Last year I had a "road to Damascus moment" and I would like to share this with you. This paper has been written to defend dispensationalism and aid the reader in grasping the teachings of Dispensational Theology. It also serves as a response to my previous beliefs. I came to faith in the Lord in September 2012, which means I have been a Christian for 12 years. My Baptist Pastor guided me to the Lord, and I became a member of my local Baptist Chapel in November 2012 when I was baptized as a believer at just 18 years old. I cherished being part of that community. I later resigned my membership from the local Baptist Church for personal reasons and others, which I prefer not to elaborate on. These reasons were of lesser importance, and in hindsight, I realize I made an unwise decision due to my youth and lack of understanding. This choice led me into a rigorous, hardline Calvinist community. My Baptist Pastor worked diligently to guide, teach, and direct me on a proper path regarding life and theology. One important lesson I learned early on was that God interacts with different individuals in varied ways at different times, a concept known as dispensationalism.
After
leaving the Baptist Church, I joined a Reformed Church because I was drawn to
their street preaching methods and their strong stance on particular issues. It
was during this period that I became familiar with Calvinism and the
"TULIP" doctrines. In my youth, I wholeheartedly embraced Calvinism
and advocated it with enthusiasm. My journey into Calvinism didn’t stem from
Scripture alone; it was influenced by reading works by John Calvin and other
historical Reformed theologians. These readings instilled in me a sense of
pride, causing me to look down upon those who criticized Calvin or the authors
I admired.
As
a follower of Calvin, I was introduced to Covenant theology, replacement
theology, and an amillennial perspective on the Bible. I was so committed to
these doctrines that I even authored a book defending them, which I have since
retracted from publication. What prompted me to reject Calvinism and revert to
my dispensational roots? The simplest and most honest answer is that I
revisited the Bible and challenged my beliefs. As I read Scripture and measured
my Calvinist interpretations against it, I realized that many of my views did
not align with biblical text. Now, at 30 years old and with over a decade of
studying the Scriptures, I have concluded that my former beliefs were
incorrect.
The
doctrines I once embraced and have since renounced revolve around limited
atonement, irresistible grace, and the Reformed perspective on Israel and the
Church. My youthful fervour led me down a perilous and narrow-minded path that,
through God’s grace, I have now turned away from. I am grateful that the blind
spots have been cleared from my eyes, and the truth of Scripture has liberated
me from erroneous beliefs. I have returned to my beginnings, and I hope this
paper clarifies matters. We all experience phases in our youth where we hold
onto false beliefs. Unfortunately for me, my errors were published. I cannot
change the material that has been sold, other than to correct the record and
retract all such publications. I have strived to do this as best as I can. By
writing this paper, I anticipate facing criticism from my former Calvinist
acquaintances, and they may use my past against me. I do not fear their
judgment; I fear God. Thus, I have decided to write this paper with that
perspective.
I
have pondered numerous times throughout the writing process whether there is a
necessity to address this topic and subject myself to criticism. Ultimately, I
believe it is essential to clarify the record while being honest before the
Lord. I do not consider myself an authority on Dispensationalism. Many have
written extensively on this subject beyond my capacity. Since I have publicly
expressed and defended Reformed theology and Replacement theology, I consider
it appropriate to clarify my current stance. Writing this paper would have been
unnecessary if I had privately adhered to Calvinism, Replacement theology, and
Covenant theology, but that was not the case. I publicly declared my position
due to my own actions and naivety. I realize that some may take time to accept
my change of heart, but over time, I hope to heal wounds and restore
fellowship. I have returned to my dispensational foundations, akin to the
prodigal son’s return in Luke 15. I strayed from the truth by engaging with
literature that led me toward Calvinism. After I became a believer, I was eager
to explore materials regarding my new faith in Christ. I distinctly remember my
Pastor’s loving warning that anything labelled “Reformed” was not beneficial
and would lead me astray. I appreciate that guidance now, despite my initial
disregard for it; through God’s grace, I have come to understand its
significance.
No
one transitions to Calvinism and Replacement Theology purely by studying the
Bible. One must consult specific books that teach how to interpret certain
Scripture passages through the lens of Reformed thought. Among the many books I
read was the Westminster Confession of Faith, pivotal in shaping my
understanding of Scripture and embracing doctrines absent in the Bible, which
are rather man-made, such as infant baptism.
I
wrote this paper to assist those who find themselves confined within
Calvinistic theology. May the truth of Scripture liberate you from such
bondage. I acknowledge that not all Reformed Christians reject a dispensational
perspective and that some do not adhere to typical Reformed beliefs regarding
Israel and the Church. Nonetheless, I contend that a majority who affirm
Calvinism's five points also adopt a non-dispensational viewpoint.
Recently
I had an idea to write a book on the topic of dispensationalism, (this paper
would have been the introduction to the book). However, there are far greater
works already available than I could ever write. One such publication I have
found helpful and recommend is Dispensationalism by Charles C. Ryrie, which is
a more extensive work than that of Mr. Scofield’s timeless classic, Rightly
Dividing the Word of Truth.
The
Seven Dispensations as Defined in the Scofield Reference Bible
The
First Dispensation: Innocency. Man was created in innocency, placed in a perfect
environment, subjected to an absolutely simple test, and warned of the
consequence of disobedience. The woman fell through pride; the man,
deliberately (1 Tim. 2:14). God restored His sinning creatures, but the
dispensation of innocency ended in the judgment of the Expulsion (Gen. 3:24).
The
Second Dispensation: Conscience. By disobedience man came to a personal and
experimental knowledge of good and evil—of good as obedience, of evil as
disobedience to the known will of God. Through that knowledge conscience awoke.
Expelled from Eden and placed under the second, or Adamic Covenant, man was
responsible to do all known good, to abstain from all known evil, and to
approach God through sacrifice. The result of this second testing of man is
stated in Gen. 6:5, and the dispensation ended in the judgment of the Flood.
Apparently “the east of the garden” (v. 24), where were the cherubims and the
flame, remained the place of worship through this second dispensation.
The
Third Dispensation: Human Government. Under Conscience, as in Innocency,
man utterly failed, and the judgment of the Flood marks the end of the second
dispensation and the beginning of the third. The declaration of the Noahic
Covenant subjects humanity to a new test. Its distinctive feature is the
institution, for the first time, of human government—the government of man by
man. The highest function of government is the judicial taking of life. All
other governmental powers are implied in that. It follows that the third
dispensation is distinctively that of human government. Man is responsible to
govern the world for God. That responsibility rested upon the whole race, Jew
and Gentile, until the failure of Israel under the Palestinian Covenant (Deut.
28–30:1–10) brought the judgment of the Captivities, when “the times of the
Gentiles” (See Lk. 21:24; Rev. 16:14) began, and the government of the world
passed exclusively into Gentile hands (Dan. 2:36–45; Lk. 21:24; Acts 15:14–17).
That both Israel and the Gentiles have governed for self, not God, is sadly
apparent. The judgment of the confusion of tongues ended the racial testing;
that of the captivities the Jewish; while the Gentile testing will end in the
smiting of the Image (Dan. 2.) and the judgment of the nations (Mt. 25:31–46).
The
Fourth Dispensation: Promise. For Abraham and his descendants it is evident that
the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 15:18, note) made a great change. They became
distinctively the heirs of promise. That covenant is wholly gracious and
unconditional. The descendants of Abraham had but to abide in their own land to
inherit every blessing. In Egypt they lost their blessings, but not their
covenant. The Dispensation of Promise ended when Israel rashly accepted the law
(Ex. 19:8). Grace had prepared a deliverer (Moses), provided a sacrifice for
the guilty, and by divine power brought them out of bondage (Ex. 19:4); but at
Sinai they exchanged grace for law. The Dispensation of Promise extends from
Gen. 12:1 to Ex. 19:8, and was exclusively Israelitish. The dispensation must
be distinguished from the covenant. The former is a mode of testing; the latter
is everlasting because unconditional. The law did not abrogate the Abrahamic
Covenant (Gal. 3:15–18), but was an intermediate disciplinary dealing “till the
Seed should come to whom the promise was made” (Gal. 3:19–29; 4:1–7). Only the
dispensation, as a testing of Israel, ended at the giving of the law.
The
Fifth Dispensation: Law.
This dispensation extends from Sinai to Calvary—from the Exodus to the Cross.
The history of Israel in the wilderness and in the land is one long record of
the violation of the law. The testing of the nation by law ended in the
judgment of the Captivities, but the dispensation itself ended at the Cross.
(1) Man’s state at the beginning (Ex. 19:1–4). (2) His responsibility (Ex.
19:5, 6; Rom. 10:5). (3) His failure (2 Ki. 17:7–17, 19; Acts 2:22, 23). (4)
The judgment (2 Ki. 17:1–6, 20; 25, 1–11; Lk. 21:20–24).
The
Sixth Dispensation: Grace.
As a dispensation, grace begins with the death and resurrection of Christ (Rom.
3:24–26; 4:24, 25). The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the
condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works
as a fruit of salvation (John 1:12, 13; 3:36; Mt. 21:37; 22:42; John 15:22, 25;
Heb. 1:2; 1 John 5:10–12). The immediate result of this testing was the
rejection of Christ by the Jews, and His crucifixion by Jew and Gentile (Acts
4:27). The predicted end of the testing of man under grace is the apostasy of
the professing church (see “Apostasy,” 2 Tim. 3:1–8, note), and the resultant
apocalyptic judgments. Grace has a twofold manifestation: in salvation (Rom.
3:24, refs.), and in the walk and service of the saved (Rom. 6:15, refs.).
The
Seventh Dispensation: Kingdom. This, the seventh and last of the ordered ages which
condition human life on the earth, is identical with the kingdom covenanted to
David (2 Sam. 7:8–17; Zech. 12:8, Summary; Lk. 1:31–33; 1 Cor. 15:24, Summary),
and gathers into itself under Christ all past “times”: (l) The time of
oppression and misrule ends by Christ taking His kingdom (Isa. 11:3, 4). (2)
The time of testimony and divine forbearance ends in judgment (Mt. 25:31–46;
Acts 17:30, 31; Rev. 20:7–15). (3) The time of toil ends in rest and reward (2
Thes. 1:6, 7). (4) The time of suffering ends in glory (Rom. 8:17, 18). (5) The
time of Israel’s blindness and chastisement ends in restoration and conversion
(Rom. 11:25–27; Ezk. 39:25–29). (6) The times of the Gentiles end in the
smiting of the image and the setting up of the kingdom of the heavens (Dan.
2:34, 35; Rev. 19:15–21). (7) The time of creation’s thraldom ends in
deliverance at the manifestation of the sons of God (Gen. 3:17; Isa. 11:6–8;
Rom. 8:19–21).
NATHAN
A. HUGHES
WREXHAM
OCTOBER
10, 2024
`Sanctify them in the truth; Your
word is truth.
John
17:17
No comments:
Post a Comment