I follow a dispensational hermeneutic of Scripture. By that I mean- Israel is not the church and will specifically receive all the promises God has intended for her. I also believe that because all biblical prophecies that have been fulfilled have been fulfilled exactly as predicted, those left to be fulfilled will also be fulfilled literally. (I know, that’s a lot of fulfilled for one sentence.) This distinction between Israel and the church and the prophecies related to each may qualify me as a dispensationalist. I reject that title. Let me try and explain why.
I have recently been reminded of what it means to be a disciple. Now that seems like a simple enough thing to determine. Books are written about it; sermons preached; discussions formed. “A disciple is a learner.” “A disciple is someone who follows another person’s teachings.” You can find similar definitions easily enough. But a serious discussion occurs in this area. Some teachers adopt this standard- not every Christian is a disciple. Followed by- discipleship is a deeper level of Christianity. This creates a debate as to the identity of a disciple. Where do those ideas come from? The Bible?
Let’s see. Here are a few examples of Jesus’ ideas about a disciple. Mat 10:42 “And whoever gives one of these little ones even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple, truly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward." What if just an ordinary Christian gave the little one a drink? No reward? Why bother?
Luke 14:25 describes the setting for three disciple references. Jesus was talking to large crowds of unbelievers. Verse 26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” But apparently for some, you can be a Christian and still love your life. Sounds like a good deal. And did He seriously believe that anyone would take Him up on this?
Verse 27 “Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. “ A regular Christian, one would assume, does not have to carry a cross. That’s a relief.
Verse 33 “So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple. “ Fortunately, you can maintain first level status, just keep being a Christian, and retain all you have. Discipleship is such a bother.
And then there is the Great Commission. Matthew 28:18-20- And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
Was Jesus asking His disciples to evangelize or make disciples? If being a disciple is different from being a Christian apparently Peter, John, James, et.al were not called specifically to evangelize. Presumably that was up to someone else. They would come in later with the ladder for the next step up- Disciple!
Do these arguments sound a little absurd? I intend them to be. But how about this one on the other side? After stating the point that salvation and becoming a disciple are not the same this writer tries to prove it with this syllogism.
Major Premise: All saved people are disciples.
Minor Premise: Discipleship is costly.
Conclusion: Salvation is costly.
He then proceeds to describe the weakness of the logic. Including his belief that salvation is not costly. (http://www.faithalone.org/news/y1990/90march1.html)The problem here is that there is no verse, no statement, not even a hint anywhere in Scripture that salvation and discipleship is not the same thing. So why must they be separated? What is the basis for that? Logic without Scripture is unreasonable. If I am given the freedom to frame the question or design the debate I will be right every time. Our plea must always be, what does the Bible say? Salvation is costly. The Bible says it was paid for by the precious blood of Christ. That did not come cheap. Certainly we are saved by grace through faith but because there is no cost to us does not mean there is no cost.
This is not the issue anyway. The issue is what Jesus expected from His followers. Was He interested in building a huge following? Was He trying to make it as easy as possible to be a‘learner?’ (disciple) Not from what we just read in Luke. But He did expect complete and full obedience from those who claimed they followed. “If you love me you will keep my commandments.” Sounds like a hard line is drawn. And let’s think about that Great Commission again.
What was to be the basis for discipleship? Teaching about ‘all that I have commanded you.” So what might we expect from the first group of disciples? And every bunch thereafter? To be true to the Master they will teach others to observe all that Jesus taught. That includes these hard sayings about following. And every other message in the Gospels. Is Jesus really satisfied that those who do not leave everything, deny themselves, and take up their cross love Him? Are His friends? (John 15:14) Can I be a true believer and ignore the Beatitudes? It is clear. In order to fulfill the command of Jesus in Matthew 28:18-20 we must call for followers of Jesus with the same zeal as did He. We will not be disciples unless we do.
So what does all this have to do with dispensationalism? It is my observation that many dispensationalists place more importance on the theological model than the actual message of Scripture. Every verse is read through the dispensational grid. The system determines the interpretation. So Jesus was in a transitional history between Law and Grace. His words are not as important theologically as Peter’s and Paul’s. (Maybe the red text should be removed from the Gospels and used to color Paul’s epistles.) A dispensationalist will say Christ’s Gospel was different. (Of course no Scriptural reference is provided as proof) It is as though the Speaker of the message did not know what He was about to say. So we should not preach what He preached. That kind of thinking is why I may affirm dispensational hermeneutics but I will not accept dispensationalism.
The fact is that we must preach Jesus’ gospel. How will we become disciples at all if we do not? It is what we are commissioned to do.
