So, there’s this thing that’s been on my mind lately, you see. I’ve been seeing some content floating around that uses this framework called Dispensationalism, and while it can be a cool way to understand the Bible, it also kind of rubs me the wrong way in how it can limit people’s experience with Scripture.
Now, don’t get me wrong, there are definitely guidelines for reading the Bible. You can’t just freestyle it, right? We gotta consider “authorial intent” – what the writer meant, who they were writing for, and the intended meaning for that specific audience back then. Doctrines can’t just be invented on a whim, and ideas gotta have some serious biblical backing.
Here’s the thing that gets me though: Dispensationalism. This way of looking at things sees God’s interaction with his chosen people throughout history happening in distinct phases, kind of different from Covenantalism’s more unified perspective.
One of the main differences, and the one I find a bit much sometimes, is this super strict line Dispensationalism draws between the Church and Israel. It suggests separate covenants and whole different plans for salvation for each group. Like, the Church (Christians) are saved by grace through faith in Jesus, and then the Jews (meaning folks in Orthodox Judaism) are saved (justified) by doing good works or following the “Law” and whatever’s left from the Torah and Rabbinical teachings that applies today.
This view, especially in this specific content I saw, makes it seem like there’s this super rigid sorting system for which Bible verses or passages apply to who. From what I gather, the Old Testament and even parts of the New Testament, since they were written for a mostly Jewish audience, are somehow strictly for Jewish people to read and apply, not Christians.
And that, to me, is just confusing at best. The Bible, the whole thing, is relevant to Christians. Paul, when he was writing to Christians, even says that “all Scripture is God-breathed” – and he’s referring to the Old Testament, which was probably all the “scripture” they had at the time. Then in another part of the Bible, 1st Corinthians, Paul talks about Old Testament stories being “written for our instruction,” and he’s addressing a mostly Gentile audience here.
Of course, there’s definitely stuff in both the Old and New Testament that we shouldn’t take literally, follow word-for-word. But they’re still, as the Bible itself says, “profitable” – even if it’s not about taking everything super literally. Understanding the intent behind the writing is key here.
Dispensationalism can also get a little weird with how it explains God’s process of choosing and justifying people. It gets kind of complicated when some interpretations say Peter’s preaching near Pentecost wasn’t the same “justifying Gospel” we have today, but some different flavor that didn’t necessarily justify sinners through Christ alone. This seems strange because Paul talks about preaching a different kind of Gospel as something that deserves to be “accursed,” even if it’s coming from angels!
The point is, there’s only one Gospel, one way for everyone to be justified, and that’s through Jesus Christ’s atoning work, for both Gentiles and Jews – today, included. This is a big point in Peter’s sermon in Acts 4, see? Because it was suggested that Peter was preaching a different kind of Gospel here, but that clearly wasn’t the case.
Look, maybe it’s just a difference in interpretation, but the Bible seems pretty clear on some things. While Paul does acknowledge some distinctions between Jews and Gentiles in Romans, the way we enter God’s Kingdom seems pretty similar – from the protoevangelium, the universality of the Abrahamic Covenant, the wake-up call of the Mosaic Covenant, the foreshadowing prophecy of the Davidic Covenant, all leading up to the ultimate work of Jesus Christ for believing sinners.
Dispensationalism can be a helpful tool for reading the Bible, I get that. Their emphasis on “rightly dividing the word of truth” is totally cool. But I just don’t think it should come at the expense of limiting God’s grace, making the whole Bible seem less valuable, or dividing his people where there shouldn’t be a division.
Full disclosure: I wrote this article with Gemini, Google’s AI chatbot. I rambled to it and asked it to make sense of that rambling — to organize my thoughts better, and edit it the best way it can. I have a day job, I want to do other things, but I still want to blog. So I use AI to make that possible for me. I would go through the generated article a few times over. I would go back-and-forth with Gemini to at least make sure it still had my voice and the stuff that I actually wanted to say in my original rambling. It’s great help, but please don’t do this in your school essays or work (if you aren’t allowed to do so, obviously). This disclosure notice, though? No AI here. And you probably felt that because it sucks.