Ranting About Dispensationalism

Dispensational theology, or dispensationalism, formed the foundation of the Scriptural interpretation and understanding which I was taught at the first Bible School I graduated from. For those who don't know, dispensationalism is the teaching that all of Biblical history can be neatly arranged into seven "dispensations," "economies," or "administrations" of how God administered the world. Starting with Innocence, then Conscience, Government, Promise, Law, the Church (or Grace), and finally the Kingdom (referring to the thousand year reign of Christ on earth). It is taught and held by mostly Evangelical, Baptist, Brethren, Pentecostal, and independent churches, and is the predominant view among these. It was born in the mid to late 1800s, and popularized by Darby, Scofield, Moody, and so on.
     On its surface, it is a fairly innocuous and benign outline of the Scriptures. But the trouble comes in when it is actually applied, because it teaches that while God worked one way with human beings during one dispensation, He changes the rules and the way He works during another. Thus, anything which is said during one dispensation can be ignored entirely because it doesn't apply to those living in another.
      Where it comes to the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, it becomes devilish. Because dispensationalism teaches that we in the present day are in the dispensation of the church, or grace, and that began at Pentecost. While the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, as well as His death, burial, and resurrection, occurred during the previous dispensation, and thus can be safely ignored or cherry picked. Thus, only the Epistles of the New Testament really have anything meaningful to say to the Church, and everything else should be interpreted in the light of these writings, or at least the interpretation of these writings which was born from the Protestant Reformation.
     I hope those reading this can understand the problem I now have with dispensationalism. How can you profess to be a follower of Jesus Christ, yet feel free to ignore those things He said that you disagree with? How can one be a disciple if you have no need to actually imitate or learn from the Master? Why call yourself a Christian at all if living how Jesus taught doesn't factor into your thinking at all? It is climbing out on a limb and sawing off the tree!
     The truth is that Paul's writings, James' writings, Peter's, and John's writings can only genuinely be understood from the standpoint of what Jesus taught, because they didn't teach anything different than He did. They went into some further explanation and some details, but it wasn't anything different, and it was always grounded on what Jesus Christ Himself said. They taught what they heard, and saw, and learned from Him; what their ears heard, what their eyes saw, and what their hands held and touched. They were His disciples, and followed the Way He taught the best way they knew how.
     To ignore what Jesus taught is to ignore the salvation and deliverance which He taught in favor of "some other Gospel" as Paul wrote. To say that Paul's writings are more important than the words of Jesus Himself is something that Paul himself would abhor and rebuke. As Paul said, "Who is Paul? Who is Apollos? Who is Kefa?" Paul would have rather never written another word if he had known that people would be saying what He wrote is more important than what Jesus Christ said. He would have attempted to disappear entirely if someone had put his words on a pedestal above Christ's.
     There is nothing more important in the life and discipleship of a Christian than what Jesus taught, and any attempts to negate or minimize His words and instruction in order to justify some interpretation or tradition of human beings is the worst kind of false teaching, because it teaches people to ignore and even disobey Him in His own name.