WHAT IS A DISPENSATION?
There is no more primary problem in the
whole matter of dispensationalism than that of definition. By this is meant not simply arriving at a single
sentence definition of the word but also formulating a definition/description
of the concept. This will require an
examination of the scriptural use of the word, a comparison of the word dispensation
with related words such as age, a study of the use of the word in
church history; and some observations concerning the characteristics and number
of the dispensations.
To say that there is a great lack of
clear thinking on this matter of definition is an understatement. Both dispensationalists and nondispensationalists
are often guilty of lack of clarity.
Many from both groups are satisfied to use the well-known definition
that appears in the notes of the original Scofield Reference Bible: "A
dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect of
obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God. Seven such dispensations are distinguished
in Scripture."[1] Dispensationalists use this definition
without thinking further of its implications in relation to age, for instance,
and without ever examining its basis or lack of basis in the scriptural
revelation itself.
Nondispensationalists use it as a convenient and useful scapegoat simply
because it does not (and could not in two sentences) convey all that is
involved in the concept of a dispensation.
If this concise definition were all that Scofield had to say about
dispensations, then it would be fair to concentrate an attack on it, but if he
has more to say (which he does) then it is not.
The New Scofield Bible, though
beginning the note on dispensations with the same sentence as the original Scofield;
continues with four paragraphs of elaboration. Among other matters those added paragraphs focus on the concepts
of (1) a deposit of divine revelation, (2) man's stewardship responsibility to
that revelation, and (3) the time period during which a dispensation
operates. Also it is made quite clear
that dispensations are not separate ways of salvation; rather, there is only
one way of salvation – "by God's grace through the work of Christ… on the
cross."[2] More recent nondispensationalists seem to
prefer not to interact with this expanded definition/description in their
discussions about dispensationalism.[3]
To draw an analogy in another doctrinal
area, a conservative, when pressed for a concise statement of his theory of the
Atonement, will answer, "I believe in substitutionary
atonement." This is entirely
accurate and probably the best concise answer that could be given. But liberals are well known for using this
simple statement as a means of ridicule, for they point out that the work of
Christ cannot be confined to a single aspect like substitution. That is true, and the conservative
recognizes that the entire work of Christ cannot be fully expressed by the
single word substitution. Nevertheless,
all the work of Christ is based on His vicarious sacrifice.
In like manner, the
nondispensationalist points out some lack in the old Scofield definition
and with a wave of the hand dismisses dispensationalism on the basis of the
weakness of the definition! Perhaps the
earlier definition does not distinguish dispensation from age, but
such failure does not mean that they cannot be distinguished or that they have
not been distinguished by others. And
it certainly does not mean that the entire system is condemned. John Wick Bowman resorts to this stratagem
when he declares, "The word translated 'dispensation' in the Greek Bible…
never means nor does it ever have any reference to a period of time as such, as
Scofield's definition demands."[4] Though the accuracy of Bowman's statement
may be questioned by the references in Ephesians 1:10 and 3:9, in making such a
charge against Scofield's definition, Bowman attempts to discredit the entire
system.
The popularity of the Scofield
Reference Bible has focused considerable attention on the definition in its
notes and has made it a prime target for attack by nondispensationalists. However, scholars who are critical of
dispensationalism should recognize that Scofield is not the only one who has defined
the word, and, if there are lacks in his definition, they ought to recognize
that his revisers and others have offered definitions that are more
expanded. At any rate, any scholarly
critique should certainly take into account several definitions if the system
is to be represented fairly. For
instance, L. S. Chafer did not emphasize the time aspect of a dispensation in
his concept,[5] and long ago
the present writer defined a dispensation entirely in terms of economy rather
than age.[6] Any critique ought to take into account such
definitions as well as Scofield's.
THE ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD DISPENSATION
The English word dispensation is
an Anglicized form of the Latin dipensatio, which the Vulgate uses to
translate the Greek word. The
Latin verb is a compound, meaning "to weigh out or dispense."[7]
Three principal ideas are connected to the meaning of the English word: (1)
"The action of dealing out or distributing"; (2) "the action of
administering, ordering, or managing; the system by which things are
administered"; and (3) "the action of dispensing with some
requirement."[8] In further defining the use of the word
theologically, the same dictionary says that a dispensation is "a stage in
a progressive revelation, expressly adapted to the needs of a particular nation
or period of time…. Also, the age or period during which a system has
prevailed."[9] It is interesting to notice, in view of the
usual criticism of Scofield's definition, that in this dictionary definition dispensation
and age are closely related.
The Greek word oikonomia comes
from the verb that means to manage, regulate, administer, and plan.[10] The word itself is a compound whose parts
mean literally "to divide, apportion, administer or manage the affairs of
an inhabited house." In the papyri
the officer (oikonomos) who administered a dispensation was referred to
as a steward or manager of an estate, or as a treasurer.[11] Thus, the central idea in the word dispensation
is that of managing or administering the affairs of a household.
SCRIPTURAL USE OF THE WORD DISPENSATION
The various forms of the word dispensation
appear in the New Testament twenty times.
The verb oikonomeō is
used once in Luke 16:2, where it is translated "to be a steward." The
noun oikonomos appears ten times (Luke 12:42; 16:1, 3, 8; Rom. 16:23; 1
Cor. 4:1, 2; Gal. 4:2; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 4:10) and is usually translated
"steward" or "manager" (but "treasurer" in Rom.
16:23). The noun oikonomia is used nine times (Luke 16:2,3, 4; 1 Cor.
9:17; Eph. 1:10; 3:2,9; Col. 1:25; 1 Tim. 1:4). In these instances it is
translated variously ("stewardship," "dis-pensation,"
"administration," "job," "commission").
The Features Displayed
Before attempting any formal definition, it might be useful to note some of the features connected with the word itself as it appears in the New Testament. These are not necessarily features of the dispensational scheme but are simply observable connections in which the word is used. In Christ's teaching the word is confined to two parables recorded in Luke (12:42; 16:1, 3, 8). In both cases the parables concern the management of a household by a steward or manager, but the parable recorded in Luke 16 gives some important characteristics of a stewardship, or dispensational, arrangement. These characteristics include the following:
1 Basically
there are two parties: the one whose authority it is to delegate duties, and
the one whose responsibility it is to carry out these charges. The rich man and
the steward (or manager) play these roles in the parable of Luke 16 (v. 1).
2 There
are specific responsibilities. In the
parable the steward failed in his known duties when he wasted the goods of his
lord (v. 1).
3 Accountability,
as well as responsibility, is part of the arrangement. A steward may be called to account for the
discharge of his stewardship at any time, for it is the owner's or master's
prerogative to expect faithful obedience to the duties entrusted to the steward
(v. 2).
4 A
change may be made at any time unfaithfulness is found in the existing
administration ("can no longer be steward").
These four features give some idea of
what was involved in the concept of a dispensational arrangement as the word
was used in the time of Christ.
The other occurrences of the word are
all in the writings of Paul except for the reference in 1 Peter 4:10. Certain features of the concept are evident
from these usages.
1 God is the one to whom men are responsible in the discharge of their stewardship obligations. In three instances this relationship to God is mentioned by Paul (1 Cor. 4:1-2; Titus 1:7).
2 Faithfulness
is required of those to whom a dispensational responsibility is committed (1
Cor. 4:2). This is illustrated by Erastus, who held the important position of
treasurer (steward) of the city (Rom. 16:23).
3 A
stewardship may end at an appointed time (Gal. 4:2). In this reference the end
of the stewardship came because of a different purpose being introduced. This reference also shows that a dispensation
is connected with time.
4 Dispensations
are connected with the mysteries of God, that is, with specific revelation from
God (1 Cor. 4:1; Eph. 3:2; Col. 1:25).
5 Dispensation
and age are connected ideas, but the words are not exactly interchangeable. For instance, Paul declares that the
revelation of the present dispensation was hidden "for ages," meaning
simply a long period of time (Eph. 3:9). The same thing is said in Colossians
1:26. However, since a dispensation
operates within a time period, the concepts are related.
6 At least three dispensations (as
commonly understood in dispensational teaching) are mentioned by Paul. In Ephesians 1:10 he writes of “an
administration [dispensation, KJV] suitable to the fullness of the times,"
which is a future period. In Ephesians 3:2 he designates the "stewardship
[dispensation, KJV] of God's grace," which was the emphasis of the content
of his preaching at that time. In
Colossians 1:25-26 it is implied that another dispensation preceded the present
one, in which the mystery of Christ in the believer is revealed.
It is important to notice that in the
first two of these instances there can be no question that the Bible uses
the word dispensation in exactly the same way the dispensationalist
does. Even Bowman admits that:
“Actually, of all seven dispensations accepted by Scofield and his colleagues,
there are but two (Grace and the Fullness of Time) in connection with which the
word 'dispensation' is ever used at all."[12]
The negative cast of Bowman's statement must not obscure the importance of this
point. The Bible does name two
dispensations in the same way that dispensationalists do (and implies a third).
Granted, it does not name seven, but, since it does name two, perhaps there is
something to this teaching called dispensationalism.
Almost all opponents of
dispensationalism try to make much of their claim that the Scriptures do not
use the word dispensation in the same theological and technical sense
that the dispensational scheme of teaching does. Two facts should be pointed out in answer to this charge. The first has already been stated in the
preceding paragraph: Scripture on at least two occasions does use the word in
the same way the dispensationalist does.
Thus, the charge is simply not true.
Second,
it is perfectly valid to take a biblical word and use it in a theological sense
as long as the theological use is not unbiblical. All conservatives do this with the word
atonement. It is a word that is
never used in the New Testament, yet theologically all use it to stand for what
is involved in the death of Christ.
Biblically, the word atonement is not used in connection with the
death of Christ, but, since it is
used of the covering for sin in the Old Testament, it is not unbiblical to give
it a theological meaning that is in reality more inclusive than its strict
biblical usage. The dispensationalist
does a similar thing with the word dispensation. The usage of the word and the features of the word, as
outlined above, prove conclusively that the dispensationalist has in no way
used the word in an unbiblical sense when he uses it as a designation for his
system of teaching. Even Daniel Fuller
admits this: "It is this latter sense which gives rise to the perfectly
valid theological usage of the word 'dispensation' to denote a period of time
during which God deals with man in a certain way."[13]
As far as the use of the word in
Scripture is concerned, a dispensation may be defined as a stewardship,
administration, oversight, or management of others' property. As we have seen, this involves
responsibility, accountability, and faithfulness on the part of the steward.
The theological definition of the word
is based on the biblical usage and characteristics. Scofield's definition has been quoted: "A dispensation is a
period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific
revelation of the will of God."
As has been seen, the usual criticism leveled against this definition is
that it is not true to the meaning of oikonomia since it says nothing
about a stewardship but emphasizes the period of time aspect. Yet note that Fuller admits the validity of
practically the same definition, namely, that the word may be used "to
denote a period of time during which God deals with man in a certain way."[14] However, there is a certain justification to
the criticism, for a dispensation is primarily a stewardship arrangement and
not a period of time (though obviously the arrangement will exist during a
period of time). Age and dispensation
are not synonymous in meaning, even though they may exactly coincide in the
historical outworking. A dispensation
is basically the arrangement involved, not the time involved; and a proper
definition will take this into account.
However, there is no reason for great alarm if a definition does ascribe
time to a dispensation.
A concise definition of a dispensation is this: A
dispensation is a distinguishable economy in the outworking of Gods purpose. If one were describing a dispensation,
he would include other things, such as the ideas of distinctive revelation,
responsibility, testing, failure, and judgment. But at this point we are seeking a definition, not a description. In using the word economy as the core
of the definition, the emphasis is put on the biblical meaning of the word
itself. Economy also suggests
that certain features of different dispensations
might be the same or similar. Differing
political and economic economies are not completely different, yet they are
distinguishably different. Communistic
and capitalistic economies are basically different, and yet there are
functions, features, and items in these opposing economies that are the same. Likewise, in the different economies of
God's running the affairs of this world certain features are similar. However, the word distinguishable in
the definition points out that some features are distinctive to each
dispensation and mark them off from each other as different dispensations. These are contained in the particular
revelation distinctive to each dispensation.
The
phrase "the outworking of God's purpose" in the definition reminds us
that the viewpoint in distinguishing the dispensations is God's, not
man's. The dispensations are economies
instituted and brought to their purposeful conclusion by God. The
distinguishing features are introduced by God; the similar features are
retained by God; and the overall combined purpose of the whole program is the
glory of God. Erich Sauer states it this way:
A new period always
begins only when from the side of God a change is introduced in the
composition of the principles valid up to that time; that is, when from the
side of God three things concur:
To summarize: Dispensationalism views the world as a household run by God. In
His household-world God is dispensing or administering its affairs according to
His own will and in various stages of revelation in the passage of time. These various stages mark off the
distinguishably different economies in the outworking of His total purpose, and
these different economies constitute the dispensations. The understanding of God's differing
economies is essential to a proper interpretation of His revelation within
those various economies.
Before leaving the subject of
definitions, it may be helpful to append several other useful definitions of a
dispensation. W. Graham Scroggie, a
noted Scottish writer and pastor, gave this helpful definition:
The word oikonomia bears one
significance, and means “an administration," whether of a house, or
property, of a state, or a nation, or as in the present study, the
administration of the human race or any part of it, at any given time. Just as a parent would govern his household
in different ways, according to varying necessity, yet ever for one good end,
so God has at different times dealt with men in different ways, according to
the necessity of the case, but throughout for one great, grand end.[16]
Harry Ironside, prince of
dispensational preachers, defined it this way: "An economy is an ordered
condition of things…. There are various
economies running through the Word of God.
A dispensation, an economy, then, is that particular order or condition
of things prevailing in one special age which does not necessarily prevail in
another."[17]
Clarence E. Mason, Jr., dean for many
years at Philadelphia College of Bible, includes descriptive features of
dispensations in his definition:
The word dispensation
means literally a stewardship or administration or economy. Therefore, in its Biblical usage, a dispensation
is a divinely established stewardship of a particular revelation of God's
mind and will which brings added responsibility to the whole race of men or
that portion of the race to whom the revelation is particularly given by God.
Associated with the
revelation, on the one hand, are promises of reward or blessing for those
responding to the obedience of faith, while on the other hand there are
warnings of judgment upon those who do not respond in the obedience of faith to
that particular revelation.
However, though the
time period (age) ends, certain principles of the revelation (dispensation
or stewardship) are often carried over into succeeding ages, because God's
truth does not cease to be truth, and these principles become part of the
cumulative body of truth for which man is responsible in the progressive unfolding
revelation of God's redemptive purpose.[18]
Another definition also includes
descriptive elements:
A dispensation is God's distinctive
method of governing mankind or a group of men during a period of human history,
marked by a crucial event, test, failure, and judgment. From the divine standpoint, it is a
stewardship, a rule of life, or a responsibility for managing God's affairs in
His house. From the historical standpoint,
it is a stage in the progress of revelation.[19]
The
differentiation of viewpoints in this definition is a helpful distinction. A dispensation is from God's viewpoint an
economy; from man's, a responsibility; and in relation to progressive
revelation, a stage in it.
The more
recent movement that calls itself progressive dispensationalism includes some
important differences from normative dispensationalism. Though its adherents do not wish to be
restricted by a sine qua non, they acknowledge the straightforward
meaning of the word; namely, "The word dispensation refers to a particular arrangement by which
God regulates the way human beings relate to Him."[20] However, they distance themselves from
classic dispensationalists by describing themselves as understanding "the
dispensations not simply as different arrangements between God and
humankind, but as successive arrangements in the progressive revelation
and accomplishment of redemption."[21] ¢
Taken from Dispensationalism, chapter 2, by
Charles C. Ryrie, Moody Press, copyright 1966, revised 1995. Used with permission. Further reproduction is prohibited without
written permission from the publisher.
Charles C. Ryrie has
written twenty-eight books that have sold more than 1.5 million copies
worldwide. Some of these titles
include: The Ryrie Study Bible, The Holy Spirit, and Balancing
the Christian Life. He is professor
emeritus at Dallas Theological Seminary and acts as visiting professor of
theology at Philadelphia College of Bible.
[1] Scofield Reference Bible (New York:
Oxford, 1909), 5.
[2] New
Scofield Reference Bible (N.Y.: Oxford, 1976), 3.
[3] E.g., John
H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth (Brentwood, TN:
Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 152, 270.
[4] John Wick
Bowman, “The Bible and Modern Religions: II.
Dispensationalism,” Interpretation 10 (April 1956): 174.
[5] L.
S. Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas: Seminary Press, 1936), 8-9.
[6] Charles
C. Ryrie, "The Necessity of Dispensation-alism," Bibliotheca Sacra
114 (July 1957), 251.
[7]
W. W. Skeat, An Etymological
Dictionary of the English Language (Oxford: Clarendon, 1946), 174.
[8] Oxford English
Dictionary (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1933),
3:481.
[9] Ibid.
[10] W. F. Arndt
and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago:
Univ. of Chicago Press, 1957), 562.
[11] J.
H. Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), 442-43.
[12]
Bowman, The Bible and Modern
Religions: II. Dispensationalism, 175.
[13] Daniel
P. Fuller, The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism (Th.D. diss., Northern
Baptist Theological Seminary, Chicago, 1957), 20.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Erich
Sauer, The Dawn of World Redemption (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951), 194.
[16] W. Graham
Scroggie, Ruling Lines of Progressive Revelation (London: Morgan &
Scott, 1918), 62-63.
[17] H. A.
Ironside, In the Heavenlies (New York: Loizeaux Bros., n.d.), 67.
[18] C. E.
Mason, Jr., “Eschatology” (mimeographed notes for course at Philadelphia
College of Bible, rev. 1962), 5-6.
[19] Paul David
Nevin, “Some Major Problems in Dispensational Interpretation” (unpublished Th.D. diss., Dallas Theological
Seminary, 1963), 97.
[20] Craig A.
Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Wheaton,
IL: Victor, 1993), 14.
[21] Ibid., 48.