Understanding The Bible
STUDY REFERENCE
Clarence E. Mason's "ESCHATOLOGY 1"
SECTION 1G - HISTORIC SKETCH OF
THE DISPENSATIONAL VIEW OF BIBLICAL STUDY |
Return to Syllabus
BY THE AUTHOR
Dr. Clarence E. Mason, Jr.
Philadelphia College of Bible
1970
Edited by Dr. Clarence E. Mason, Jr.
- HISTORIC SKETCH OF THE DISPENSATIONAL VIEW OF BIBLICAL STUDY
- General assumption
- Origin of Dispensationalism
It has been asserted or assumed by almost all opponents of the
dispensational viewpoint that the whole idea is of comparatively recent
origin. Some of the lesser informed have attributed its origin to Dr. C.
I. Scofield (1843-1921) or/and some anonymous confreres. Those who
consider themselves better informed knowingly and unctuously affirm that
Scofield got his idea from John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) with perhaps an
assist from Dr. James H. Brookes (1830-1897), with whom he studied
privately after his conversion in St. Louis in 1879. It is also assumed
that if they but knew the "facts" (that is, of its recent and Plymouth
Brethren origin), most of the present-day adherents of dispensationalism
would be shocked and, very probably, reconsider the advisability of
retaining their view. The following quotes are typical:
Bear begins his treatment of dispensationalism with the statement,
"Dispensationalism as we know it today is of comparatively recent origin,
having had its beginnings in England in the last century among the
Plymouth Brethren."1
A recent writer put it this way: "In the United States, the theology of
the Plymouth Brethren blossomed into Dispensationalism, gaining
adherents from among Christians of every sort, some so remote from
Brethrenism as to be shocked upon learning the source of their doctrines.
This theology has brought into being a large body of literature, a great
number of schools, and many Christian movements. Its adherents have
constituted, if not the backbone, at least much of the bony structure of
conservatism for the past fifty years. Yet it is a theology which is
treated with studied ignorance by large sections of the theological
world."
- Implications of this theory
This approach leaves two impressions: (1) that a movement of so recent
origin must of necessity be assumed to be untrue; (2) it likewise implies
that a person would never get any such ideas from personal Bible study,
and that, therefore, the critics of dispensationalism have successfully
traced the source of contamination and infection to Darby and the
(Plymouth) Brethren.
- Explanation and answer
- Origin of Dispensationalism
(1) It is admitted that in the last 150 years a substantial literature has
been produced, and a greatly enlarged public have been brought into the
picture through this literature and the spoken word as preached from
pulpits, taught in Bible conferences and Bible schools, etc. This is
especially true since 1875, and more so since the First World War, whose
world-shaking events led to a greater and more earnest interest in the
study of prophecy on the part of many. But we feel there is an adequate
explanation for these facts. The line of thought goes somewhat like
this...
(2) As it will be shown later in these notes, when we come to the proper
place, Premillennialism was strongly entrenched in the thought and life of
the Early Church of the first four centuries, reaching formal climax in
the great church creeds, such as the Nicean and Athanasian Creeds. There
would of necessity be dispensations involved in the transitions required
by Chiliasm, from Israel and her promises to her rejection of Messiah and
the establishment of the Church, to the translation of the Church, to the
return of Christ and the setting up of His kingdom. That there was basic
recognition of such transitions, involving a procession of ages or
dispensations will be affirmed later on pages 26-27 and 117-124.
(3) We dispensationalists feel that the disrupted conditions which led to
the dominance of Rome in the dark ages were not only sufficient
explanation for the eclipse of this truth in the Church's thinking and
writing, but for the distortion by Rome of the other great truths which
the Church expressed at the Council of Nicea, etc.; e.g., justification.
(4) We dispensationalists feel that it is not difficult to see why such
truths as justification by faith and the problems of ecclesiology should
have occupied the primary attention of the reformers and most of their
adherents for a considerable time, as they sought to dig out from under
the Roman debris.
(5) We dispensationalists feel that the truths the Early Church held dear
in relation to the Lord's return and kingdom inevitably came to light and
prominence as men took time - after the heat of reformation controversy
died down - to study what the Scripture had to say about God's plan for
the world and its future.
(6) We dispensationalists feel that, hence, the recovery of the
premillennial emphasis of the Early Church was the proper result of such
study, and that it was seen to be part of the overall picture of God's
plan for the ages.
(7) In point of time, therefore, the literature on dispensationalism would
be the last to be developed. Men had previously been chiliasts but had not
developed a full -blown system which shared its place with other great
doctrines in the well-ordered program of God's dealings with man. Here and
there they had said things which showed they realized that the return of
Christ was not an isolated event but the culmination of God's purpose in
the world. Nevertheless the logical dispensational system which is the
basis for the culminating rule of Christ on the earth was developed when
men gave the same amount of time to the study of this field as they had
previously given to the other areas of Bible doctrine, such as
Soteriology, Theology Proper, Anthropology, Hamartiology, Ecclesiology,
and so on.
NOTE:
Premillennialism known as "Chiliasm" in those days, being the Greek word
for 1000. There were no post-or Amillennialists then, hence no need for
the term Premillennialists. It was a standard part of the doctrine of the
Church that Christ was coming back to earth again to rule for 1000 years.
(Chiliasm is pronounced Kiliasm, like "Ch" in Christ.)
(8) We shall demonstrate (pages 26ff.)that there was some discussion on
the ages-dispensations question from very early times. It will be
particularly pointed out, in rebuttal of the Darby-origin idea, that no
less than 15 writers of more or less prominence wrote (many quite
extensively) on the subject in pre-Darby times, between 1625-1825,
(9) Dispensationalists are convinced that there can be no logical
Premillennialism which is not based upon the dispensational emphases of
the covenants with Abraham and David. There is certainly no future for the
Jew or need for a kingdom reign of the Lord Jesus Christ if the covenants
with Abraham and David affecting Israel, and through her the world, are
not the valid basis and the controlling interpretational principles of one
s eschatology. Therefore, the rediscovery of Premillennialism - held so
earnestly by the Early Church - could not logically have failed to lead to
an extensive study and elaboration of the principles which demand a return
and reign of Christ. This is nothing more nor less than dispensationalism
- Implications concerning Dispensationalism's Origin answered
(1) The movement must be untrue because comparatively new.
The previous section a, and G, 3 (to follow), will have shown that the
emphasis on the very recent origin of dispensationalism is erroneous. But
even among those writers who first of all seek to establish a recent date,
some must admit, as does Bear, that this is not a valid argument:
"of course, doctrine may be new and yet not untrue" (Ibid, pp. 3-4).
Rutgers, one of the most thoroughgoing foes. says: "Dispensationalism is
modern in the sense that its widespread acceptance among Christians in
America dates from the last decade of the 19th century. But it is not an
invention of these few decades." (W. H. Rutgers, Premillennialism in
America, p. 172). Reese is stronger. He puts it: "It matters not that
(views) are new and novel. . .what men call heresy sometimes proves to be
the truth of God." (Alexander Reese, The Approaching Advent of Christ, pp.
IX, 29.). "Kromminga goes farther to assert: "Subdivision of dispensations
had already been made by Tertullian and Joachim...' (D. H. Kromminga, The
Millennium in the Church, p. 289).
Are the propounders of this insinuation willing to accept responsibility
for that principle if it were applied to the rise of the period of modern
missions? Certainly the emphasis on missions so evident in the Early
Church was lost in the Dark Ages under Rome. Just as certainly the
Reformers did little or nothing to revive missionary activity and some
spoke against the idea. Today everyone recognizes William Carey as the
Father of the Modern Missionary Era (1790). The date was comparatively
recent, after the writing of the U.S. Constitution. Is the missionary
truth and emphasis, so recently recovered, to be urged as dangerous and
automatically untrue because of that fact? Then, let such arguments be
seen to be what they are, unfounded and grossly misleading.
(2) No one would ever get any idea like dispensationalism from a study of
the Scripture. It _is always traceable to a source of contamination and
infection.
A few years ago I received part of an unpublished paper from Talmage
Wilson which makes a rather desperate effort to identify Darby as the
source of infection in the case of James H. Brookes, because Darby visited
Brookes in St. Louis on two or three occasions starting in 1864. In
response to Wilson's request for an evaluation of his paper, I wrote the
following which serves to illustrate the problem and to answer the
implication raised:
"Now concerning your comment on Brookes's relation to Darby. Undoubtedly
men are influenced by what other men speak and write, and undoubtedly
Brookes influenced Scofield, but I feel that your line of evidence which
places Darby, Brookes, Scofield, Moody, Torrey, etc. in a sort of
apostolic succession is circumstantial and presumptive, but not
demonstrative, especially in the case of Brookes and Darby. But, supposing
such influence could be demonstrated.
"My first reaction is: What would be wrong with that, if it were true? Do
not most of us find ourselves influenced by what we have heard and read
from others? So, if your presumption were true, it would scarcely call for
special comment, for people are supposed to pass on to others what God
shows them from their study of the Bible. But, if the one influenced the
other, why might not Brookes have influenced Darby quite as much as you
presume Darby influenced Brookes?
"It appears that who influenced whom would be of little significance
unless you were committed to the proposition that the system is so
abstruse that no one else would have conceivably come up with it.
"But if, as Ehlert indicates (on pages 26ff. of this syllabus), other men
prior to Darby had independently expressed themselves as seeing a series
of eras-' dispensations-ages-or economies under which God dealt with men,
then what happens to your earnest attempt to trace all this erroneous
system back to Darby? There is no indication that Darby got it from any of
them, and there is certainly no indication that any of them got their
ideas from one another.
"What is the conclusion then? May it be that you have overlooked something
very important? Is it not possible that careful reading of the Scripture
could lead different men at different times without collaboration to a
similar or the same conclusion? In other words, are you not assuming too
much when you imply that no one would get such a system out of personal
research of the Scripture; that he could only get it from someone else,
who in some strange way developed a queer system of interpretation?
"Though it would have been perfectly proper for Brookes to accept Darby's
explanation, or for Darby to accept someone else's explanation, if Brookes
says that he came to his own conclusions from a study of Scripture, is
there not precedent in the experience of some of those other men (Poiret,
Watts, etc.) for. such a possibility? If the system is not inherent in
Scripture and must always be learned from another (and thus be traced back
to one source of contamination) how do you explain the multiple adherents
m pre-Darby days? (pp.28ff.)
"Also, is it not true that although we do hear and read others, have we
not again and again in our own experience deliberately set time apart and
given ourselves to a study of what the text of Scripture itself says?
Particularly because he was equipped for this study with skill in the
original languages, I would see nothing in Brookes's statement that would
make it impossible for him to say honestly and sincerely that he came to
his conclusion from a study of the Scripture, even if he, at the same
time, evaluated things that he had heard and read pro and con on the
subject. I am trying to say that it is possible to be convinced that the
Scripture says something without succumbing to some book(s) or oral
exposition(s) of some writer(s) and/or speaker(s). I think he means he
made his final decision solely on the authority of Scripture regardless of
whether it cut directly across or agreed with what Darby or anyone else
said or wrote.
"May I cite a very similar illustration in Dr. Albert Schweitzer's
experience? You will remember that he took his Greek Testament-with him
when he left Strasbourg to go into his compulsory military training
service period. You will remember that all his professors and the great
minds of his day and most of the great theologians of Europe were
confidently asserting, and had for many years asserted, that the kind of
kingdom Jesus was announcing was not eschatological but an ethical rule of
God over the hearts of men on earth. You will remember that after
exhaustive study of the Greek New Testament alone, Schweitzer became
thoroughly convinced that the very same kingdom the O.T. prophets had been
predicting a Messiah would set up on earth was the only kind of kingdom
which Jesus could properly be interpreted as offering (as recorded in the
Gospels). In other words, Schweitzer came to exactly the same conclusion
from the study of the Greek New Testament itself that Premillennialists
came to when they insisted that the kingdom Jesus offered was an earthly,
literal kingdom on David's throne, albeit on moral and spiritual bases
predicated on repentance.
"Because Schweitzer did not believe in the kind of inspiration we do, he
was then forced to say that this kind of kingdom was what Jesus actually
believed and taught, but that He was mistaken. Of course, we say that this
was the kind of kingdom Jesus meant, but that Israel did not repent; thus,
this kingdom was rejected in the King, and was put in abeyance
("postponed") until they should, through the suffering of Daniel's 70th
week, be brought to the place where they shall "look on Him whom they have
pierced and mourn because of Him" and say "blessed is He that cometh in
the name of the Lord." In the meantime, God has revealed that which was
"hidden from ages and generations past," His Church, and is accomplishing
His witness to the world through the Church until He takes that Church out
of the world unto Himself and again takes up His dealings with His ancient
people, Israel, with the result previously stated, the setting up of the
mediatorial Messianic kingdom of 1000 years on earth.
"Is it not true that Schweitzer insists that he came to his conclusion in
spite of all he was taught, from a study of the Greek New Testament alone?
I ask, therefore, 'Who was the John N. Darby who misled him?'"
- A Survey of Literature on Dispensations PRIOR TO the Modern Emphasis (up
to 1825)
- Apostolic Times and the Church Fathers
"In apostolic and near apostolic times, because the first coming of Christ
was fresher in the minds of men, and because His second coming was a
bright and living daily hope, the events of the general eschatological
program which were constantly expected have a very prominent place in the
writings of the 'fathers' of those times. To this fact the united
testimony of all sources gives unfailing witness. " (Lincoln) This
quotation refers of course particularly to the coming and kingdom of
Christ (i.e., Premillennialism or chiliasm), but as already pointed out,
these truths rest on the implication of an orderly procession of the ages.
Dr. Arnold D. Ehlert has done the best piece of research in this field and
his findings, entitled "A Bibliography of Dispensationalism, " are
recorded in Bibliotheca Sacra, numbers 401-409,1944-46. Any person will be
well rewarded by reading this series.
In number 402, Ehlert calls attention to the Christian adaptation of the
old Jewish "septa-millenary tradition." By this is meant that the Jews had
a tradition that the world would go on for 6000 years, and Messiah would
then come and reign in a final 1000 years, making 7000 years of mankind's
history in all. Early Christian writers clearly emphasized Christ's coming
for a 1000 year reign which was sometimes said to be the seventh 1000
years, but they rather generalized on the six eras of 1000 years which
preceded. Eventually the emphasis came to be on the obvious transitions in
the program of God's dealings with men regardless of whether the
transitions fell on even 1000 years. Thus, logical rather than
chronological divisions resulted and this was the first step toward a
consistent dispensational sequence.
Among those whom Ehlert quotes in No. 403 is Clement of Alexandria
(150?-220?) concerning whom Dr. Samuel Hanson Cox claimed that his
seven-fold system was "sustained by Clement's authority." Clement
pluralized "the patriarchal dispensation" distinguishing clearly three
patriarchal dispensations (in Adam, Noah, and Abraham). Then comes the
Mosaic. Clement also held a multi-covenant position, speaking of the
"sacred tetrad of the ancient covenants."
Augustine quotes Pelagius (3607-420?) and Coelestius as "dividing the
times" so as to say that "men first lived righteously by nature, then
under the law, thirdly under grace, --by nature meaning all the long time
from Adam before the giving of the law." He quotes them as follows, '"For
then, ' say they, 'the Creator was known by the guidance of reason; and
the rule of living rightly was carried written in the hearts of men, not
in the law of the letter, but of nature. But men's manners became corrupt;
and then,' they say, 'when nature now tarnished began to be insufficient,
the law was added to it, whereby as by a moon the original luster was
restored to nature after its original blush was impaired. But after the
habit of sinning had too much prevailed among men, and the law was unequal
to the task of curing it, Christ came; and the Physician Himself, through
His own self, and not through His disciples, brought relief to the malady
at its most desperate development.'"
Another writer cited was Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus (3907-4577).
But by all odds the most important name to consider is that of Augustine
(354-430). His famous "Distinguish the times (ages) and Scripture agrees
(is in harmony with itself)" sounds good, though some feel its context
weakens its force.
Ehlert then cites three significant quotations from Augustine) very
clearly showing his belief in successive ages to which the dispensations
are adapted:
"The divine institution of sacrifice was suitable in the former
dispensation, but is not suitable now. For the change suitable to the
present age has been enjoined by God, who knows infinitely better than man
what is fitting for every age. and who is, whether He give or add, abolish
or curtail, increase or diminish, the unchangeable Governor as He is the
unchangeable Creator of mutable things, ordering all events in His
providence until the beauty of the completed course of time, the component
parts of which are the dispensations adapted to each successive age, shall
be finished, like the grand melody of some ineffably wise master of song,
and those pass into the eternal contemplation of God who here, though it
is a time of faith, not of sight, are acceptably worshipping Him." (A
Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian
Church, ed. Philip Schaff, First Series, vol. 1, 482).
Again, "For as the man is not fickle who does one thing in the morning and
another in the evening, one thing this month and another in the next. one
thing tills year and another next year, so there is no variableness with
God, though in the former period of the world's history, He enjoined one
kind of offerings, and in the latter period another, therein ordering
symbolical actions pertaining to the blessed doctrine of true religion in
harmony with the changes of successive epochs without any change in
Himself. For in order to let those whom these things perplex understand
that the change was already in the divine counsel, and that, when the new
ordinances were appointed, it was not because the old had suddenly lost
the divine approbation through inconstancy in His will, but that tills had
been already fixed and determined by the wisdom of that God to whom, in
reference to much greater changes, these words are spoken in Scripture:
"Thou shaft change them, and they shall be changed; but Thou art the same,
(Ps. 102:26-27) it is necessary to convince them that this exchange of the
sacraments of the Old Testament for those of the New had been predicted by
the voices of the prophets, For thus they will see, if they can see
anything, that what is new in time is not new in relation to Him who has
appointed the times, and who possesses, without succession of time, all
those things which He assigns according to their variety to the several
ages." (Schaff, op. cit., p. 483).
Similarly, Augustine says, "If it is now established that. that which was
for one age rightly ordained may be in another age rightly changed, - -the
alteration indicating a change in the work, not in the plan, of Him who
makes the change, the plan being framed by His reasoning faculty, to
which, unconditioned by succession in time, those things are
simultaneously present which cannot be actually done at the same time
because the ages succeed each other." (Ibid.).
- The Dark Ages: from the Fall of the Roman Empire (476 AD) to the End
of the Reformation (c.1625).
As we would expect, there was no substantial constructive teaching during
this period when the Bible was chained in monasteries, monks' cells, and
church edifices.
A few who mentioned the idea of eras in God's dealings with men are:
Aelifric (? - 1006/20?), Joachim of Fiore (1130/45-1201/2), Amalric of
Bena (?-1202/06), and even the Koran's interesting Mohammedan parallel to
the idea of successive revelations by dispensations.
- The Post-Reformation Period, c.1625 to c. 1825
After the heat of controversy over Soteriology had cleared the air on
justification by faith, men began to study and write on the important
questions involved in God's dealings with man. The 15 citations of this
period according to No. 404 (Bib. Sac.) are:
William Gouge (1575/78-1653)
William Cave (1637-1713)
Pierre Poiret (1646-1719)
John Edwards (1639-1716)
John Shute Barrington (1678-1734)
Isaac Watts (1674-1748)
Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758)
John Taylor (1694-1761)
John Fletcher (1729-1785)
David Bogue (1750-1825)
Adam Clarke (1762-1832)
Joseph Priestley (1733-1804)
George Stanley Faber (1773-1843)
David Russell (1779-1848)
Richard Watson (1781-1833)
From these writers a few comments are chosen to show the keen interest and
care they displayed in the development of their study concerning God's
dealings with man, and especially to emphasize the 6 or 7 division
tendency which many of them had come to see. Also, a number of the writers
distinguish the idea of dispensation as a stewardship or revelation of
truth from the time word (usually age) to which that stewardship is
particularly related.
It is to be regretted that some of their treatises were hampered in their
development by the author's adherence to the so-called all-time covenant
of grace. But otherwise Poiret's, Edwards's, and Watts's systems
practically parallel the popular present-day division.
From this view of 6 or 7 dispensations, modern covenantism has receded and
now allows only 2 or 3 within the Covenant of Grace, sometimes including
the Covenant of Redemption as a joint covenant. The Covenant of Works is
added outside but related to the Covenant of Grace. (Cp. Hodge's scheme,
p. 35)
On the contrary, starting with the same background, present-day
dispensationalism has advanced in clarity of thinking and expression to a
different division of Biblical truth divorced from the whole covenantism
of redemption-works-grace idea at the beginning of Section III.
(1) Isaac Watts (1674-1748), the great hymn writer, was also a
considerable theologian. His collected works fill six large volumes. He
wrote an essay of some forty pages entitled, "The Harmony of all the
Religions which God ever Prescribed to Men, and all his Dispensations
towards them." Due to the comparative inaccessibility of his works to the
general public, it seems to be in order to quote here his definition of
dispensations.
"The public dispensations of God towards men, are those wise and holy
constitutions of his will and government, revealed or some way manifested
to them, in the several successive periods or ages of the world, wherein
are contained the duties which he expects from men, and the blessings
which he promises, or encourages them to expect from him, here and
hereafter; together with the sins which he forbids, and the punishments
which he threatens to inflict on such sinners: Or, the dispensations of
God may be described more briefly, as the appointed moral rules of God's
dealing with mankind, considered as reasonable creatures, and as
accountable to him for their behavior, both in this world and in that
which is to come. Each of these dispensations of God, may be represented
as different religions, or, at least, as different forms of religion,
appointed for men in the several successive ages of the world." (Isaac
Watts, Works, ed. Leeds, II. 537-573; 625-660).
Watt's outline follows:
I. The Dispensation of Innocency; or, the Religion of
Adam at first
II. The Adamical Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace,
or, the Religion of Adam after his Fall
III. The Noachical Dispensation; or, the Religion of
Noah
IV. The Abrahamical Dispensation; or, the Religion of
Abraham
V. The Mosaical Dispensation; or, the Jewish Religion
VI. The Christian Dispensation
It is not possible to go into detail here as to the great mass of material
contained in this work. One can only recommend its perusal to any who
would attempt to understand the beginnings of dispensationalism in its
larger sense.
(2) John Edwards (1639-1716) wrote the first extensive treatise on the
subject of dispensations that has come to our attention. He was an eminent
English Calvinist, educated at Merchant -Taylor's School, London, and St.
John's College, Cambridge, of which latter he became scholar and fellow.
He moved to Cambridge in 1697 and spent the following two years in the
library there. In 1699 he published two volumes totaling some 790 pages
entitled A Complete History or Survey of all the Dispensations.
In his preface he has this to say: "I have undertaken a Great Work, viz.,
to display all the Transactions of Divine Providence relating to the
Methods of Religion, from the Creation to the end of the World, from the
first Chapter of Genesis to the last of the Revelation. For I had not met
with any Author that had undertaken to comprise them all, and to give us a
true account of them according to their true Series: nor had I ever lit
upon a Writer (either Foreign or Domestic) who had designedly traced the
particular causes and Grounds of them, or settled them in their right and
true foundations. Wherefore I betook myself to this Work, resolving to
attempt something, though it were only to invite others of greater skill
to go on with it." (see John Edwards, A Complete History or Survey of
all the Dispensations and Methods of Religion, 2 Vols., London, 1699).
From this it appears that there was a literature on the subject at that
early date, which could probably still be examined at the Cambridge
libraries.
The scheme that Edwards developed is rather involved. He understood three
great "Catholic and Grand Oeconomies, " the third of which he subdivided,
and which constitutes the main sweep of Biblical time to the consummation
and conflagration.
Following is his scheme outlined:
I. Innocency and Felicity, or Adam created upright
II. Sin and Misery, Adam fallen III. Reconciliation, or
Adam recovered, from Adam's redemption to the end of the World, "The
discovery of the blessed seed to Adam":
a. Patriarchal economy:
(1) Adamical,
antediluvian
(2) Noachical
(3) Abrahamic
b. Mosaical
c. Gentile (concurrent with a and b)
d. Christian or Evangelical:
(1) Infancy,
primitive period, past
(2) Childhood,
present period
(3) Manhood, future
(millennium)
NOTE: Edwards believed in a millennium, but he took it to be a spiritual
reign. He was antichiliastic. The reign would be characterized by
universal righteousness and holiness, but he declines to set the time of
its commencement. With regard to the coming of Christ, he says, "I
conceive he may Personally Appear above, though he will not Reign
Personally on Earth," II, 720.
(4) Old
age, from the loosing of Satan to the conflagration
It is impossible to go into detail here as to the great mass of material
contained in this work. One can only recommend its perusal to any who
would attempt to understand the beginnings of dispensationalism in its
larger sense.
(3) Perre Poiret (1646-1719) was a French mystic and
philosopher, whose more than forty works are of great importance to French
theological thought. He attempted, like many others, to comprehend the
whole story of redemption in one sweep, and saw clearly that the work of
God through the ages falls into various periods differing in detail, yet
preserving a unifying thread throughout. His great work, L'Oeconomie
Divine, first published in Amsterdam in 1687, was (apparently by himself)
rendered into English and published in London in six volumes and appendix
in 1713.
He started out to develop the doctrine of predestination, but says that so
many things came to his attention that seemed to be inter-related that he
decided to expand the work,' and the result is a rather complete
Systematic Theology covering in considerable detail six of the seven major
divisions (Bibliololgy being omitted). It is distinctly Biblical, although
there is the mystical element and terminology in places, and he admits a
modified form of purgatory.
It appears to be a modified Calvinism, or mediate theology, but its most
interesting and significant feature is the fact that it is premillennial
and dispensational. As such, it forms the most solid kind of support to
these doctrines as now held by conservative Bible students and teachers.
The six volumes are entitled as follows:
I. The Oeconomy of the Creation
II. The Oeconomy of Sin
III. The Oeconomy of the Restoration before the
Incarnation of Jesus Christ
IV. The Oeconomy of the Restoration after the
Incarnation of Jesus Christ
V. The Oeconomy of the Co-operation of Man, with
the Operation of God
VI. The Oeconomy of Universal Providence
The main work is followed by an appendix in the form of a vindication
against a letter by a certain Mr. LeClerc. Volume VI is a sort of
recapitulation, but it goes on to treat the subject of the nations in
relation to God's program, prophecies and their fulfillment; and there is
a summary outline of Paul's epistle to the Romans in nineteen propositions
with an abridgment of the first eight chapters, supporting the whole
argument of the work. Grace is strong throughout, although free will is
allowed.
There is no question that we have here a genuine dispensational scheme. He
uses the phrase "period or dispensation" and his seventh dispensation is a
literal thousand-year millennium with Christ returned and reigning in
bodily form upon the earth with His saints, and Israel regathered and
converted. He sees the overthrow of corrupt Protestantism, the rise of the
Antichrist, the two resurrections. and many of the general run of end-time
events. These are all discussed more freely and fully than in any author
to come under our attention in this bibliography up to the time of Darby.
Poiret's dispensational scheme does not articulate with his volume titles.
He is very clear that the seventh dispensation is the millennium. The
sixth appears to be the latter portion of what we would call the Christian
dispensation, and the fifth the early pare of it. The scheme is based on
the septa-millenary tradition and somewhat on Augustine's scheme of ages
and dispensations.
His outline of the dispensations is as follows:
I. Infancy, to the deluge
II. Childhood, to Moses
III. Adolescence, to the prophets, or about
Solomon's time
IV. Youth, to the time of the coming of Christ
V. Manhood, "some time after that"
VI. Old Age, "the time of his (man's) Decay"
VII. Renovation of all Things
The author explains, "Though I do not pretend precisely to determine the
Number nor Duration of these Periods, it is obvious however unto all, that
the World hath really passed through Periods of this Nature." (Peter
Poiret, The Divine Oeconomy: or, An Universal System of the Works and
Purpose of God Towards Men Demonstrated, 7 vols. in 4 (as bound in the
edition in the Rufus M. Jones Collection on Mysticism at Haverford
College, the last volume having been labeled "Volume VII. Appendix" at
some early date). London, 1713. See especially III, 150 ff.).
Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) had a very interesting comment on the
law-grace controversy of his day:
"All allow that the Old Testament dispensation is out of date, with its
ordinances: and I think in a manner pertaining to the constitution and
order of the New Testament church, that is a matter of fact wherein the
New Testament itself is express, full, and abundant. In such a case to
have recourse to the Mosaic dispensation, for rules or precedents to
determine our judgment, is quite needless and out of reason. There is
perhaps no part of divinity attended with so much intricacy, and wherein
orthodox divines do so much differ as the stating the precise agreement
and difference between the two dispensations of Moses and Christ."
(Jonathan Edwards, The Works of President Edwards, 1858, I, 160).
- Literature on Dispensations since 1825
This has been increasingly extensive and it is not the purpose of this
syllabus to review it. Our major emphasis was to show that there was a
literature before 1825, All during the Church age people have pondered this
providential program of God. They have come up with different answers but it
is instructive to observe the large number who came up with 5 to 10 periods
of God's dealings and especially interesting to note those who came up with
6 or 7.
Ehlert makes the following significant comment on the period since 1825:
"The year 1825 seems to be the logical dividing-line between the old and the
new dispensational -ism. This is not to forget that many of the roots of
later systems are to be found in works before that date, nor that much of
the other philosophy is carried over to the later period. As late as 1929 a
rather substantial volume appeared in England on the subject by George Croly
in which he seems utterly to ignore almost all the dispensational literature
since 1825, and indeed much of that before. He might as well have dated his
book 1829 so far as the doctrinal content is concerned."
- John Nelson Darby (1800-1882)
"Much has been said about the rise of so-called modern dispensationalism,
Many date this beginning with John Nelson Darby, who first wrote on the
subject in 1836. It is no doubt true that the Plymouth Brethren, of whom
he was a prominent pioneer, colored the doctrine to a considerable extent,
but it will appear readily to him who takes the pains to compare all the
writers enumerated in this bibliography just how much this contribution
was, and how much is to be traced to other various sources."
Since so much has been said about Darby, I am including Ehlert's summary
on him: "John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), one of the chief founders of the
Plymouth Brethren movement in England, is credited with the great revival
and a substantial advance of the whole subject of ages and dispensations.
He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin, and was called to the English
bar but soon gave that up for an ecclesiastical career. He took holy
orders and served in a curacy in Wicklow until 1827, when his views on
ecclesiastical authority and establishments caused him to leave the church
and to take up association with a little company of believers of like mind
m Dublin.
"After some travel, he and several others settled in Plymouth (England)
and started a little paper called The Christian Witness in 1834. It was in
1836 that Darby first published his dispensational views in tins paper
under the title 'Apostasy of the Successive Dispensations.' It was
afterward published in French as 'Apostasie de l'economic actuellc.'
Darby's writings have been collected, though the collection is not
complete, and published in 32 volumes (there was also a 35-volume edition,
including an index volume), and it is in these volumes that we find his
available writings on the subject.
"In his article from The Witness he gives the philosophy of the
dispensations and discusses each briefly. Communion with God in a new
nature is God's desire for us, and the means by which He can bring us the
knowledge of Himself as well as delight Himself in us. Good and evil have
their important part in bringing about our instruction in grace, based
upon the incarnation of Christ. 'This however we have to learn in its
details, in the various dispensations which led to or have followed the
revelations of the incarnate Son in whom all fullness was pleased to
dwell, . .
'"The detail of the history connected with these dispensations brings out
many most interesting displays, both of the principles and patience of
God's dealings with the evil and failure of man; and of the workings by
which He formed faith on His own thus developed perfections. Bur the
dispensations themselves all declare some leading principle or
interference of God. some condition in which He has placed man, principles
which in themselves are everlastingly sanctioned of God, but in the course
of those dispensations placed responsibly in the hands of man for the
display and discovery of what he was, and the bringing in their infallible
establishment in Him to whom the glory of them all rightly belonged.. .
'"In every instance, there was total and immediate failure as regarded
man, however the patience of God might tolerate and carry on by grace the
dispensation in which man has thus failed in the outset; and further, that
there is no instance of the restoration of a dispensation afforded us,
though there might be partial revivals of it through faith. (John Nelson
Darby, Collected Writings, ed. Wm. Kelly, 2nd ed., London, 1857-1867, I,
192-193).
"We might outline Darby's scheme as follows:
(I. Paradisiacal state), to
the flood
II. Noah
III. Abraham
IV. Israel:
a. Under the
law
b. Under the
priesthood
c. Under the
kings
V. Gentiles
VI. The Spirit VII. The Millennium
(it is very difficult to get Darby's exact outline here, as he is not
always a lucid writer. He says, "The paradisiacal state cannot properly be
called a dispensation in this sense (i.e., that there is no instance of
the restoration of a dispensation); but as regards the universal failure
of man, it is a most important instance" (p, 194). This succession of
dispensations is again discussed in II, 568-573. In neither place does he
attach the millennium to the list as a dispensation, although he firmly
holds to the literal thousand years. His chapter on "The Dispensation of
the Kingdom of Heaven," II, 80-96, does not indicate clearly whether he
means to identify the Dispensation of the Kingdom of Heaven with what he
elsewhere calls the Dispensation of the Spirit. The Church is not properly
a dispensation, IV, 504; V, 24. The present dispensation is parenthetical,
I, 142; XIII, 236; XXVI, 373).
Much has been said about Scofield parroting Darby. It is with somewhat of
a shock that one reads Darby's very different list. Note he omits
Innocence (as I do) as a true dispensation, though it is a crucial turning
point (see footnote #18). Also observe that he does not have two
consecutive periods called Law and Grace or Law and the Church. He has
three subdivisions under Israel, and he inserts Gentiles to run alongside
Israel in the latter part of the period of Law before the period of the
Church. Observe that the period of the Church or Grace is called the
dispensation of the Spirit. Note that he conceives the Millennium as being
brought in at the conclusion of the ages of time (which is characterized
by man's failure). He evidently does not consider the rebellion at the end
of the thousand years important enough to make the millennium another
dispensation in which man fails.
- Among the other writers cited by Ehlert are:
John Eagleton - Covenant of Works (1829)
John Dick (1764-1833) - Lectures on Theology (1836)
John Forbes - A course of lectures on the Jews (1840)
W. H. Neal - The Mohammedan System of Theology (1843)
John Nelson Darby - Collected Writings, ed. Wm. Kelly, 2nded.,
London, 1857-1867, I, 192-193
Benjamin Wills Newton (1805-1898) - Thoughts on the Apocalypse
(1844) (A contemporary with Darby among Plymouth Brethren who disagreed
with Darby on some points)
Patrick Fairbairn (1805-1874) - The Typology of Scripture (1870)
Samuel Farmer Jarvis (1787-1851) - The Church of the Redeemed
(1850)
Frederick W. Robertson (1816-1853) - Sermons on Christian Doctrine
(1907)
J. H. McCulloh, M.D. - On the Credibility of the Scriptures (1867)
John Pye Smith (1774-1851) - First Lines of Christian Theology
(1854)
George Smith - The Harmony of the Divine Dispensations (1856)
John Cox (1802-1881) - A Premillennial Manual (1856)
John Gumming (1810-1881) - The Great Consummation (1858)
Isaac P. Labagh - Twelve Lectures on the Great Events of
Unfulfilled Prophecy (1859) (20 years before Scofield was saved, Labagh
listed the dispensations as the Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic,
Christian, Millennial, and New Jerusalem. These are practically Scofield's
words if his covenants be compared with his dispensations, yet I dare say
Scofield never saw Labagh's book!)
William E. Blackstone - Jesus Is Coming (a classic!)
Judge Joel Jones (1795-1860), (Once mayor of Philadelphia) - Jesus
and the Coming Glory (1865)
William Cunningham (1805-1861) - Historical Theology (1864)
W. C. Bayne (1808-1887) - Waymarks in the Wilderness, and
Scriptural Guide (1864/5)
David Higgins - The Three Dispensations of Grace (1866)
Robert Jamieson (1802-1880) - A Commentary, Critical, Experimental,
and "Practical, on the Old and New Testaments, in 6 volumes (1868) (of the
famous Jamieson, Faussett and Brown trio, which authored the above)
Charles Hodge (1797-1878) - Systematic Theology (1874) (Hodge lists
4 dispensations in the so-called Covenant of Grace and seems to allude to
a last dispensation, either the millennium or the eternal state. He also
foresees a future for Israel!)
John Jakob Van Oosterzee (1817-1882) Christian Dogmatics (1878)
Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-1898) - Systematic Theology (1890)
Henry Grattan Guinness (1835-1910) - The Approaching End of the Age
(1892)
Samuel HansonCox (1793-1880) - Elucidation III, The Ante-Nicene
Fathers (1885)
Arthur Cleveland Coxe (1818-1896) - Lectures on Prophecy (1871)
John R. Graves (1820-1893) - The Work of Christ in the Covenant of
Redemption (1928)
Samuel James Andrews (1817-1906) - God's Revelation of Himself to
Men (1885)
George Wilson - The Kingdom of God Developed (1887)
Burlington B. Wale - The Closing Days of Christendom (1883)
Charles Taze Russell (1852-1916) - Millennial Dawn, Vol. I, The
Plan of the Ages (1905), (the founder of what is now Jehovah's Witnesses)
A, J. Frosr - International Prophetic Conference (1886)
James Hall Brookes (1830-1897) - Maranatha: or the Lord Cometh
(1889)
William A. Parlane - Elements of Dispensational Truth (1894)
George Hawkins Pember (1837?-1910) The Great Prophecies of the
Centuries; Concerning Israel and the Gentiles (1942)
Robert Cameron - The Doctrine of the Ages (1896)
Frank White - The Sure Word on Prophecy (1897)
James Martin Gray (1851-1935) - Dispensational Bible Studies (1901)
G. B. M. Clouser - Dispensations and Ages of Scripture (1903)
Ethelbert W. Bullinger (1837-1913) - How to Enjoy the Bible (1907)
E. C. and R. B. Henninges - Bible Talks for Heart and Mind (1919)
J. H. Burridge - God's Prophetic Plan (1909)
C. I. Scofield (1843-1921) - The Scofield Reference Bible (1909)
George Soltau - Past-Present; -Future (1912)
Charles H. Welch - Dispensational Truth (1912)
Adolph Ernst Knoch (1874-?) - The Divine Calendar (1913)
William Evans (1870-?) - Outline Study of the Bible (1913)
Isaac Massey Haldeman (1845-1933) - A Dispensational Key to the
Scripture (1915)
Clarence Larkin (1850-1924) - Dispensational Truth (charts) (1920)
Algernon Jamea Pollock (1864 -?) - Things Which Must Shortly Come
to Pass (1918)
Wm. Graham Scroggie (l 877 -1958) - Ruling Lines of Progressive
Revelation (1918)
Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952) - Major Bible Themes (1924)
Philip Mauro (185 9 - ?) - The Gospel of the Kingdom (1928) (He
began in our camp but became one of the bitterest enemies. His book was
demolishingly answered by '.. M. Haldeman in "A Review of Mr. Philip
Mauro's Book,")
George Croly - Divine Providence (1929)
Alfred Pearson - Creation and Its Sequel (1929)
Norman Baldwin Harrison (1874 - ?) - His Book on Structure in
Scripture (1934)
George H, Gudebrod (1863-?) - Bible Problems Solved (1937)
C. A. Chader - God's Plan Through the Ages (1938)
Clifton Lefevre Fowler (1882-?) - Building the Dispensations (1940)
Henry Alien Ironside (1876-1951) - The Lamp of Prophecy (1940)
David Lipscomb Cooper (1886- ?) - The World's Greatest Library
Graphically Illustrated (1942)
Arthur Isbell (1913 - ?) - Total Depravity as Manifested in
the Dispensations (1944)
Reuben A. Torrey (1856-1932) - What the Bible Teaches (1898)
Arno C. Gaebelein (1861-1945) - Harmony of the Prophetic Word
(1905)
There are a host of books since Ehlert's list above was issued.
- Ehlert's conclusion on the definition of "dispensation"
'" An unperverted mind,' said Austin Phelps in the seminary chapel at
Andover, 'will approach reverently any revelation of God in the destiny of
man. (Austin Phelps, Regeneration the Work of God, as quoted by Ehlert).
The word dispensation is a Scriptural term (1 Cor. 9-i7. Eph. 1:10; 3-9;
Col. 1:25). Biblically speaking, its meaning, but not its etymology, stems
from the Old Testament idea of stewardship, or house management.
Gen. 15:2; 43:19; 1 Chr. 28:1, etc.)
Etymologically it is the anglicized form of the Latin dispensation, which
is the rendering in the Vulgate Version for the Greek oikonomia. English
has also taken over this Greek term as oeconomy or economy, which is more
or less synonymous with dispensation.
"For a solid background in the use of the Greek term one should consult
the standard lexicons, especially Liddell and Scott (the new 2-volume
revised edition), Moulton and Mill igan, Cremer, Thayer and W. E. Vine's
Comprehensive Dictionary of the Original Greek Words with their Precise
Meanings for English Readers. This latter specifically denies the
time-period aspect; of the word in Biblical usage.
"The word dispensation should be consulted in Corradini's Lexicon Totius
Latinitatis of Facciolati, Forcellini and Furlanetti, and Du Cange's
Glossanum Mediae et Infimae Latinitatis.
"In approaching the whole subject of dispensations from a historical
standpoint one is shut up immediately to the definition found in the New
English Dictionary on Historical Principles. For the benefit of those who
might not have access to this set, the theological definition of the word,
which is only one of the eleven divisions of the definition listed, is
there quoted: 'A religious order or system, conceived as divinely
instituted, or as a stage in a progressive revelation, expressly adapted
to the needs of a particular nation or period of time, as the patriarchal,
Mosaic (or Jewish) dispensation, the Christian dispensation; also, the age
or period during which such system has prevailed. '
"The word economy should also be consulted in the same work. Other
definitions of dispensation in the theological sense will be found in the
Encyclopedia Britannica, 14th ed.; M'Clintock and Strong's Cyclopaedia of
Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature; Watson's Biblical and
Theological Dictionary; Gardner's Christian' Cyclopedia, or Repertory of
Biblical and Theological Literature (a good definition based on covenant
distinctions); and Fausset's Bible Cyclopedia. Critical and Expository
(First published in London in 1878 under the title, The Englishman's
Critical and Expository Cyclopedia). Canon Fausset, because of his
unimpeachable scholarship, is especially to be noted. He was born 22 years
before Scofield. Theologically he was of the Evangelical school of the
Church of England, and he wrote a number of substantial volumes of his own
on prophecy. He will be recognized as one of the Jamicson, Fausset and
Brown trio of commentary fame. (The original 6-volume critical commentary
is not to be confused with the popular one-volume abridgement that is so
widely circulated. The latter does not reveal the dispensational
viewpoints of Jamieson and Fausset as the original does. The condenser
unfortunately deleted these. For the benefit of those who will not be able
to consult this Cyclopaedia, the outline that Fausset presents is given
here.
Canon Faus set's dispensational scheme:
I. Innocence, in Eden
II. Adamical, after the fall
III. Noaichal
IV. Abrahamic
V. Law
VI. Christian:
i.
Present "ministration of the Spirit"
ii.
Epiphany of the glory23 (Because of the significance of his statement on
this point, it will be welcomed by many as given
in full here; "The epiphany of the glory of the great God and Saviour
(Tit. 2:13), the manifested kingdom when He 'will restore it to Israel'
(Acts 1:6-7; Ezk. 21:27), and Himself shall 'take His great power and
reign' with His transfigured saints for a thousand years over the nations
in the flesh, and Israel at their head (Zech. 14; Isa. 2; 65; Rev.
7:15-18; 5:10; 20).
iii.
Final ages of the ages Of course, definitions can be found in many of the
individual works on the subject.
"Theologically speaking, an adequate definition of dispensationalism
probably remains to be written. As soon as the suffixes are added to the
word the subject is transferred immediately from Biblical to theological
grounds. The recent literature on the subject has made it necessary to
revise the theological definition, which it is hoped will receive some
adequate consideration by lexicographers. The current conception of the
term in the popular mind is entirely inadequate, covering as it does for
many the whole field of premillennial writings and prophecy, or on the
other hand the restricted school of thought that is chiefly concerned only
with the present church age and its problems. The one is too wide, the
other too narrow." (Arnold D. Ehlert, "A Bibliography of
Dispensationalism, " Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. 101, no. 403, July-September
1944, pp. 319-321).
POIRET 1646-1719 |
SCOFIELD 1843-1921 |
DARBY 1800-1882 |
FAUSSET 1821-? |
Infancy
- to the deluge |
Innocency |
(Paradasaical state)
to flood |
Innocence, in Eden |
Conscience |
Adamical, after the
fall |
Childhood
- to Moses |
Human Government |
Noah |
Noaichal |
Promise (given
Abram) |
Abraham |
Abrahamic |
Adolescence - to the
prophets or about Solomon's time |
Law |
Israel:
a. Under law
b. Under priesthood
c. Under kings |
Law |
Youth - to the time
of the coming of Christ |
Gentiles |
Manhood - "sometime after
that" |
Grace
[both Scofield and Darby teach the Church Age will end in apostasy] |
The Spirit
[both Scofield and Darby teach the Church Age will end in apostasy] |
Christian
present ministration of the Spirit (i.e., Church)
Epiphany of the glory (i.e., millennium)
Final ages of the ages |
Old Age - "the time
of his (man's) decay" (i.e., apostasy) |
Renovation of all things |
Kingdom |
(The Millennium) |
1. J. E. Bear,
"Dispensationalism and the Covenant of Grace," Union Seminary Review, July,
1938, p. 2.
2. Talmage Wilson, "Modern Dispensationalism in the united States,"
unpublished paper, p. 35.
3. Known as "Chiliasm" in those days, being the Greek word for 1000. There
were no post or amillennialists then, hence no need for the term
premillennialist. It was a standard part of the doctrine of the Church that
Christ was coming back to earth again to rule for 1000 years. (Chiliasm is
pronounced Kiliasm, like the "Ch" in Christ.)
4. W. H. Rutgers, "Premillennialism in America," p. 172.
5. Alexander Reese, "The Approaching Advent of Christ," pp. IX, 29.
6. D. H. Kromminga, "The Millennium in the Church," p. 289
7. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian
Church, ed. Philip Schaff, First Series, Vol. 1., p. 482.
8. Psalm 102:26-27
9. Schaff, op. cit., p. 483.
10. Ibid.
11. Isaac Watts, "Works," ed. Leeds, II, 537-573; 625-660.
12. Ibid., pp. 543, 625.
13. See John Edwards, "A Compleat History or Survey of all the
Dispensations and Methods of Religion, 2 Vols., London, 1699.
14. Edwards believed in a millennium, but he took it to be a spiritual
reign. He was antichiliastic. The reign would be characterized by universal
righteousness and holiness, but he declines to set the time of its commencement.
With regard to the coming of Christ, he says, "I conceive he may Personally
Appear above, though he will not Reign Personally on Earth," II, 720.
15. Perter Poiret, "The Divine OEconomy: or, An Universal System of the
Works and Purpose of God Towards Men Demonstrated," 7 vols. in 4 (as bound in
the edition in the Rufus M. Jones Collection on Mysticism at Haverford College,
the last volume having been labeled "Volume VII. Appendix" at some early date).
London. See especially III, p. 150 ff.
16. Jonathan Edwards, "The Works of President Edwards," 1858, I., p. 160.
17. John Nelson Darby, "Collected Writings," ed. Wm. Kelly, 2nd Ed.,
London, 1857-1867, I., p. 192-193.
18. It is very difficult to get Darby's exact outline here, as he is not
always a lucid writer. He says, "The paradisaical state cannot properly be
called a dispensation in this sense (i.e., that there is no instance of the
restoration of a dispensation); but as regards the universal failure of man, it
is a most important instance" (p. 194). This succession of dispensations is
again discussed in II, p. 568-573. In neither place does he attach the
millennium to the list as a dispensation, although he firmly holds to the
literal thousand years. His chapter on "The Dispensation of the Kingdom of
Heaven," II., p. 80-96, does not indicate clearly whether he means to identify
the Dispensation of the Kingdom or Heaven with what he elsewhere calls the
Dispensation of the Spirit. The Church is not properly a dispensation, IV., p.
504; V., p. 24. The present dispensation is parenthetical, I., p. 142; XIII., p.
236; XXVI., p. 373.
19. Austin Phelps, "Regeneration, the Work of God." as quoted by Ehlert.
20. Genesis 15:2; 43:19; 1 Chronicles 28:1, etc.
21. First published in London in 1878 under the title, "The Englishman's
Critical and Expository Cyclopaedia."
22. The original 6-volume critical commentary is not to be confused with
the popular one-volume abridgement that is so widely circulated. The latter does
not reveal the dispensational viewpoints of Jamieson and Fausset as the original
does. The condenser unfortunately deleted these.
23. Because of the significance of his statement on this point, it will be
welcomed by many as given full here: "The epiphany of the glory of the great God
and Saviour (Titus 2:13), the manifested kingdom when He 'will restore it to
Israel' (Acts 1:6-7; Ezekiel 21:27), and Himself shall 'take His great power and
reign' with His transfigured saints for a thousand years over the nations in the
flesh, and Israel at their head (Zecheriah 14; Isaiah 2; 65; Revelation 7:15-18;
5:10; 20)
24. Arnold D. Ehlert, "A Bibliography of Dispensationalism," Bibliotheca
Sacra, Vol. 101, no. 403, July-September 1944, pp. 319-321.
Return to Syllabus
"Mason's
Notes"
200 Manor Avenue
Langhorne, PA 19047
United States of America |
"Mason's
Notes" Study materials on this website are made available
here free, through the generosity of Cairn University,
and may be copied for use in Bible study groups, in limited numbers, providing
that no charge is made for them. No further distribution or use
of these materials is allowable under U.S. or International Copyright
Law without the express permission of Cairn University. |
20160408