary, 1984) 48, writes: In his teaching and commentary on Romans

(Romans 11:26) Bucer taught that the Jewish people would come to a new national faith in the Christian

gospel before the end of history.

7Kroeze, The Variety of Millennial Hopes in the English Reformation, 49.

8J. W. Montgomery, Millennium, in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, rev. ed., ed.

Geoffrey W. Bromily, 4 vols. [ISBE] (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1986) 3:359. Montgomery

identifies the evangelical revivals through the eighteenth century as part of the causal force giving rise to

millennialism. The principle of evangelicalism was also formative for the Niagara Bible Conference

meetings in the following century; see Craig A. Blaisings Dispensationalism: The Search for Definition,

in Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, eds., Craig A. Blaising and Darrell

L. Bock (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 17-18, esp. 18 n.14.

4

University wrote a very influential volume on premillennialism, Clavis Apocalyptica,9

incorporating ethnic Israel within its eschatology.10

In general, theology favorable

towards Judaism continued from the sixteenth through eighteenth centuries, although

mostly of the historic premillennial variety. An important historical event buttressing

premillennialism would be the French Revolution (1798), which created some doubts

regarding the utopian theological ideals associated with postmillennial exegeses.

The point here is not a counter-critical stance towards covenant theology vis--

vis dispensationalism, but to reveal instead the significant overlap of their developmental

histories. Though both systems of theology have long been considered antithetically

related, history reveals a more complex relationship, and one of close theological

relation.11

Since both covenants and dispensations explicitly drive biblical history, the

increasing concern for accurate biblical exegesis necessarily results in overlap between

the two systems of theological thought.

9Original Latin published in 1627; English translation, Key of the Revelation Searched and

Demonstrated, published in 1643.

10For a thorough historical treatment of millennialism which is inclusive of Israels Old

Testament eschatological promises see George Kroeze, The Variety of Millennial Hopes in the English

Reformation, 1560-1660, He points out that the work of Mede was seminal: Virtually every Independent

minister in England knew Mede and was influenced by him to some degree or another (250).

11Cf. Glenn W. Shuck: The fact that Dispensationalism emerged from within minds shaped by

covenant theology largely explains its special appeal among conservative Reformed, non-Lutheran

Protestants. Shuck, Christian Dispensationalism, in The Oxford Handbook of Millennialism, ed. by

Catherine Wessinger (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 516-7.

5

John Nelson Darby (1800-82)12

Darby was born shortly after the tragedies of the French Revolution. He was

classicist, first in his class at Trinity College, Dublin. Not long after graduating in 1819

he had an evangelical conversion; this was during a time when Trinity College was

experiencing evangelical renewal. He initially desired to become a lawyer though

evidence that he ever practiced has not been forthcoming.

Darbys early theology was akin to the evangelical, Christ-imitation theology

of Thomas Kempis. Darby admirably fasted and prayed and often took upon himself the

conditions of the people to whom he ministered. He spent a lot of time with the poor and

leading people to personal salvation in Christ. After an 1827 horse accident left him with

a crushed knee, he began to focus more time on theology. His early theology in this

period followed the Reformed tradition broadly until his encounter with premillennialist

eschatology.

Eventually Darby penned The Hope of the Church of God which set forth

the formal structures of his dispensational thought. Rather than conceptualize Scripture

according to a covenantal structure, Darby used dispensations.13

He also developed a

pretribulational rapture view of premillennial eschatology which would prove to be the

hallmark of dispensational tradition.14

Darbys eschatological views of an imminent

12Much of the material in this section comes from the lectures of Craig A. Blaising,

Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology (classroom lecture notes CHAHT 4363 Church History,

Spring 2014), personal transcriptions.

13Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, 75, compliments, He was an indefatigable worker. His

written ministry incorporates some forty volumes of six hundred pages each, including a translation of the

Bible.

14Jon R. Stone, Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century American Millennialisms, in The Oxford

6

expectation of Christs rapture of the saints became influential for American, classical

dispensationalists including C. I. Scofield (1843-1921) and James H. Brookes (1830-97),

who also understood Christs imminent return in the rapture as a key component in the

Bibles Endtime chronology.15

Darbys wide influence among the Plymouth Brethren provided a helpful

forum for spreading his theology. His influence in America could be found in the Niagara

Bible Conference, which has been called the American version of Darbys ecumenical

vision.16

This popular conference provided the forum for introducing and developing

American dispensationalism.17

Jon R. Stone, Professor of Religious Studies at California

State University, Long Beach, writes the following history of the late nineteenth century

prophecy conferences from which the Niagara conference developed:

The prophecy conference movement began in the 1860s, when a small group

of millenarians gathered informally in New York City to share their views on the

Second Coming of Christ. Officially convened in 1868, and then held annually from

1875-1900, these gatherings of theologians and clergymen from nearly all major

Protestant denominations were at first called the Believers Meeting for Bible Study,

and then later the Niagara Prophecy Conference. While the publication of the

fourteen-point Niagara Creed articulated the fundamental doctrinal beliefs of those

in attendance, it also served as a foundation upon which present and future

Handbook of Millennialism, writes: Darby held that at the Rapture, which could occur at any moment,

Christ would return for his saints. Then, at the end of the seven-year Tribulation period, Christ would return

with his saints, to rule Israel and the Earth from the ancient city of Jerusalem. American premillennialists,

such as Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921) and James H. Brookes (1830-97), began to see the Rapture as a key

component in the Bibles Endtime chronology (508).

15Stone, Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century American Millennialisms, 508.

16Blaising, Dispensationalism: The Search for Definition, 17.

17Ibid., 16.

7

generations of premillenialist conference speakers and writers would build their

elaborate Endtime interpretations.18

James Hall Brookes (1830-97)

James Brookes is specifically an important figure for the development of

dispensationalism in America. While his theology is congruent with Darbys distinct

futurist eschatology, actually proving an association, to any degree, is somewhat

challenging. However, one connection noted by many historians is Brookes invitation to

Darby to preach at his church in St. Louis, Missouri.19

It cannot, therefore, be said that a

personal link was absent and preachers do not trust their congregations to just anyone.

Brookes was also the publisher of The Truth journal which catalogued the

Niagara Bible Conferences history; and he was a founding member and president of the

conference.20

Brookes dispensational structure includes seven dispensations: (1)

Innocence; (2) Conscience; (3) Patriarchs; (4) Law; (5) The Lord; (6) Grace; and (7)

Millennial Age. The dispensations of Law and Grace evidence a clear evangelical

concern of Brookes.

C. I. Scofield (1843-1921)

Scofields obvious and inestimable contribution to the dispensationalist

tradition is found in the Scofield Reference Bible, which sold ten million copies and

helped rescue the financially troubled Oxford University Press. The term

18Stone, Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century American Millennialisms, 508. The prophecy

conferences movement can be traced as follows: (1) 1860s = New York. (2) 1875 = Chicago. Finally, (3)

1883 = Niagara (permanently). This history is pieced together from both Stones essay and Blaisings,

Dispensationalism: The Search for Definition, 16 n.5.

19Shuck, Christian Dispensationalism, 517.

20Blaising, Dispensationalism: A Search for Definition, 16 n.5.

8

dispensationalism was first applied to the interpretations offered in the Scofield

Reference Bible,21

the terms first occasion in history.

Scofield was a speaker at the Niagara conferences and was taught by Brookes.

He too divided Scripture according to seven dispensations (although, somewhat distinct

from Brookes division): (1) Innocence; (2) Conscience; (3) Human Government; (4)

Promise; (5) Mosaic; (6) Grace; and (7) Kingdom. It should be noted that the kingdom of

God in Scofields theology is distinguished from the kingdom of heaven:

He [Scofield] believed that the term kingdom of God, found in all four Gospels,

referred to the moral rule of God in the hearts of those subject to Him. It is

everlasting in extent. The kingdom of heaven, found in the New Testament only in

Matthew, was thought to be the fulfillment of the covenant made to David, in which

God promised to establish the kingdom of His Son.22

This kingdom dualism would have a lasting influence on the tradition until its eventual

correction by progressives.

Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952)

Lewis Chafer once said that he learned more from Scofield in a single hour

than in all his previous studies.23

Sometime after Chafer was called to the Scofield

Memorial Church in Dallas, he started an evangelical college which was shortly renamed

Dallas Theological Seminary. Chafer was the seminarys first president, holding the

21Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 22.

22Ibid., 30.

23Craig A. Blaising, Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology (classroom lecture notes

CHAHT 4363 Church History, Spring 2014), personal transcription.

9

position until his death in 1952. Chafer further published a formidable eight-volume

systematic theology which not only advanced dispensational influence but placed it on

the academic map.

Summary

The purpose of this brief tradition history is partly to form an apology for

criticisms concerning the systems novelty. It is also to trace the traditions primary

thinkers and shapers and locate them in an enabling historical context. Each of the four

primary thinkers discussed under the above subheadings played an important role in

solidifying the foundation of classical dispensationalism, as did their historical contexts

growing support for national Israel within the New Testament and increasing recognition

of millennial eschatologies.

From Classical to Revised Dispensationalism

While the theologians above established the classical foundation of

dispensationalism, growth within the tradition proved inevitable, as with any tradition.

Dispensationalism underwent changes during the 1950s through 70s, resulting in revised

dispensationalism a name given to the dispensationalists of this period by later

progressives such as Craig Blaising, now Professor of Theology at Southwestern Baptist

Theological Seminary. Blaising writes, Some of the more well-known revised

dispensationalists include Alva J. McClain, John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, J. Dwight

10

Pentecost, and Stanley Toussaint.24

Revised dispensationalists improved upon the

classical form in significant ways but the most important revision introduced by the

dispensationalists of the 50s and 60s was their abandonment of the eternal dualism of

heavenly and earthly peoples.25

By emphasizing the word eternal, Blaising intends to

demonstrate that while an element of eschatological dualism remained, it was removed

from eternity with the effect of bringing together the eschatological people of God during

the final dispensation. By mitigating some of the expansive anthropological dualism

found in the earlier classical form, the way for progressives was being paved by revised

dispensationalists. But this is not to suggest that progressives dissolved the distinction

holistically. Perhaps it can be said that if earlier dispensationalism saw two peoples of

God, progressives saw one people of God expressed in two groups, Israel and the nations.

It was left to the work of progressives to advance the tradition to more

persuasive exegeses and doctrinal clarity. Progression was made primarily in two ways.

First, and as discussed above, was through discarding the systems anthropological

dualism which consisted of an earthly Israel and heavenly church. And secondly, by

incorporating inaugurated eschatology and legitimating Jesus Christ as the presently

reigning eschatological Davidic Messiah, the church came to be more associated with the

kingdom in its present dispensation and, consequently, no longer a parenthetical

dispensation within the unfolding of biblical history. This resulted in overturning the

24Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 22. Dwight Pentecost, sadly, recently

passed (April 28th

2014) during the time this paper was being researched and written.

25Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 31.

11

understanding of the present ecclesial dispensation as an intercalation. These changes

are elaborated in the two following subheadings.

The Earthly and Heavenly Dualism of Classical

and Revised Dispensationalism

Ryrie was a strong catalyst in moving the dispensationalist tradition forward,

particularly by distancing the tradition from some of the weaknesses of Scofieldism,

specifically Scofields division of the single salvific purpose of God: This in turn served

to legitimize the changes from Scofieldism that were actually taking place in the work of

the new generation of dispensationalists, allowing them to claim continuity in the midst

of change and establishing them as the heirs of the tradition.26

While in recognition of a

unified salvation plan of God, and further granted they dropped the terms heavenly and

earthly, revised dispensationalists nevertheless still continue to recognize two peoples of

God, which progressives critically regard as anthropological dualism.27

The Parenthetical Nature of the Church in

Classical and Revised Dispensationalism

A second distinctive element of both classical and revised dispensationalisms

is the parenthetical nature of the dispensation of grace, which functions more or less as an

intercalation of earthly, political biblical history. Progressives moved beyond this aspect

26Blaising Dispensationalism: The Search for Definition, 28.

27Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 31 (emphasis original). Blaising further

writes of revised: They were simply two groups of people. Not heavenly versus earthly, but those

represented by Israel and the church. (). They are structured differently, with different dispensational

prerogatives and responsibilities. But the salvation which they receive the eternal life is the same for

both, with the one exception that some belong to one group and others belong to another (32).

12

of the tradition as well by recognizing the New Testaments explicit association of

Christs present session in heaven as initial fulfillment of the Davidic covenantal

promises. With the recognition that Christ is reigning now from heaven as the Davidic

Messiah, any dualism between the earthly, political program of God for Israel and the

heavenly church breaks down since the church is necessarily a part of the kingdom,

although in mystery.

Progressive Dispensationalism and Hermeneutics

In discussion of Christs session at Gods right hand in partial fulfillment of

the covenantal promises to David, Blaising defends progressive dispensationalism against

charges of spiritualized hermeneutics: Nor are we following a spiritual interpretation

when we read Peters proclamation that Jesus has been raised up in accordance with the

promise to seat on of Davids descendants upon his throne and then hear him say that

Jesus has been seated at the right hand of God and made Lord and Christ.28

The need for

a more self-conscious hermeneutical task further led dispensationalists to abandon the

transcendental distinction of heavenly versus earthly peoples in favor of a historical

distinction in the progressive revelation of the divine purpose.29

28Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 187. Other formidable defenses are held

regarding Christ as the Davidic King (186); Jesus reception of the office of the Melchizedekian priesthood,

the office which God covenanted by oath to David (187); etc. Blaising convinces that these truths are

discerned through a historical-literary interpretation of Scripture. It is Scripture itself which makes these

fulfillment connections and associations, not a latent, spiritual hermeneutic.

29Blaising, Dispensationalism: The Search for Definition, 33.

13

The Inaugurated Eschatology of

Progressive Dispensationalism

Perhaps the strongest catalyst driving hermeneutical development within

dispensationalism was the growing scholarly acceptance of inaugurated eschatology seen

primarily in the work of George Eldon Ladd (1911-82). Ladds work in the 1950s and

1960s in some ways picked up the theological mantle of Carl F. H. Henry (1913-2003),

who by 1947 had already spoken of the need for recognizing present and future aspects of

the kingdom of God: No study of the kingdom teaching of Jesus is adequate unless it

recognizes His implication both that the kingdom is here, and that it is not here. This does

not imply an ultimate paradox, but rather stresses that the kingdom exists in incomplete

realization.30

However, Ladds work Jesus and the Kingdom: The Eschatology of

Biblical Realism went to great lengths to establish his view of inaugurated eschatology

within the context of the larger body of contemporary New Testament scholarship.31

Ladds already/not-yet matrix proved pivotal for progressive dispensational

theology. Darrell L. Bock, research professor of New Testament at Dallas Theological

30Carl F. H. Henry, The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism (Grand Rapids:

William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1947) 48. Russell D. Moore writes that in a 1971 Jerusalem

Conference on Biblical Prophecy, Henry combined the already Kingdom emphasis of covenant

theologians with the not yet Kingdom expectancy of the dispensationalists, all within an explicit appeal to

the kind of inaugurated eschatological framework already being discussed within New Testament theology

by biblical scholars such as Oscar Cullmann. Moore, The Kingdom of Christ: The New Evangelical

Perspective (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004), 31. Chapter two of Moores work, Toward a Kingdom

Eschatology: The Kingdom as Already and Not Yet, is first rate historical treatment of inaugurated

eschatology referencing its growing theological recognition in both covenant theology and

dispensationalism.

31Moore, The Kingdom of Christ, 31. George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The

Eschatology of Biblical Realism (New York: Harper & Row, 1964); reprinted as The Presence of the

Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1974). Additional works

by Ladd influential for inaugurated eschatology include: Crucial Questions about the Kingdom of God

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952); The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959); and A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974).

14

Seminary and contributor to Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for

Definition, pens the chapter The Reign of the Lord Christ in which he illustrates

kingdom thought for progressive dispensationalism as both The Already Reign, and

The Not Yet Reign of Jesus Christ.32

However, Bock is careful to qualify the

progressive dispensational meaning of inaugurated eschatology against the historic

premillennialism of Ladd:

The idea of a realm that presently extends over all the earth, and alongside of it,

makes this formulation of the already/not yet kingdom different from Ladds

view, which emphasized the dynamic character of the rule without discussing a

realm. The view of the kingdom defended here is not covenant premillennialism, for

two reasons. First is the way this form of dispensationalism sees the kingdoms

present realm. It still defers many aspects of Old Testament promises to the future

kingdom. Second is the way it portrays the fulfillment of the Old Testament as

described in Acts 3, a fulfillment that reintroduces Israel into the culmination of the

divine plan. However, the kingdoms presence now makes it clear that Gods

kingdom exists in the midst of the kingdoms of the earth.33

The Structure of Progressive Dispensationalism

There are primarily three ways of observing the structure of progressive

dispensationalism, all of which combine to form the full biblical-theological portrait.

Briefly, they are (1) the biblical covenants, (2) the various dispensations, and (3) the

kingdom of God. Each of these provides a perspective of Gods unfolding promissory

plan to redeem all of creation. In the subheadings that follow the first two receive

independent treatment, but within each focus will also be given to the kingdom of God.

32Darrell L. Bock, The Reign of the Lord Christ, in Dispensationalism, Israel and the

Church, 37-67.

33Bock, The Reign of the Lord Christ, 54.

15

The Covenants of Progressive

Dispensationalism

In a broad sense, the covenantal architecture of progressive dispensationalism

is not wholly unlike the biblical covenantal associations within covenant theology, and

due recognition is given by progressives to recent biblical scholarship concerning the

ancient Near Eastern contextual nature of the biblical covenants. They are consequently

identified as either unilateral (e.g., Abrahamic and Davidic) or as bilateral (e.g., Mosaic),

reflective of their associations with either the grant covenant model34

or suzerain-vassal

model.35

Against covenant theology, however, there are a few distinctives of the

dispensationalist portrait. First is that the covenants are historical covenants and are made

to Israel, to her people (Mosaic) and to her kings (Davidic). The church is not the

recipient of these covenants since it would not arrive historically until New Testament

fulfillment of the covenants began in Jesus Christ. Secondly, the covenants are successive

and build upon one-another. The Abrahamic covenant builds upon the Noahic, the

Mosaic the Abrahamic, etc. The successions, however, are not abrogations unless the text

explicitly states that such is the case. The promises of former covenants continue into

34Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 132: A grant covenant does not,

however, exclude obligations. However, if the Abrahamic covenant was a bilateral covenant acts of

disobedience on the part of Abraham or his descendants would be sufficient grounds for refusing the

promised blessing. But in fact, God promises to fulfill the blessing in spite of human disobedience (134).

35Blaising notes the work of Hebrew University scholar Moshe Weinfeld, The Covenant of

Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East, Journal of the American Oriential Society 90

(1970); Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 309 n.8. Weinfeld writes: The covenant with

Abraham, and so the covenant with David, indeed belong to the grant type and not to the vassal type. Like

the royal grants in the Ancient Near East so also the covenants with Abraham and David are gifts bestowed

upon individuals who excelled in loyally serving their masters (185). As will be shown, the character of

the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants as grant covenants is testimony of their enduring nature, eventually

finding inaugural fulfillment in Christ.

16

newer covenants. As successions one-upon-another, features of each biblical covenant

should be understood as continuing into the next.

The Abrahamic Covenant. Through the Noahic covenant the theologian

learns of Gods promise to rescue all creation and this rescue is to the end that a

populated earth enjoys fellowship with the Creator, which was the original intent of

Genesis 1 and 2.36

The Noahic covenant reveals, in this manner, a creational foundation

for the rest of biblical history.37

Subsequent the Noahic is the Abrahamic covenant in which God unilaterally

promises to bless Abraham and to bless all the peoples on earth through him.38

The

promise to bless all nations is a critical feature of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12:2-3;

18:18). Nations are part of the divine plan and play an important role, both throughout

biblical history and eschatologically. God supports a plurality of nations in his promises

to Abraham, an important feature considering that, following the events of Babel, the

earths nations are the result of divine judgment (Gen 11). They are now a part of Gods

redemptive plan for creation.

The Abrahamic covenantal blessings are multidimensional, covering several

aspects of creaturely existence. These blessings are intended for Israel but also the

36Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 129.

37Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 140, Blaising writes, The Noahic and

Abrahamic covenants reveal aspects of the overall plan of redemption and set forth a foundational structure

for the subsequent relationship between God, humanity, and life on the earth.

38Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 130. Blaising offers a helpful list of the

contents of the covenant. Blaising also points out that no single passage contains all of the various

elements. As the narratives progress, one or two aspects may receive special focus and more specific

elaboration, and new promises may be added. It is clear, however, that they are meant to be taken together

as one collective promise (132).

17

nations by extension. The unilateral nature of the Abrahamic covenant, which

collectively becomes known as the patriarchal promises, means that it is certain to find

fulfillment in the new covenant. Blaising notes: The New Testament presents Jesus

Christ as the present and future fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant.39

The Mosaic Covenant. In many ways the Mosaic covenant is a restatement of

the Abrahamic and has, as previously stated, the Abrahamic as part of its foundation.

This accounts for the frequent references to the patriarchal promises throughout the Old

Testament.40

However, one important distinction is the movement from the unilateral

grant covenant of the Abrahamic/patriarchal promises, to the bilateral suzerain-vassal

treaty form found in the Israelite covenant.41

This critical change results in the covenant

with Israel being a conditional covenant. As a suzerain-vassal treaty, blessings are

merited and the chance for genuine covenant forfeiture exists. This is demonstrated

historically in Israels exile from her promised land. However, since the Abrahamic

covenant remains abiding it becomes the fundamental reason for Gods continued

relationship with covenant breaking Israel, in essence, giving each new generation the

opportunity for the blessings or curses spoken of in the Mosaic covenant.42

The

interrelation between the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants also accounts for the apparent

equivocation between judgment and salvation in the Old Testament prophetic corpus.43

39Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 134.

40Ibid., 140-2.

41Ibid., 142.

42Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 150.

43Ibid., 144-5; and also 150 with an emphasis on the remnant.

18

The Davidic Covenant.44

In the Davidic grant covenant, God unilaterally

promises to build David his own house, understood as a dynasty, and an eternal kingdom.

This is communicated in 2 Samuel 7 through use of phrases such as your house, your

throne, and your kingdom.45

First Chronicles 17 stresses the establishment of the

descendants kingship within Gods kingly rule over Israel and the nations.46

Again, the

nations are not eclipsed from the divine plan but remain a part of it. Also included in the

Davidic covenant is the promise of a special relationship with Davids son.47

The new

covenant inaugurated in Jesus Christ fulfills many aspects of the Davidic covenant.

The New Covenant.48

As stated previously, because the Abrahamic and

Davidic covenants are of the grant model and therefore unconditional, they are of an

enduring quality and are certain to be realized. The Mosaic covenant, however, is not like

these covenants in that it is a conditional suzerain-vassal treaty. As biblical history

cyclically demonstrates, Israel as a nation is unable to perform her vassal obligations to

the divinely initiated treaty. However, God graciously replaces the Mosaic covenant with

the new covenant, which is of a grant sort, and which finds fulfillment in Jesus Christ,

44Blaising prefers to order the covenantal arrangements following the Mosaic as The New

Covenant followed by The Davidic Covenant; Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 151.

45Ibid., 160.

46Ibid., 160. (Emphasis original.)

47Ibid., 160-1.

48Cf. Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 151-9, for a full treatment.

19

Gods very own Son.49

The new covenant grants Israel a heart of flesh a heart

associated with Gods promised Spirit making her able to keep the new covenant

commandments. This reveals the nature of the new covenant as one of grace, including

the forgiveness of sins as one of its most meaningful characteristics. The promises of the

new covenant also include a future restoration for Israel, resurrection from the dead,

eternal life, and the full realization of Abrahamic and Davidic promises. Israel will exist

in peace with the nations, who also partake of her covenantal blessings.50

It should be noted that the new covenant is an eschatological covenant which

comes in two stages. The most important aspect of fulfillment is with regard to the

Davidic covenant. Christ is now seated on the Davidic throne. On this point Blaising is

emphatic: every New Testament description of the present throne of Jesus is drawn from

Davidic covenant promises.51

The initial fulfillment guarantees the fulfillment of all of

the Davidic promise in the future, including the national and political dimensions of that

promise.52

All of the unilateral biblical covenants are fulfilled holistically in the period

of consummated eschatology. This results in Jesus Christ reigning on earth over Israel

and the nations, who together comprise the one people of God.

49Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 194, write: The promises of a new

covenant, however, looked to a time when the Mosaic covenant would be replaced. It would come to an

end and be replaced by the new covenant.

50Cf. Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 190-3.

51Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 182. (Emphasis original.)

52Ibid., 180. (Emphasis original.)

20

The Dispensations of Progressive

Dispensationalism

The different dispensations should not be seen necessarily as a one-to-one

correspondence with the aforementioned covenants, though there are many associations.

There are primarily four dispensations in progressive dispensationalism: (1) the

Patriarchal; (2) the Mosaic; (3) the Ecclesial; and (4) the Zionic.53

Dispensations are

Gods sovereign arrangements with humankind in which his purposes for the creation and

humankind unfold in history, but only after certain requirements within each dispensation

are met.54

The Patriarchal Dispensation.55

This dispensation is inclusive of the general

period of biblical history beginning with creation to the time of Israel at Sinai and

includes everything in between. As a general dispensation and covering such a lengthy

expanse of biblical history, further dispensational divisions within this period are not

unwarranted, as some dispensationalists observe. Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Seth,

Noah, the Tower of Babel, and Abraham and his sons all belong to this period.

The Mosaic Dispensation. The Mosaic dispensation begins with the giving of

the Law at Sinai and the inauguration of the Mosaic covenant and continues until the time

of Jesus Christs ascension. Since Christ is the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law, and since

the Holy Spirit is given following his ascension, he is included within the Mosaic

dispensation.

53Ibid., 123.

54Ibid., 109-10.

55Ibid., 122.

21

The Ecclesial Dispensation. Since Jesus Christ fulfills the Mosaic

covenant56

and brings the unilateral promises of the Abrahamic, Davidic and new

covenants to fulfillment, he acts as mediator of their respective covenantal blessings.57

The inauguration of his kingdom brings the promised blessings upon Jews and Gentiles

which is the mystery form of the kingdom existing in the church. This dispensation is

related to the inaugurated eschatology spoken of previously and observed in the fact of

Gods presently operative kingdom with Christ who sits enthroned in heaven in partial

fulfillment of the Davidic promises. The Ecclesial dispensation includes the biblical

history beginning with the gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and ending when Jesus

Christ returns in his authoritative parousia, though he comes earlier to rapture the church

prior to the tribulation events prophesied in the Apocalypse of John.

The Zionic Dispensation. While the Ecclesial dispensation involves the

inaugural form of new covenant and kingdom promises, the Zionic dispensation is the

final, authoritative fulfillment of them, in both their earthly and spiritual dimensions. The

Zionic dispensation includes the political restoration of believing Israel during the

millennium, which eventuates in peace and blessings for the whole earth. Prior to the

millennium is the first resurrection, in which the dead in Jesus Christ are brought to life.

During the millennium, Christ reigns over the earth as the authoritative Davidic Messiah

and at the end of this millennium is the final resurrection of the dead (the second

resurrection), judgment for the wicked and eternal glorification for the righteous. The

56Cf. Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 194-9.

57Ibid., 199-211.

22

resultant state of things is a glorified new heavens and new earth with Christ as the

Davidic Messiah reigning over glorified Israel and nations. The final portrait is not unlike

what the covenantal promises each proclaimed previously.

23

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Blaising, Craig A. Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology. Classroom lecture

notes, CHAHT 4363 Church History, Spring 2014. Personal transcriptions.

Blaising, Craig A., and Darrell L. Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids:

BridgePoint Books/Baker Books, 1993.

Blaising, Craig A., and Darrell L. Bock, editors. Dispensationalism, Israel and the

Church: The Search for Definition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,

1992.

Chafer, Lewis S. Dispensationalism. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1936.

Henry, Carl F. H. The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. Grand Rapids:

William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1947.

Kroeze, George. The Variety of Millennial Hopes in the English Reformation, 1560-

1660. Ph.D. diss., Fuller Theological Seminary, 1984.

Ladd, George Eldon. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

_________. Crucial Questions about the Kingdom of God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1952.

_________. Jesus and the Kingdom: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism. New York:

Harper & Row, 1964; Reprinted as The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of

Biblical Realism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974.; and A

Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974).

_________. The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God.

Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959.

Metzger, Bruce M. The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions. Grand

Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.

Michel, Otto. and . Gerhard Friedrich, editor. Theological

Dictionary of the New Testament. [TDNT] Translated and edited by Geoffrey W.

Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1967.

24

Montgomery, J. W. Millennium. In International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.

[ISBE] Revised edition. Edited by Geoffrey W. Bromily. 4 vols. Grand Rapids:

William B. Eerdmans, 1986.

Moore, Russell D. The Kingdom of Christ: The New Evangelical Perspective. Wheaton,

IL: Crossway Books, 2004.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Shuck, Glenn W. Christian Dispensationalism. In The Oxford Handbook of

Millennialism. Edited by Catherine Wessinger. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

2011.

Stone, Jon R. Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century American Millennialisms. In The

Oxford Handbook of Millennialism. Edited by Catherine Wessinger. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2011.

Weinfeld, Moshe. The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near

East. In Journal of the American Oriential Society 90 (1970): 184-203.