Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology: Sibling Rivalry

[RBerman]

I just read this fascinating paper by Dr. Todd Mangum of Bible Theological Seminary. He discusses how, when dispensationalists split from covenant theologians in the mid-20th century, the original point of contention, considered important enough to split over, was not about the modern state of Israel, or the millenium, or the events preceding the return of Christ.

Rather, the split focused on early dispensationalist claims (mainly by Scofield and Chafer) that Old Testament saints were saved not by faith (or at least, not solely by faith) but also by works, meaning either the Mosaic Law in general or the sacrificial system in particular. The next generation of dispensationalist leaders (e.g. Walvoord, Ryrie, Swindoll) backed away from those claims, generally saying that Chafer had misspoken or been misunderstood rather than being mistaken. Revisions of the Scofield footnotes by other editors quietly removed the objectionable material. Munger argues that the gap between modern dispensationalism and covenant theology is not wide enough to justify continued ecclesiastical separation now that the big problem has been remedied.

[Pilgrim]

I would agree but only as it pertains to more conservative covenant theology which still talks about the "age of probation" and "the covenant of works" which we failed.

[RBerman]

I would agree but only as it pertains to more conservative covenant theology which still talks about the "age of probation" and "the covenant of works" which we failed.

Yeah. That's not what Scofield/Chafer were talking about, though. They were talking about Leviticus, the Ten Commandments, etc.

[Bill the Cat]

It's always been about faith.