Fathers of Dispensationalism on the role of Israel and Jews
C.I. Scofield was an American theologian, minister, and writer whose best-selling annotated Bible popularized Dispensationalism.
I have made my own study of Dispensationalism and now view it as another version of Supersessionism and Replacement Theology (albeit one that’s the most friendly to the Jewish nation when compared to other Christian theological views regarding Israel). This version of these theologies does not try to appropriate the physical promises given to Israel, but rather “only” the spiritual ones. The Pre-tribulational Rapture (which is specifically designed to separate Israel from the “Church”) is another key to the Dispensationalist theology – without it, the whole thing simply falls apart. I will touch on the pre-trib Rapture teaching later and why it’s so important to Dispensationalists, as it deserves its own post.
So, without further ado, I will let two of the fathers of Dispensationism (Chafer & Scofield) speak for themselves on how they viewed Israel and the Jewish people. This information is rarely presented but can be easily looked up by following the bibliographical references I list next to each quote. This will help illustrate the origins of Dispensationalist thinking, even though there’s a number of different forms of this system at the present, its goals remain the same. I welcome comments, especially from those who hold to Dispensationalism.
1) Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer (the founder and first president of Dallas Theological Seminary, an influential founding member of modern Christian Dispensationalism.):
Judaism is not the bud that blossomed into Christianity. Each sets up its ground of relationship between God and man–the Jew by physical birth, the Christian by spiritual birth; each provides its instructions on the life of its adherents–the Law for Israel, the teachings of grace for the Church; each has its sphere of existence– Israel on the earth for all ages to come, the Church in heaven” (Systematic Theology IV:248).
Israel’s new covenant rests specifically on the sovereign “I will” of Jehovah, while the new covenant for the Church is made in Christ’s blood. Everything that Israel will yet have is the present possession of the Church–and infinitely more besides (Systematic Theology VII:98,98).
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 which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity,” (Dispensationalism, p. 107).
2) C.I. Scofield (Leader in Dispensational Premillennialism, second only to Darby in importance), author of the Scofield Reference Bible which became the launching pad for Dispensationalism in USA):
Continuing his research, the student finds mention in Scripture of another distinct body, which is called the church. This body also has a peculiar relation to God and, like Israel, has received from Him specific promises. But similarity ends there, and the most striking contrast begins. Instead of being formed of the natural descendants of Abraham alone, it is a body in which the distinction of Jew and Gentile is lost. Instead of the relation being one of mere covenant, it is one of birth. Instead of obedience bringing the reward of earthly greatness and wealth, the church is taught to be content with food and raiment, and to expect persecution and hatred; it is perceived that just as distinctly as Israel stands connected with temporal and earthly things, so distinctly does the church stand connected with spiritual and heavenly things. (Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth)
Comparing, then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, he finds that in origin, calling, promise, worship, principles of conduct, and future destiny that ALL IS CONTRAST. (Scofield about the Church and Israel as having totally separate identities, callings, among other things, and even separate future destinies. (Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth)
It should be needless to say that, in THIS DISPENSATION, neither Jew nor Gentile can be saved otherwise than by the exercise of that faith on the Lord Jesus Christ whereby both are born again (John 3:3, 16) and are baptized into that “one body” (I Con 12:13) which is “the church” (Eph. 1:22-23). In the church the distinction of Jew and Gentile disappears. (Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth)
In the predictions concerning the future of Israel and the church, the distinction is still more startling. The church will be taken away from the earth entirely, but restored Israel is yet to have her greatest earthly splendor and power. (Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth)
It may safely be said that the Judaizing of the church has done more to hinder her progress, pervert her mission, and destroy her spiritually than all other causes combined. (Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth)
Let me ask you, what is God doing in this age of ours? Is He not taking out of the Gentiles a people? A few Jews are being converted, for Paul tells us there is always a remnant in Israel according to the election of grace (Rom. 11:5), but the great, the altogether vast majority of the Church is taken out of the Gentiles. This we all see. To believe this is not at all a matter of faith, but of simple observation. Not, anywhere, the conversion of all, but everywhere, the taking out of some. The evangelization of the world, then, and not its conversion, is the mission committed to the Church. To do this, to preach the Gospel unto the uttermost parts of the earth, to offer salvation to every creature, is our responsibility. It is the divinely appointed means for the calling out of a people for His Name, the Church, the “Ecclesia.” (C.I. Scofield’s “The Biggest Failure of the Church Age” on the essential nature of the “church” and the “Church Age”)
“The Jew was promised an earthly inheritance, earthly wealth, earthly honor, earthly power. The Church is promised no such thing, but is pointed always to heaven as the place where she is to receive her rest and her reward. The promise to the Church is a promise of persecution, if faithful in this world, but a promise of a great inheritance and reward hereafter. In the meantime, she is to be a pilgrim body, passing through this scene, but abiding above.” (C.I. Scofield’s “The Biggest Failure of the Church Age” on the nature of the “church” and the “Church Age”)
Nice work, Gene. You’ve zeroed in a major linchpin of Dispensationalism.
Thanks, Carl!
“The Jew was promised an earthly inheritance, earthly wealth, earthly honor, earthly power. The Church is promised no such thing, but is pointed always to heaven as the place where she is to receive her rest and her reward”.
Which explains why the church is so future-oriented in teaching, thinking, and action, focused on “going home to Jesus”, so to speak.
It’s kind of strange, because I posted a blog today that speaks to the differences between Jews and Christians relative to time-orientation and purpose. I tried to illustrate why Christians are always looking at the horizon and waiting for the “bus to Heaven” while Jews are more pointed to serving God in the here and now.
Thanks for the blog post, Gene. It’s more than a little scary.
[Thanks, Daily Minyan. Excellent blog. Here's what I ran into recently while webbing away.]
SCHOLARS WEIGH MY RESEARCH (update)
by Dave MacPherson
(For more than 40 years my pretrib critics have falsely claimed that leading scholars condemn my research. Since those critics continue to deliberately distort and censor (even on Wikipedia etc.) my evidence that Edward Irving’s group as well as Margaret Macdonald taught a pretrib rapture before John Darby and his group did, I hereby present reactions to my research from leading scholars who haven’t had a huge axe to grind either for or against pretrib dispensationalism. See web articles like “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” and “More Facts About Margaret Macdonald.”
Loraine Boettner (theologian, author): “I think that you have done a magnificent job in showing the real origin of the Pre-trib rapture theory.”
F. F. Bruce (theologian, encyclopedia contributor): “It is strange that Darby should acknowledge his indebtedness to a young lady in Limerick and say nothing about the young lady in Port Glasgow [that is, not acknowledge her pre-Antichrist rapture of part of the church]….If this work of yours can do anything to counter the influence of Hal Lindsey…, you will have rendered a signal service.” Superficial—-and even devious—-scholarship loves to repeat Bruce’s 1975 surmise that pretrib was “in the air in the 1820s and 1830s.” Hired critic Thomas Ice knows that this wasn’t a scientific conclusion (does reliable data rest literally “in the air”?), and Ice moreover has ignored Bruce’s later statements complimenting my evidence!
Gary DeMar (theologian, author): “THE RAPTURE PLOT is the never-before-told, true story of the plot—-how plagiarism and subtle document changes created the ‘mother of all revisionisms.’ A fascinating piece of detective work.”
Robert H. Gundry (theologian, author): “As usual, Dave MacPherson overwhelms his critics with a superior knowledge of the primary sources. His is a rare combination of historical research and investigative reporting. Those who would refute him have failed to outhustle him, especially in the tracking down of information uncatalogued in academic libraries.” Superficial scholarship is aware that the first—-1973—-printing of Gundry’s THE CHURCH AND THE TRIBULATION stated on pp. 185, 187: “The likelihood is that Edward Irving was the first to suggest the pretribulational rapture….the outpouring on Margaret Macdonald did not include revelation of a pretribulational rapture….” But careful scholarship has long known that after Gundry saw my Macdonald findings, he deleted his Irving statement and substituted favorable comments about the Scottish lassie—-changes appearing in his classic work since the 1980′s!
John H. Kromminga (Calvin Sem. president emeritus): “The material appears to be well researched, and this impression is confirmed by the excellent comments you cite from well-established evangelical commentators.”
Francis Nigel Lee (church historian etc., 9 earned doctorates!): “Dave MacPherson, in his various books, has made a major contribution toward vindicating Historic Christian Eschatology. The 1830 innovations of the disturbed Margaret Macdonald documented by MacPherson – in part or in whole – immediately spread to Edward Irving and his followers, then to J. N. Darby and Plymouth Brethrenism, and were later popularized by the dispensationalistic Scofield Reference Bible, by Classic Pentecostalism, and by latter-day pretribulationists like J. F. Walvoord and Hal Lindsey.”
Harold Lindsell (church historian, author): “…must reading for anyone who is interested in the [pretrib] origins….”
C. S. Lovett (pastor, author): “You have to be, in my opinion, the world’s authority on Margaret.”
Peter Marshall (pastor, author): “I am in emphatic agreement with you on your thesis.”
Walter Martin (researcher, author): “[MacPherson has produced] a fascinating historical detective story…with surprising and not easily refutable conclusions.”
J. Gordon Melton (editor): “According to the best scholarship available, the pretribulation, premillennial eschatology originated among members of the Catholic Apostolic Church as a result of a vision and revelation to Margaret MacDonald. See Dave MacPherson, THE UNBELIEVABLE PRE-TRIB ORIGIN.” (ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN RELIGIONS, 1978)
Gary North (author, church historian): “…Dave MacPherson has inflicted a deep wound on the pre-trib camp by showing that a teenage Scottish girl named Margaret Macdonald…came up with this doctrine….” (Dispensationalism in Transition, Nov., 1988)
Harold J. Ockenga (theologian, author): “You have done your research well.”
J. I. Packer (author, church historian): “From my own explorations of the origins of Darbyism I judge that you are presenting facts fairly, and I am glad you are, for I also regard dispensationalism as an unhappy aberration.”
J. Barton Payne (theologian, author): “MacPherson has once and for all overthrown Ernest Sandeen’s assertions that the Irvingites never ‘advocated any doctrine resembling the secret rapture’ and that to connect J. N. Darby and early dispensationalism with Irving’s church is ‘a groundless and pernicious charge’….For serious students of the history of dispensationalism the study of MacPherson’s discoveries has become a must.” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Winter, 1974)
The Prairie Overcomer (Canada): “…MacPherson’s case seems to be watertight.” (July, 1974)
Reformed Review: “MacPherson has done excellent historical research.” (Spring, 1985)
Ian S. Rennie (author, church historian): “…it is likely that [Margaret's revelation] was grist for Darby’s mill.” (DREAMS, VISIONS AND ORACLES, 1977)
R. J. Rushdoony (theologian, author): “Dave MacPherson has been responsible for major change in the eschatology of evangelical churches by his devastating studies of some of the central aspects thereof. In THE RAPTURE PLOT MacPherson tells us of the strange tale of ‘rapture’ writings, revisions, cover-ups, altercations, and confusions. No one has equalled MacPherson in his research on the ‘pre-trib rapture.’ Attempts to discredit his research have failed….”
The Seminary Review: “[MacPherson] shows conclusively that Margaret Macdonald was the originator of the concept.” (June, 1984)
Oswald J. Smith (pastor, author): “You have some excellent thoughts here that will be difficult to answer.”
Merrill C. Tenney (theologian, author): “…the connection between Margaret Macdonald and Irvingites and Brethren is reasonably well established. You have done a valuable piece of research.”
The Witness (oldest & largest Darbyist Brethren magazine in England): “What [MacPherson] succeeds in establishing is that the [pretrib] view outlined was first stated by a certain Margaret Macdonald…early in 1830.” (April, 1974)
(The critics who have tried to cover up the above scholarship are basically the ones who’ve tried to muddy the waters by “discovering” hints of pretrib before 1830. For more on this, see my internet article entitled “Deceiving And Being Deceived.”)
Thanks, Jed, for the eye opening research. Of course, the Rapture junkies really hate this fellow you cited, Dave_MacPherson: http://raptureready.com/who/Dave_MacPherson.html
It’s interesting, but John Howard Yoder saw Dispensationalism as Non- Supersessionist in his book, Preface to Theology. He thought this aspect was a unique and positive step as Dispensationalism did not seek to replace Israel if I recall correctly. Of course, as Yoder noted elsewhere, he had major problems with how Dispensationalists treated the Sermon on the Mount, etc.
I was breast-fed (almost literally) on Ryrie-Walvoord-et al style dispensationalism, and began to question its conclusions while at Word of Life Bible Institute in Schroon Lake, NY. Couldn’t find a satisfactory replacement, however, till stumbling on to Walter Kaiser’s Promise-Plan theology around 2000. Anyway, with that background, it has been more than a bit fascinating to me to note the UMJC’s move back in the direction of dispensational tenets; most notably with bi-lateral ecclesiology.
You can find my historic summary and concise evaluation of dispensationalism at http://literaryjoe.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/considering-dispensationalism/. I figured you might find the thoughts of an insider/post-dispensationalist interesting.
By the way, I had not really noticed the move toward bi-lateral ecclesiology in Messianic Judaism when I wrote this piece, and had an entirely different audience in mind, so I certainly don’t exhaustively address the issue, but enough, perhaps, that you can see the similarities.
Nate, thanks for the comment and your article.
I replied via this post.
We are in complete agreement about Dispensationalism getting the perpetuity of ethnic Israel in God’s plan correct. Of course, they didn’t get the how right, but simply stating that ethnic Israel continued to matter in God’s redemptive plan was an enormous corrective to the supersessionism that had by the early 1900′s largely swept across the Christian world.
I would not say that bi-lateral ecclesiology = dispensationalism, but that it is a move in a similar direction.
“We are in complete agreement about Dispensationalism getting the perpetuity of ethnic Israel in God’s plan correct.”
Nate, I am glad that we at least can agree on that!