All who hold to a high view of Scripture are called Fundamentalists by those who favour a more liberal approach to the Bible. Reformed people, generally speaking, do not appreciate being identified with Fundamentalists because there are serious differences between them and the Reformed. There may be agreement on such doctrines as the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth of Christ and the substitu­tionary atonement, but there are many other areas of disagreement too. For instance, Fundamentalists tend to be Arminian in their understanding of the way of salvation and premillennial in their doctrine of eschatology (last things); they have a completely different view of the church and the kingdom of God, and hold to a strictly literal interpretation of Scripture, especially in connec­tion with prophecy. This is particularly true of that branch of Fundamentalism called Dispensationalism which flourishes especially in North America. It represents a powerful force in society, influencing not only religion and morality, but in recent years, in America at least, also politics.

Dispensationalism, while most popular in America, has its origin in the Brethren movement which arose in England and Ireland in the 1830's. In Europe they are known as Plymouth Brethren, because the city of Plymouth in south-western England was at one time the strongest centre of the movement. The forerunner of dispensational was the Dutch theologian John Cocceius (1603-1669). Cocceius held that the ceremonial law was imposed on Israel as a penalty for the sin of worshipping the golden calf at Sinai. He also believed that there was a basic difference between the old  and New Testament as far as the divine method of salvation was concerned; the Old emphasizing law and the New stressing grace as the way whereby sinners could be saved. It was especially this feature of Cocceius'  thought which marks him as a forerunner of modern Dispensationalism; although there is no real evidence that the British and American leaders of the movement derived their ideas from Cocceius' writings.

The real father of Dispensationalism was John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). Born in London, England, of Irish parents, he was ordained to the ministry in 1825 in the Anglican Church of Ireland. Darby's ministry was very successful. Irish Catholics were converted to Protestantism at the rate of six to eight hundred per week. While enjoying this great success, Darby became aware of the evil of Erastianism (government control of the church), which characterized especially the Irish branch of the Anglican Church. His Bible study led him to a completely different concept of the church. In his view the organized church of his day was thoroughly apostate and therefore he urged true believers to withdraw themselves from it and to organize their own fellowships. Such fellowships of true saints, he believed, constituted the "Bride of Christ", while organized churches were merely part of Christendom.

Darby also came to the conviction that an ordained ministry and eldership was not necessary to the proper observance of the Lord's Supper. Believers were at liberty to meet together to break bread without any ecclesiastical supervision whatsoever. But what about the many references in the New Testament to the office of elders? Darby "solved" this problem by distinguishing between the "professing church", characterized by a ministry or eldership and having "successive" or "derivative" authority, and the "Church" described by Paul as a "mystery" which is entirely unique, completely distinct from Israel, a heavenly body having no connection with the earth. The former he called "the Jewish" or "Petrine" church and the latter the "Bride of Christ". This distinction between the true (Pauline) Church and the professing (Petrine) church is fundamental to an understanding of later Dispensationalism.

Next Darby took up the study of Biblical prophecy. This resulted in a dispensational scheme of interpreting the Bible. "Rightly dividing the word of truth," for Darby meant, dividing the Bible into seven dispensations. A dispensation he defined as a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God. Darby also believed that some parts of Scripture refer exclusively to the Jews and that others have meaning only for Christians.

Closely connected with his doctrine of the church is Darby's view of the "Coming" (of Christ). Since the church as a heavenly body has no connection with earthly events, and since such events concern only Israel and the nations, the church must live in constant expectancy of the coming of the Lord. Darby further believed that Christ could come at any time for His saints (the rapture), after which He would come again with His saints (the appearing or revelation).

To do justice to Darbyism or the Brethren movement, we must try to understand the situation out of which it arose. There was at that time a widespread feeling among serious Christians that the church was worldly and that few had any interest in spiritual or heavenly things. Hence Darby's emphasis on the heavenly character of the church and his distinction between it and the professing church with its worldly arrangements, notably the sharp difference between clergy and laity. Darby stressed the priesthood of all believers and he saw the true church as the gathering of all those called out of this world by Christ who recognized Him alone as their Head and lived in daily expectation of His coming.

Darby was not some wild-eyed fanatic, but a very learned and pious Christian. As far as his view of salvation is concerned, he was a Calvinist, believing firmly in the doctrines of grace. He was highly respected by true Christians of all denominations for his deep devotion to Christ and his love for the saints. Darby was a voluminous writer, publishing over forty volumes of six hundred or more pages each on all sorts of religious subjects. Among his writings is a complete translation of the Bible from the original languages, which displays his tremendous learning and scholarship. Darby died at the ripe age of eighty-two after a very productive and useful life.

Modern Dispensationalism is an outgrowth of the Brethren movement, although it differs from it in one important respect: it does not hold to Darby's extreme anti-ecclesiasticism. Dispensationalists today for the most part do not stigmatize all denominations of the visible, professing church as "sects" as he did. But Darby's prophetic views have been widely adopted in the United States and Canada. Among the leaders of this movement in the late nineteenth century may be mentioned J.H. Brookes, H.A. Ironside, I.M. Haldeman, L.S. Chafer, and of course C.I. Scofield.

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield was born in 1843. He studied law and practiced it in Washington, D.C. He was also active in politics. During these early years he did not know the Lord and lived a worldly life, drinking heavily. Converted in 1879, Scofield continued as a lawyer for three more years and then, without any formal training in theology, was ordained pastor of a small Congregational church in Dallas, Texas. Later in life he came across the writings of Darby and was converted to his views. With help form others he prepared what came to be known as the Scofield Bible, which was published first in 1909 and since then has been reprinted many times, so that some three million copies have been sold in the United States alone. The Scofield Bible consists of the text of the King James Version, accompanied by a copious system of explanatory notes and cross-references. J.G. Vos sums up the importance and success of Scofield's annotated Bible this way:

It was a master stroke of psychology of Scofield to place his comments on the same pages with the inspired text of Scripture. The Scofield notes thereby acquired, in many people's minds, what might be called 'authority by association'. Also the strongly dogmatic, oracular tone of the Scofield notes makes the book popular. Scofield never argues and never states his reasons. He simply asserts that something is true. Another reason for the popularity of the Scofield Bible is that it rings true on the great fundamental doctrines of Christianity such as the inspira­tion of Scripture, the virgin birth of Christ and the substitutionary atonement. Yet another reason may be discerned, perhaps, in the manner in which the Scofield and Pilgrim Bibles (a special edition for young people) are advertised by their publisher, the Oxford University Press. They are represented as simply Bibles with references and helps. The fact that these two Bibles are based throughout on a highly debatable system known as Darby-Scofield Dispensationalism is never mentioned in the advertising. The public is thus led to believe that these are simply Bibles with helps, comparable, say, to the Thompson Chain-Reference Bible. Thus the naive purchaser pays his money and receives, without realizing it, a package of very opinionated and debatable propaganda, in which the most debatable matters, on which sincere Christians deeply disagree, are presented with oracular certainty, and without a shadow of suggestion that any other interpretation is held by anyone or indeed is compatible with faith in the Bible as the Word of God. J.G. Vos, "An Explanation and Appraisal of Dispensationalism"
in Blue Banner Faith and Life, Vol. 18, April-June 1963, p. 57

Today there are scores of Bible schools and Institutes in Canada and the United States where Dispensationalism is taught and the Scofield Reference Bible is studied as the main textbook. The number of books and periodicals in circulation today which expound this viewpoint may reach into the thousands. Dispensationalism is preached from countless pulpits and via as many radio broadcasts. All of this is bound to have an influence on those who read Dispensational literature or listen to radio programs with this emphasis.

Also among us there are people who regularly tune in to such programs as The Back to the Bible Broadcast, Through the Bible with Vernon McGee and similar dispensationally oriented pro­grams. To be sure, there is much good in what these men teach, but there are also areas where we as Reformed people have significant differences. For this reason I would like to examine Dispensationalism in some detail as part of our duty to "prove all things" and "hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21).

Dispensationalists are people who believe that the Bible is divided into many different dispensations or periods. The term "dispensation" comes from the Greek word Oikonomia which means arrangement or management. It may refer to a management, administration, or stewardship entrusted to someone (Luke 16:2-4) or to a plan, arrangement, or "economy" appointed by God (Eph. 1:10). In this latter sense the term is sometimes used to refer to different arrangements by which God has made Himself known or related Himself to men during different periods of sacred history. All Christians recognize at least two dispensations, namely the Old and the New Testament. But dispensationalists see as many as seven different periods, during which God tests man's obedience on the basis of some specific revelation of His will.

Reformed theology holds to three dispensations: the period from the creation of man to the Fall (covenant of works), the period from the Fall to Christ (the old covenant), and the period from Christ to the end of the world (the new covenant). The latter two covenants are two administrations of the same covenant of grace. The seven dispensations according to dispensationalists are:

1. Innocency, before the Fall of man;
2. Conscience, from Adam's Fall to Noah;
3. Human government, from Noah to Abraham;
4. Promise, from Abraham to Moses;
5. Law, from Moses to Christ;
6. Grace, from Christ to the rapture;
7. The Kingdom, from Christ's return to the end of the world.

The basic error here is that these seven dispensations are seen as periods of time during which mankind is repeatedly tested by God.

There is no Scriptural evidence for this notion at all. The Bible mentions only one test to which God exposed man: the probationary command of the covenant of works. Another serious error of dispensationalism is that it sets up these various periods as conflicting with each other with respect to purpose. JG Vos calls this the very essence of dispensationalism, namely, "the setting up of Dispensations as periods of time in Bible history which are regarded as mutually antithetical rather than mutually complementary." Blue Banner of Faith and Life, vol. 18, April-June 1963, p. 59) Vos then makes this important statement:

Orthodox theology regards all dispensations as basically identical in purpose, all coming under the master theme of divine grace in bringing the elect of God to glory. Ortho­dox theology holds that various periods of sacred history differ in circumstances, modes of administration, and the like, but that beneath these superficial differences there is an underlying unity and continuity which is more basic than the differences. Dispensationalism, on the other hand denies the unity and emphasizes the difference." Ibid., p. 59

According to dispensationalism God deals with man in different ways: in the Old Testament, at least between Moses and Christ, he was judged on the basis of his obedience to law, while in the New Testament the relationship is based on man's acceptance of divine grace. At Sinai, says Scofield, Israel rashly accepted the law as a covenant of works and thus took upon him a burden that proved to be too heavy to bear. Only in the New Testament God revealed His wondrous grace in Jesus Christ. The favourite text for Dispensationalists, therefore, is John 1:17: "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

They interpret this to mean that law and grace are opposite and mutually exclusive things which like oil and water cannot be mixed. But surely this is a complete misunderstanding of the text. We have in this passage what we find so often in Scripture, namely a comparison which for the sake of emphasis is stated as if it were an absolute contrast. Because law is more prominent in the Mosaic economy and grace characterizes more the dispensation which began with Christ, they are placed opposite each other as contrasts. But anyone who has more than a superficial understanding of the Old Testament knows that there was much grace there – the whole sacrificial system pointed to Christ. By the same token the New Testament contains many laws – the commandments of Christ and the rules for Christian living laid down by the apostles.

Does dispensationalism then teach that there are different ways of salvation in different dispensations? Scofield and also more recent spokesmen for dispensationalism deny this emphatically. But it is difficult to see how they can evade the charge. Their position taken to its logical conclusion can only mean that salvation by grace is limited to the dispensation of grace, and that those living during the period between Moses and Christ were either not saved at all or found peace with God some other way.

The fundamental error of dispensationalism which leads to all sorts of other mistaken notions is its false distinction between Israel and the Church. As we saw last time, Darby, the father of dispensationalism, believed that the Church or the Bride of Christ, is a mystery which has only been revealed in the New Testament or dispensation of grace. The Old Testament says nothing about the Church, does not even prophesy anything about it, and therefore the Church must be sharply distinguished from Israel, God's ancient covenant people.

According to Darby, Israel is always spoken of in the Old Testament as an earthly people and its future is usually described in terms of national and this-worldly concepts. The nature and destiny of the Church, on the other hand, is described in the New Testament in terms of heavenly realities. The contrast between Israel as an earthly nation and the church as a heavenly body does not mean that there is no relation between Israel and the church. Darby recognized a relationship of type and fulfilment, but he would not hear of the idea that Israel was the predecessor of the Church and that the latter succeeded the former as the people of God.

This idea, namely that the Church of Christ is the true Israel and therefore has inherited Israel's covenant promises, Darby saw as the fundamental error of historic Christianity. Darby and his successors firmly believe that this distinction between Israel and the Church supplies them with the key to a proper interpretation of prophecy.

If, as dispensationalists believe, the Church is not the successor to Israel, then most of the prophecies addressed to Israel as an earthly nation and people are yet to be fulfilled. There are of course also prophecies referring to the Church, but these must be kept separate from those intended for Israel. Thus, as Lewis S. Chafer, the systematic theologian of dispensationalism, puts it: "The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved, while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved." ("Dispensationalism", in Bibliotheca Sacra 93, 1936, p. 448)

Here we have the basic premise of dispensationalism: there are two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity. Rightly dividing the Word of Truth, therefore means, according to dispensationalist, dividing the Scriptures, not merely into compartments of time or dispensations, but also into sections that apply either to Israel or to the Church or to the Gentiles. The key text here is 1 Cor. 10:32.

This dispensational method of interpreting Scripture invented by Darby – he himself of course claims it was revealed to him – represents a radical departure from the historic Christian understanding of the Word of God.

Orthodox Christian theology in general and Reformed theo­logy in particular, fundamentally disagree with this whole notion of a dual divine purpose with respect to Israel and the Church. As John Calvin has taught so clearly and forcefully: there is a spiritual unity and continuity of the Church with the Old Testament Israel. And as for the purpose of God with Israel and the Church, Calvin would say, there is only one purpose: the salvation of His people from both dispensations. As J.G. Vos puts it:

"The over-all theme or subject of Scripture is the revelation and implementation of God's gracious purpose to redeem the elect unto eternal glory. The dominant theme of Scripture, then, is God's grace toward the elect. Subordinate to this is the history of Israel, which is related to the salvation of the elect as a means to an end … Israel is important, and the Old Testament is important, because it prepares the way for the coming of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. In other words, Israel is important as essential to the origin of Christianity. But in dispensationalism, Israel is important for its own sake." Blue Banner Faith and Life, p. 61