Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church

I gave this book 5 stars because it has so much varied material for the dispensationalist. It can help beginners however, this book is more applicable to those who have a basic understanding of dispensationalism and covenant theology. I will always regard this book as a main-stay in my library (kindle library) for years to come. Invest in this book and you will not go away dissatisfied.

Unlike the hostility and polemics that usually accompany this issue, Craig Blaising and Darrell Bock have offered us a good willed, honest dialog on this divisive subject. It's interesting that they invited three theologians from the Covenant community to offer responses in this book. I am not aware of a single book written by a covenant theologian which has done the same. I wish someone would. My appreciation goes out to these gentlemen. May their tribe increase.

Insightful commentary on the subject matter.

good book

This book is a must-read for anyone seeking information on the state of Dispensationalism (a system of biblical interpretation founded by John Nelson Darby in the 19th century, and widely used within both Christian fundamentalism and evangelicalism) during the last two decades of the 20th century. At this point in time it's probably impossible to find a single source that fully explains the history, philosophical foundations, and relationship between Dispensationalism and its chief rival, Covenant theology. This has not been for want of trying, but the issues are so complex that one would need to read several key works to get the full picture. This book partially fulfills that need, and so can be added to the list of strategic resources, with an additional (somewhat surprising) bonus: it contains critiques of Dispensationalism (although mainly the new brand of Dispensationalism that this book promotes) from both within and without. This is highly unusual considering the editors both consider themselves Dispensationalists. Historically Dispensationalists have been loathe to open themselves up to criticism so freely. ¶ The majority of the book's contributors consider themselves Progressive Dispensationalists, and they explain how and why they depart from earlier versions of Dispensationalism. Afterward, three non-dispensational authors (Willem VanGemeren, Bruce Waltke and Walter Kaiser) provide feedback. Both of these aspects (i.e., internal and external criticism) are much-needed steps forward for a theological movement that has tended both to be ingrown and to avoid real, constructive dialogue with outsiders. ¶ The authors examine several issues that have historically occupied a central place in Dispensationalism, including the nature of God's kingdom, the relationship between Law and Gospel, Israel and the Church, and so on. Most of these issues, in fact, either already existed within Protestant theology since the 16th century, or had been raised (by the Anabaptist camp, in some cases) during the Reformation. For example, in the 18th century Reformed theologian Jonathan Edwards noted that the precise relationship between Law and Gospel has historically been one of the most contentious issues in all of Christian theology. ¶ The idea of a radical disjunction between the Israel and the Church, however, is unique to Dispensationalism. Dispensationalist Charles Calwell Ryrie taught that the distinction between Israel and the Church as the "sine qua non" of true Dispensationalism. Classical Dispensationalism (from Darby, through C.I. Scofield and Lewis Sperry Chafer (who died in the 1950s)) held that Israel and the Church are two separate and distinct "peoples of God," Israel being God's "earthly people" and the Church being God's "heavenly people," each with it's own divinely-ordained program and destiny. Classical Dispensationalism further held that this distinction would endure through all eternity. ¶ The Revised Dispensationalism of the 1960s, '70s and early '80s (when names like Ryrie and John F. Walvoord dominated the movement) softened the "eternal" aspect of this distinction somewhat, and also made a highly significant concession on the biblical doctrine of the New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:8-13). Specifically, Revised Dispensationalism abandoned Chafer's "Two New Covenants" view, which had supposedly safeguarded certain premises embedded in Dispensational hermeneutics. The problem with that view was that it was totally unsustainable from the data of the New Testament. ¶ These changes set the stage for the advent of Progressive Dispensationalism movement in the mid-1980s. Despite the original Dispensationalism's affinities with Lutheran doctrine (especially in the relationship between Law and Gospel), Progressive Dispensationalism represents a step toward the Covenant theology of the Reformed churches (which, interestingly, was Lewis Sperry Chafer's original background). As such it is perceived as a threat by Classical and Revised Dispensationalists, which is unfortunate, because in this reviewer's opinion, the Progressive Dispensationalist position is on much firmer exegetical footing that any of its predecessors were. ¶ The final essays by VanGemeren, Waltke and Kaiser (especially the first two) alone are worth the price of the book. They address remaining points of contention between Dispensationalism and non-Dispensationalist systems which, if heeded, may point the way toward further movement in the direction of Covenant theology. If the trend continues, Dispensationalism may eventually find itself relegated to the pages of 19th and 20th century Church history. Even so, the need to respond to Dispensationalism has helped conservative evangelical Protestantism sharpen its heremeneutical theories and methods, and this has not been a bad thing.

Good product!

If You Are Questioning Dispensational Theology Read This! Essays from 11 Progressive Dispensationalists trying to change the core of unbiblical Classic Dispensational Theology and 3 non-Dispensationalists applauding the direction, but underscoring they have not come nearly far enough. Reading all of these essays it becomes self-evident that Dispensational Theology at its most basic level is man made eisegesis and a house of cards invented by Darby, Plymouth Brethren, Schofield and perpetuated by long line of misguided theologians from the Dallas Theological Seminary (Schafer, Pentecost, Walvoord, Ryrie, etc.) among others.

Although much more needs to be said on this topic the authors and editors have begun this work in a good place. Make sure to consult the later work by Bock and Blaising along with Saucy's volume.

What is the status of Israel before God according to the Bible and what is the distinction between Israel and the church? What is the fulfillment of the Covenants? All these are questions of imminence for theology and the dispensationalists have answered these questions all in favour oft the church and Israel, whereas non-dispensationalists deny Israel` s prominent status as a nation and people.This book is a bold but responsible attempt to genuinly reaffirm how dispensationalists respond to some of the problems of theology and exegesis in the context of Israel and the church. This book also signals a significant restructuring of dispensationalism within the framework of inaugurated eschatology. As is shown the revised dispensationalism affects hermeneutics largely. The comments are rich but not exhausting the topics. They offer a really good introduction to the field of dispensationalism which is mainly one of how to read the Bible in the context of Israel and the church. The editors and contributors to this book have to be respected for their openness, fairness and scholarship.What must be saluted is that the contributions show that dispensationalism is not a fixed dogmatic theology, but ready for development and growth in the awareness of spiritual knowledge which is just in accordance with the alleged dispensationalism in Gods plans. They are committed to accurate exegesis of the Bible, not to confessions or doctrinal statements, and they seem to be willing to revise them if necessary in the light of their research. This is very much apparent here throughout the reading.The introduction draws attention to the fact that dispensationalists are reexamining the meaning of dispensationalism. In these years dispensationalists have tried to reflect more accurately the relationship between the church and Israel and to better define dispensationalism. The authors of this book have conducted an extensive reinvestigation. They still hold a futurist premillennialism that has strongly maintained the return of Christ and a national an political future of Israel in the divine plan for history whereby their biblical approach interprets discontinuity of the Old and New Testaments as historical changes in divine-human dispensations. Therefore dispensationalism is the attempt to reflect the different purposes in the divine plan which lead in the end to one goal in Christ. Christ is seen as the agent, director and fulfiller of dispensational change. He fulfills all the promises through the church and Israel for the church and for Israel. The church and Israel are together his people, but they go different ways for the sake of the salvation of all nations. Christ inaugurated the present dispensation, that of the eschatological Spirit, through his atonement, resurrection and enthronement. The previous dispensation anticipated and then witnessed it. The future dispensation is starting with his return and goes on to see all promises of the Old Testament not yet fulfilled to be finally consummated. The final dispensation is one in which all things (" ta panta") will be united in Christ. What an amazing outlook! Amazing that this is the only way in which all the promises of the Old and New Testament are shown to be consummated.The book also includes responses of non- dispensationalists, who bring their own traditional concerns into the dialogue. But they have to face some biblical facts that are undeniable according to W.C. Kaiser: 1. God never made a formal covenant with the church. 2. The New Testament clearly says that God has not cast off disobedient Israel (Rom 11:1. 25-26). 3. The church is nowhere called "New Israel" 4. The "new covenant" was made with "the house of Judah and the house of Israel", not with the Church! 5. Jesus did not disavow the restoration of the kingdom of Israel but instead specifically affirmed it 6. that "all Israel shall be saved" of Rom 11:25-26 refers to Jewish people, not the church people.Rather it is concludent that "God kept enlarging the sphere and the contents of his covenant promises while maintaining the base and the foundational realities that were at the heart of it all."As the editors conclude: "This work can function a a catalyst to a greater, more inclusive theological dialogue on the history of redemption."Highly recommended who want to know what the Bible has to say about the status and future of Israel.