Dispensational Proof 1

1. Dispensational Hermeneutics

            Dispensational hermeneutics is the most consistent literal, grammatical, historical, authorial intent approach to the Bible. The subject of hermeneutics is the first place to begin in a discussion to prove that dispensationalism is a valid and solid interpretation of the Scripture. The faithful use of a literal, grammatical, historical hermeneutic results in a dispensational understanding of God’s plan for all ages, all creation and all created beings. Many theologians whether covenant or dispensational understand that dispensational theology results from a consistent literal hermeneutic and especially when used in the prophetic passages of the Old Testament (OT). Dispensationalism as a hermeneutic is the only method that forms a complete system of consistent literal hermeneutical exegesis of both the OT & New Testament (NT). There is continuity in God's character and promises when a proper hermeneutic is applied to the entire revelation of God. If the primary purpose of Bible study is to determine “What has God said?” then the literal normal understanding of language is the place we must always start. David L Cooper has the premier description of dispensational hermeneutics that is quoted very often: “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.”

            Some dispensationalists do not like to use the descriptive term “dispensational” before the word hermeneutic. Yes, for a dispensationalist the dispensational views on Scripture come from the consistent application of literal, grammatical, historical, and authorial intent method of Bible study. I think because their is so much confusion in Bible interpretation and because some theologies also claim to use the same method it may be prudent to distinguish that there is a difference among the use of the literal, grammatical, historical method. Many today are using the idea of genre to just automatically change their hermeneutic. If they can claim something is apocalyptic then somehow that allows them to quickly abort the literal hermeneutic, then begin looking for allegorical interpretations where they are not warranted. We should rather continue with the literal, grammatical, historical, authorial intent hermeneutic as we approach any text allowing the text to determine what we may find to be literal, symbolic or even allegorical. As many dispensationalists often note, all the symbols or allegorical ideas of Scripture represent literal ideas and events. Many interpreters move to a place where figurative language represents a figurative idea or the allegorical represents something that is also mystical. This begins to be the dog chasing his tail in some passages. This tends to make the words of God so veiled that it appears God has not been able to speak clearly for His people to hear and understand. This has placed great confusion upon the church and to the plain simple reading of the Scripture.