Progressive Dispensationalism
Michael J. Vlach
Michael J. Vlach (PhD, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Professor of Theology at Shepherds Theological Seminary in Cary, NC
Progressive Dispensationalism is a theology that addresses and harmonizes God’s creation, kingdom, and covenant purposes in all their dimensions from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22. Like other systems it addresses sin and the need for individual redemption in Christ, but, uniquely, it grasps the fullness of the restoration of all things in Jesus through His two comings to earth. Progressive dispensationalism, thus, offers a broad and detailed perspective on all of God’s purposes.
Introduction
Dispensationalism is a comprehensive theological system based upon a consistent grammatical-historical hermeneutic applied to all Scripture. It accounts for God’s creation, kingdom, and covenant purposes and how these unfold in history from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22. It also explains how Israel, the nations, and the church relate to God’s purposes.
With this essay I explain key historical, hermeneutical, and theological beliefs of dispensationalism from the perspective of progressive dispensationalism (PD). By “progressive dispensationalism” I refer to the dispensational tradition of approximately the last fifty years. I identify as a “revised-progressive dispensationalist” since much of what I hold is similar to both revised and progressive forms of dispensationalism. What is presented here also has much in common with what James Fazio presented as “traditional dispensationalism” in the previous essay, yet with some minor differences. But for simplicity, in this article I will refer specifically to the designation, progressive dispensationalism.
While no system is perfect, throughout the essay I will argue that PD is the most accurate and comprehensive theological view that captures the storyline of Scripture in all its dimensions.
Distinctives and Assumptions
Like other Protestant and Evangelical theologies, dispensationalism, as a system, is a post-Reformation development. William C. Watson’s book Dispensationalism Before Darby documented theological currents of English theologians in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that led to the rise of dispensationalism in the nineteenth century.[1] These include interest in Bible prophecies, the future of national Israel, and premillennialism. Dispensationalism adopted these contributions and built upon the interest in these areas.
As a system, dispensationalism often is linked with the Anglo-Irish theologian and Plymouth Brethren minister, John Nelson Darby (1800–82). Darby packaged several beliefs now associated with dispensational theology—a coming seventieth week of Daniel, a future restoration for national Israel, the significance of geo-political nations, the distinction between Israel and the church, and a pretribulational rapture of the church. Most of these beliefs existed well before Darby, but Darby combined these ideas in a way that contributed to dispensationalism as a system. Most dispensationalists view Darby as one who systematized dispensational ideas and not as the originator of dispensational beliefs, since they believe these are taught in the Bible.
Dispensationalism increased in popularity in the nineteenth century through the Bible conference movement of the 1890s, the rise of dispensational Bible institutes and colleges, the influence of Dallas Theological Seminary (est. 1924), the popularity of dispensational radio and television programs, and many books produced by dispensationalists. Dispensationalism does not have a confession that has frozen its theology. It has revised itself throughout the decades while retaining its core beliefs.
There are four historical stages of dispensationalism.[2] Classical dispensationalism was prominent from the 1830s with Darby through the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. Traditional dispensationalism characterized the era from 1909 to 1949, the latter date coinciding with the release of Lewis Sperry Chafer’s Systematic Theology. Revised dispensationalism represents the dispensational tradition from 1950 to 1986 and the influence of John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, J. Dwight Pentecost, and Alva J. McClain. Progressive dispensationalism represents dispensationalism from 1986 to today and highlights the influence of key theologians such as Robert Saucy, Craig Blaising, and Darrell Bock. Dispensationalism today is mostly a mix of traditional or revised and PD. These forms of dispensationalism, especially the last two, share many similarities with minor differences between them.
Dispensationalism’s Primary Contributions
Dispensationalism is an heir of the Protestant Reformation.[3] It embraces the five solas of the Reformation—grace alone, faith alone, Christ alone, Scripture alone, and to the glory of God alone. While dispensationalism is not a specific soteriological system like Reformed or Covenant Theology, it affirms Reformation and evangelical understandings of salvation in Christ. Many early dispensational theologians were Presbyterians, and dispensationalists often affirmed Calvinistic theology. Historian, George Marsden, noted, “strong Calvinistic ties” in the American origins of dispensational premillennialism.[4] And “Darby was himself an unrelenting Calvinist.”[5] Although variations exist among dispensationalists on the Calvinism–Arminianism scale, dispensationalists affirm traditional evangelical perspectives on salvation.
Dispensationalism’s primary emphases and contributions, however, do not occur in the realm of soteriology or individual redemption. Dispensationalism primarily addresses God’s workings throughout history in the realms of creation, kingdom, covenants, law, people of God, and hermeneutics. It also has specific and nuanced views concerning ecclesiology (church), and eschatology (end times). While covenant theology mostly focuses on the salvation of elect individuals in Jesus, dispensationalism addresses God’s broader historical purposes, which include but go beyond individual redemption.
Dispensationalism tracks God’s actions in history through various eras or dispensations. And it is often known for affirming seven dispensations: innocence, conscience, government, promise, law, grace, and kingdom. These seven are emphasized within classical and traditional dispensationalism. Most revised and progressive dispensationalists affirm something close to these seven dispensations, but also emphasize God’s purposes through the unfolding of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New covenants in history. Dispensationalism also focuses on the people of God in history, namely pre-Israel saints, Israel, Gentile nations, and the church, and how these relate to each other and contribute to God’s purposes. Dispensationalism, from its earliest days, is also known for promoting a hermeneutic of consistent literal-grammatical-historical interpretation to all Scripture. This includes Old Testament prophetic sections, which dispensationalists believe should be understood with a consistent, literal hermeneutic.
Though not a particular system of soteriology, dispensationalism does address the scope and reach of salvation. The salvation Jesus accomplishes not only applies to saved individuals; it also extends to corporate ethnic groups and nations, and even the entire creation. For example, Romans 11:26 states, “all Israel will be saved,” a reference to corporate national Israel. Isaiah 19:20 reveals that God will send Egypt “a Savior and a Champion,” which is a reference to a coming salvation of Egypt. Isaiah 11 says the Messiah will restore the animal realm. Isaiah 35 describes a transformed earth. According to Colossians 1:20 Jesus is reconciling all things through the blood of His cross.
Thus, dispensationalism presents a broad perspective of salvation, one that reaches all creation. Darrell Bock notes, “Salvation is comprehensive, touching all structural spheres.”[6] Mark Snoeberger observes, “There is more to the Bible than mere redemptive history. The Bible is a history of the rule of God as much as it is a history of his saving acts.”[7]
This comprehensive understanding of salvation is a unique contribution of dispensationalism not often seen with the other theological systems. Craig Blaising notes, “The dispensational tradition has offered a broader concept of redemption than found in some other theologies. Redemption extends to political and national levels as well as to individual and spiritual renewal.”[8] This differs particularly from Covenant Theology, which seems most focused on the individual salvation of elect persons, and not on God’s broader purposes for creation and nations.
Thus, dispensationalism uniquely contributes to Christian theology by accounting for God’s multi-dimensional purposes for all creation and peoples from the garden of Eden in Genesis 1–2 to Jesus’s messianic-millennial kingdom in Revelation 20 and the Eternal Kingdom described in Revelation 21–22. It is a kingdom-reign-over-creation system. Dispensationalism also addresses all dimensions of the Noahic, Abrahamic, Davidic, and New covenants, including their physical, national, and international blessings. It realizes these covenants include spiritual blessings, but there also is much more. Dispensationalism delves into the roles of Israel, Gentile nations, and the church in history. As such, it offers insights into how God’s creation, kingdom, covenant, and people of God purposes unfold in history.
Essentials of Dispensationalism
Dispensational scholars promote certain specific beliefs as essential to its system. Charles Ryrie (1925–2016), for example, presented a sine qua non (essential conditions) of dispensationalism involving three areas: (1) a distinction between Israel and the church, (2) a hermeneutic of “literal interpretation” to all areas of scripture, including Old Testament prophecies, and (3) the glory of God as the underlying purpose of God in history.[9]
Extending past Ryrie’s list, John Feinberg, offered six “essentials” of dispensationalism: (1) multiple senses of terms like “Jew” and “seed of Abraham”, (2) a hermeneutic in which the New Testament reaffirms and does not reinterpret the Old Testament, (3) unconditional promises to national Israel in the Old Testament must be fulfilled with national Israel, (4) a distinctive future for Israel, (5) the church as a distinctive organism, and (6) a philosophy of history in which history is the gradual implementation and outworking of the kingdom of God.[10]
These lists show that dispensationalism involves a hermeneutic of consistent literal-grammatical-historical interpretation to all Scripture. Also, this system addresses the important roles of Israel and the church in God’s purposes. Finally, it emphasizes God’s broader kingdom designs in history. Dispensationalism is a “big-picture,” comprehensive perspective.
Progressive Dispensationalism Distinctives
A full discussion of how PD compares with other forms of dispensationalism is beyond our purposes. Progressive dispensationalism holds to the core beliefs of dispensationalism as found in the lists of Ryrie and Feinberg above. But there are certain noteworthy emphases. First, PD traces God’s workings in history mostly from the unfolding of the biblical covenants in history, and less on the traditional seven dispensations. Many progressive dispensationalists believe in the traditional dispensations of dispensationalism but choose to focus more on the biblical covenants and the implications of Jesus’s two comings for tracking God’s workings in history.
Second, PD believes the church of this age experiences partial and realized fulfillments of the Abrahamic, Davidic, and New covenants. These covenants were made with Israel and will be fulfilled in all their dimensions with Israel, but since these covenants were also intended to bless Gentiles someday (see Gen 12:3; 2 Sam 7:19; Isa 52:15), it is accurate to see the church as experiencing spiritual blessings of the covenants of promise. Thus, PD uses the word “fulfill” for what God is doing with the church regarding the covenants. This fulfillment involves the arrival of Jesus and spiritual blessings associated with the covenants. Yet the fulfillment of physical and national promises, including those related to national Israel, awaits Jesus’s return.
Hermeneutics of Progressive Dispensationalism
Progressive dispensationalism affirms consistent use of “literal-grammatical-historical” hermeneutics to all Scripture as foundational to interpreting the Bible. As Saucy notes, “Progressive dispensationalism affirms traditional historical-grammatical hermeneutics as its starting point.”[11] Using this method properly reveals all God is telling us in His Word. By “literal” is meant the authorial intent of the Bible writer as he was guided by the Holy Spirit. Whether through straightforward language or the use of analogy, figure of speech, or symbol, each Bible author conveyed a specific meaning in each text he wrote. And this meaning, whether in the Old Testament or New Testament, contributes to God’s revelation. Literal hermeneutics seeks to decipher the authorial intent in all Bible texts.
Deciphering the literal meaning comes through awareness of the historical and grammatical contexts surrounding the Bible writers. “Historical” refers to the historical context in which the writer wrote. This involves the time, place, audience, and situation facing the writer and his readers. “Grammatical” means studying the words, sentences, paragraphs, syntax and everything associated with words and how language works. This also includes discerning the various genres of the Bible. Additionally, this means awareness of figures of speech and symbols. Ultimately, literal-grammatical-historical interpretation is “interpretation,” that discovers what a Bible author meant in his text. When all parts of the Bible are understood accurately, we see a cohesive and harmonious message.
This principle of literal-grammatical-historical hermeneutics also applies to Old Testament prophetic passages, including those about the restoration of Israel. Prophecies of Israel’s curses and dispersion literally happened. So, too, will promises concerning Israel’s salvation and restoration as found in texts like Leviticus 26, Deuteronomy 30, Isaiah 11, Jeremiah 30–33, Ezekiel 36–37, Hosea 2, and Zechariah 14. As Roy Zuck states, “Nowhere does Scripture indicate that when we come to prophetic portions of Scripture we should ignore the normal sense of the words and overlook the meanings of words and sentences. The norms of grammatical interpretation should be applied to prophetic as well as to nonprophetic literature.”[12]
Progressive dispensationalism, at times, is linked with the concept of “complementary hermeneutics” in which God may do more than what He promised in a text but He will not do less. Thus, there could be meanings and significances beyond the original meaning of a text. This concept has been debated within dispensationalism, and it is not my view. But it does not change the reality that PD emphasizes grammatical-historical hermeneutics as foundational for understanding all Scripture.
Passage Priority
Non-dispensational systems often assert the concept of New Testament Priority over the Old Testament. Allegedly, the meanings of Old Testament prophetic texts are not found primarily in the Old Testament passages, but in New Testament interpretations or reinterpretations of these passages. As Richard Gaffin puts it, “Hermeneutical priority belongs to New Testament statements.”[13]
But PD does not believe later Bible passages interpret or reinterpret earlier Bible passages, if by this meanings are infused into the Old Testament texts that did not originally exist. God inspired all Scripture with no need for the meaning of one passage to override the meaning of another. Darrell Bock observes that the New Testament priority approach is “subversive retrojection of the NT back to the Old” that negates what God explicitly affirmed:
[the] claim of New Testament priority is a subversive retrojection of the NT back to the Old that actually loses some of what the inspiring God had committed himself to doing. No amount of pleading on behalf of a certain type of typology can deny this linguistic canceling effect on the text. The result is not a unifying of scriptural teaching but a negating and limiting of what God affirmed, resulting in a reductionist reading of the text.[14]
Dispensationalism, thus, asserts passage priority. The meaning of any Bible passage is found in that passage. The meaning of Joel 3 is found in Joel 3. The meaning of Psalm 2 is found in Psalm 2. The meaning of Revelation 20 is found in Revelation 20, and so on. Wherever it is located a Bible passage contributes to God’s purposes in its own context. Later revelation might comment on a passage, draw principles or significances from it, or connect a promise in the Old with fulfillment in the New, but later revelation does not reinterpret or change earlier revelation. God got it right the first time.
Dispensationalism also affirms the integrity and authority of both testaments. Scripture is a unified whole. Later revelation harmonizes with earlier revelation. The New builds upon the Old but it does not change the Old. God’s character guarantees this. John Feinberg notes how the principle of passage priority, found with dispensationalism, contrasts with nondispensationalism, “Nondispensationalists begin with NT teaching as having priority and then go back to the OT. Dispensationalists often begin with the OT, but wherever they begin they demand that the OT be taken on its own terms rather than reinterpreted in the light of the NT.”[15] And when both testaments are taken seriously, we see they harmonize. Paul Feinberg rightly argues, “If both Testaments are granted their integrity, their message will harmonize, since there is the single divine mind behind both.”[16] Dispensationalism, thus, affirms great continuity between Old Testament expectations and New Testament fulfillments. What the Old Testament literally promised, will be fulfilled literally through the two comings of Jesus.
Jesus’s Role with Fulfillment
Nondispensationalists often assert that Old Testament promises are transformed or fulfilled in a different way because of Jesus. Allegedly, Jesus fulfills the Old Testament in a way that makes prophetic details about Israel, Israel’s land, physical blessings, an earthly Davidic Throne, and other things disappear in significance. For example, Kim Riddlebarger said Old Testament prophecies “vanish in Jesus Christ, who has fulfilled them.”[17] But is this what fulfillment in Jesus really means?
No, Jesus does not make Old Testament prophecies “vanish.” Instead, “fulfillment in Jesus” involves literal fulfillment of all Bible prophecies, covenants, and promises. This has two dimensions.
First, Jesus literally fulfills messianic prophecies about himself. Jesus referred to this in Luke 24:44 concerning His suffering, death, and resurrection: “Now He said to them, ‘These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.’” This reveals that “all things which are written about” Jesus in the Old Testament must be fulfilled. Jesus’s birth in Bethlehem was predicted in Micah 5:2 and was literally fulfilled. Jesus’s entrance into Jerusalem on a donkey literally fulfilled Zechariah 9:9 (see Matt 21:4–5). So one major way Jesus fulfills the Old Testament is that He directly fulfills messianic prophecies about himself.
Second, Jesus is the means for the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, promises, and covenants. Jesus is a person, but there are prophecies and predictions about other persons, things, institutions, events, etc. These are important for God’s plans to be accomplished. There are predictions about a coming Antichrist, temple, Israel, nations, destruction and rescue of Jerusalem, battles between nations, the Day of the Lord, kingdom, resurrections, judgments, etc. These matters are significant to God’s purposes and Jesus is involved with their fulfillment. They do not vanish or dissolve into Jesus in a metaphysical way. As the One who is at the center of all God is doing in the world, Jesus works to bring everything predicted in the Old Testament to literal fulfillment. So Jesus is the means of fulfillment of the Old Testament since He makes sure all God’s plans are accomplished.
In Matthew 5:17–18, Jesus said He did not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets but to “fulfill” them. “Law” and “Prophets” means the entirety of the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus also explained what “fulfill” means when He declared that everything predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures must be “accomplished” (Matt 5:18). Thus, “fulfill” in this context means “accomplished.” And what must be accomplished? Everything stated in the Old Testament! Jesus actively works to make sure everything in the Hebrew Scriptures happens as stated. He is the means for the literal fulfillment of the Old Testament. Blaising notes that fulfillment in Jesus can mean “through Him”: “Actually, ‘in Him’ is a thick concept in Scripture that includes ‘through Him.’ It includes multiple aspects of the relationship of Christ to the redeemed creation.”[18] I would argue this approach is more Christ-honoring than believing details of prophecies “vanish” into Jesus.
Partial Fulfillments of Covenants and Prophecies
Concerning fulfillments of the biblical covenants and the return of Jesus, Mark Yarbrough rightly states, “While all covenants are completed in Jesus, Jesus has yet to complete all the covenants. That is why we await the second advent of Christ, when he will return and finish what has been started.”[19] Though Jesus fulfills the biblical covenants, and many aspects of these covenants have already occurred, not everything has been fulfilled yet.
Progressive dispensationalism views the biblical covenants as having past, present, and future fulfillments. The Abrahamic covenant predicted the coming of a “great nation,” Israel. That happened. But Israel’s full possession of the dimensions of the promised land, as stated in Genesis 15:18–21, awaits future fulfillment. Concerning the Davidic covenant, the promise of kings in the line of David leading to the Messiah have been fulfilled in history. But the promises of perpetual peace for Israel and a reign of the Messiah over the entire earth and all nations (see Psalm 72) has not yet happened. Also, the New covenant promise of the indwelling Holy Spirit and a new heart now occurs for God’s people, but the restoration of Jerusalem and physical blessings for Israel associated with the New covenant still await future fulfillment (see Jeremiah 31:38–40; 33). Thus, concerning the covenants of promise—Abrahamic, Davidic, and New—important details have been fulfilled in history, but others await future fulfillment. PD addresses which aspects of the biblical covenants have been fulfilled already and which aspects still need to occur. It also understands that the first coming of Jesus did not bring everything to completion. Jesus’s second coming also is involved with fulfillment.
Partial fulfilment also applies to some prophetic passages. In some cases, certain details of a prophetic passage were literally fulfilled with Jesus’s first coming, while other details in the passage await future fulfillment with Jesus’s second coming. One example is Zechariah 9:9–10. This prophecy describes several events concerning the Messiah. It predicts Jerusalem celebrating her King who comes humbly on a donkey (v. 9). And it predicts this King as One who brings peace to the nations with a kingdom reign over the entire earth (v. 10). The events of 9:9 were fulfilled with Jesus’s first coming, while the events of 9:10 await fulfillment with Jesus’s second coming. All four Gospel writers quote Zechariah 9:9 as being fulfilled with Jesus’s entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday. Jesus came to Jerusalem on a donkey as Israel’s Messiah. But Zechariah 9:10 foretold the Messiah removing war from the earth and ruling the nations from sea to sea. This awaits future fulfillment. Warfare among nations did not cease with Jesus’s first coming, and Jesus is not yet reigning over the nations of the earth. Dispensationalists believe 9:10 will be fulfilled with Jesus’s second coming to earth (see Matt 25:31 and Rev 19:15).
Just as there is a time gap between the first and second comings of Jesus, there is a time gap concerning the fulfillment of some prophecies. As Saucy observes,
The possibility of a partial fulfillment of many messianic prophecies should be expected, in that the Old Testament prophecies are generally associated simply with the coming of the Messiah, whereas their fulfillment in the New Testament clearly involves two advents. . . . Progressive dispensationalism thus agrees with many others that a partial fulfillment of the messianic prophecies began with the ministry of Christ at his first coming. But, it insists that the partial fulfillment is a partial fulfillment of the normal meaning of the original prophecy. The future completion of the fulfillment is also understood to be in accord with the original meaning of the prophecy so that ultimately the prophecy is fulfilled according to its original meaning.[20]
In sum, according to PD, a biblical prophecy with several elements may have a partial fulfillment. Some aspects of a prophecy can already be fulfilled while other parts await future fulfillment.
Types
Certain Old Testament entities prefigure greater New Testament realities. This occurs with Adam and Jesus, David and Jesus, the Mosaic covenant and the New covenant, the feasts of Israel and Jesus, and more. Thus, types, and the study of types (that is, typology), are legitimate topics for study. Dispensationalism affirms types and their significances. Sometimes dispensationalism is accused of not understanding types but that is not true. Types reveal God’s hand as He providentially moves in history, and with them we see important patterns and connections in the Bible. But we must grasp the proper understanding of types.
Progressive dispensationalism believes the New Testament determines types and their significances. Some types are explicitly identified with “type” wording. Romans 5:14 says Adam was a type (tupos) of Jesus. According to Hebrews 10:1 the Mosaic Law was a “shadow” (skia) of Jesus and the better New covenant. The use of “shadow” (skia) here is explicit typology language.
Some typological connections exist without explicit “type” or “shadow” wording. Paul links the Passover with Jesus’s sacrifice in 1 Corinthians 5:7. In Matthew 2:15–18, events in Israel’s history, such as Israel being called out of Egypt, and weeping at the time of the Babylonian captivity, are linked with events in Jesus’s career. These show Jesus is the corporate Head of Israel who can save and restore the nation Israel (see Isa 49:1–6). Statements and events in David’s life correspond to statements and events in Jesus’s life (see John 13:18; Ps 41:9). These show Jesus is the ultimate Son of David and Messiah.
Thus, PD embraces types and their implications when the New Testament reveals them. But a responsible use of types is necessary. Types supplement the story of the Bible revealed in explicit statements of Scripture. Types do not change the Bible’s storyline. As Darrell Bock notes, “Yes, we do see much biblical typology connected to Christ, finding realization in him, but not always at the expense of groundwork already laid. It comes alongside in complement, not in removal.”[21] Blaising observes that we should be skeptical of claims that types establish God’s plan when God’s explicit wording states otherwise:
The critic is right to be suspicious of a claim like this (that types are the means of establishing the divine plan) when the claim is employed to contravene, suppress, or subvert the meaning of explicit covenant promise, and even more so when the NT explicitly repeats and reaffirms the same promise as declared in the covenants of the OT.[22]
Also, contrary to nondispensational systems, the Old Testament is not a vast landscape of types waiting to be transformed. Not everything in the Old Testament is a type. For instance, the Abrahamic, Davidic, and New covenants are eternal, unconditional covenants that contain multiple promises concerning Israel, nations, land, kings, physical blessings, and spiritual blessings. These covenants and their elements are not types that become transformed in New Testament times. Their significances in all their dimensions remain across both the Old and New testaments.
Robert Saucy aptly notes that the Mosaic covenant being a shadow is not a reason for seeing other covenants and eschatological realities in the Old Testament as shadows and types:
Recognizing that the Old Testament prophecies speak of the eschatological times and events, including the inauguration of the new covenant, precludes our seeing all of the Old Testament as merely shadows and types that become outmoded with the coming of Christ. The fulfilled reality of the coming of Christ transcended many elements contained in the old Mosaic covenant; but this cannot be said of the promises of the new covenant and other eschatological realities.[23]
In short, PD believes that types support and supplement the Bible’s storyline and show important patterns in the Bible. But types do not change the Bible’s narrative. Also, the covenants of promise and the nation Israel are not types and shadows that are transcended in the New Testament.
Continuity and Discontinuity
On the issue of continuity and discontinuity concerning the relationship between the Old and New testaments, PD is a continuity system that contains elements of discontinuity.
Continuities
Progressive dispensationalism primarily is a continuity system since it sees great continuity between Old Testament expectations and New Testament fulfillments. What was promised in the Old will be fulfilled in the New, literally, as a result of Jesus’s two comings, which includes
- the biblical covenants in all their dimensions—physical and spiritual; individual, national, and international
- Bible prophecies in all their details
- a coming Day of the Lord and seventieth week of Daniel
- an earthly kingdom of the Messiah
- a reign of the Messiah over geo-political nations
- the transformation of nature and the animal realm
- restoration of national Israel
- fulfillment of land promises to Israel
- all nations blessed in their lands
These items are important parts of the Old Testament expectation. The New Testament continues these expectations and expects their fulfillments through the two comings of Jesus. Belief in this is why PD primarily is a continuity system.
Progressive dispensationalism also notes other areas of continuity. When it comes to salvation, believers in both testaments are saved by grace alone. Saints in both the Old and New testaments are saved through faith alone. The object of faith in both testaments is God alone. The objective basis for the salvation of Old and New testament saints is the atoning death of Jesus alone.
Discontinuities
In harmony with these continuities, though, there are significant discontinuities between the Old and New testaments. First, while a specific messianic hope exists in the Old Testament, the arrival of Jesus the Messiah occurs with the New Testament era bringing full knowledge of the Messiah. Second, the New Testament brings added revelation to God’s purposes. We now know exactly who the promised Messiah is. We learn there will be two comings of the Messiah separated by a gap of time. We learn specifics of Jew-Gentile unity because of Jesus (see Eph 2–3). This new revelation harmonizes with Old Testament revelation, but New Testament saints have more revelation than did Old Testament believers.
Third, there is a major epochal transition from the Mosaic covenant era to the New covenant era. From Exodus 20 until the cross, keeping the Mosaic covenant and its Mosaic law was required. From the cross onward, though, God’s people are now under the New covenant and its Law of Christ. The transition from the Mosaic covenant era to the New covenant dispensation is a major area of discontinuity that PD acknowledges. Christians no longer are bound to the Mosaic law, including its sacrifices and worship system, but they are bound to the Law of Christ (see 1 Cor 9:20–21).
Fourth, this transition from the Mosaic era to the New covenant era also brings enablement to obey God that did not exist before. The Mosaic law did not enable or help people under it to obey God (see Rom 7:13–25). It told Israel what God expected, but it offered no aid in keeping it. The New covenant, though, brings enablement to obey God through the permanent indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit and a new heart (see Rom 8:1–4).
Fifth, there is discontinuity between Israel and the church. While closely related historically and theologically, each has a unique identity and role. This will be discussed more below.
In sum, PD primarily is a system of continuity with elements of discontinuity.
Theological Commitments and Themes
In addition to its hermeneutical principles, along with its balance of continuity and discontinuity, PD promotes several key theological commitments and themes that are at the heart of this system.
Kingdom as Theme
First, a kingdom of God over creation by man as God’s mediator is the theme that ties the Bible’s storyline together. This point is foundational to PD and sets it apart from other theological systems that focus mostly on individual redemption from sin. Progressive dispensationalism is a kingdom-over-creation system. Progressive dispensationalism includes the importance of individual redemption, but also grasps that kingdom is the overarching theme that ties God’s purposes together. God’s plans before time are connected with the summing up of all things in Christ—“things in the heavens and things on earth”—which is the kingdom (Eph 1:10). And this plan is played out in history. Genesis 1 starts with a wonderful creation and a mandate given to man to rule over this creation for God’s glory. The story eventually culminates in an earthly kingdom of the Messiah in Revelation 20 and then an Eternal Kingdom on earth in Revelation 21–22.
Thus, a kingdom on earth, with Jesus as King, is the theme of Scripture. This is shown with the Bible’s bookends. A reign over creation by God’s image bearers is mandated in Genesis 1:26–28. And with Revelation 22:5, the last verse describing human history, the saints of God “will reign forever and ever” over the new earth.
God is pursuing a multiethnic, multinational earthly kingdom characterized by righteousness and justice. Adam, as representative of mankind, was to fill, rule, and subdue the earth as God’s mediator. This is a kingdom mandate. This expectation existed before sin and the need for salvation in Genesis 3. So, kingdom is prior to salvation. When man sins the need for salvation will arise and become an important theme. But redemption operates under God’s broader kingdom plans. God’s ultimate purpose for man is not just to be saved but to be in relationship with God and others, and function as God intended for him. Man was created to love God and love other people, and rule over God’s creation. After the Fall, man must be saved to do this, but being saved is not an end in itself. It is a means for further ends.
Progressive dispensationalism also calls for a deeper understanding of what “salvation in Christ” involves. Salvation has three main components. First, there is redemption from sin for the individual. Second, salvation extends to the restoration of ethnicities, nations, and society (see Isaiah 2; 19:16–25; Rev 21:24; 22:2). Third, salvation involves the healing of all creation (see Isaiah 11:6–9; Rom 8:19–22). PD addresses all three.
Thus, a reign over creation by man for the glory of God is at the heart of what God is pursuing according to PD. Jesus, the Last Adam, will succeed from and over the realm—earth—where Adam failed. When Jesus returns He will rule the earth and nations from Jerusalem (Zech 14:9; Rev 20:4). He shares this rule with His saints (see Rev 5:10; 20:4; Matt 19:28–30). There will be a multiethnic, multinational kingdom that brings prosperity and blessings for Israel and all nations. This messianic kingdom of Jesus is the millennium mentioned in Revelation 20. According to 1 Corinthians 15:24, 28, when Jesus has successfully reigned in this kingdom He will hand it over to the Father and the Eternal Kingdom will commence. This Eternal Kingdom takes place on a restored earth and involves the nations serving God and making cultural contributions to the new earth (see Rev 21:3, 24, 26). The Father and Jesus reign from a throne in the New Jerusalem and the saints of God will reign forever on the new earth (see Rev 22:2–5).
Emphasis on Biblical Covenants for Understanding God’s Purposes
All Christian theological systems acknowledge the importance of covenants. But not all agree on what the biblical covenants are or which ones should be emphasized. Covenant theology, for example, emphasizes three theological covenants that are not explicitly mentioned in Scripture—Covenant of Redemption, Covenant of Works, and Covenant of Grace. Although the existence of these alleged covenants is highly disputed, for Covenant theology they become the grid through which the explicit biblical covenants—Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New—are understood.[24] Progressive dispensationalism is suspicious about this approach, asserting that the explicitly mentioned biblical covenants should be the starting points and priority for understanding God’s covenant purposes in the Bible. The Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New covenants are the focus of God’s covenantal purposes, and they are the means for the implementation of God’s creation and kingdom plans in history. Dispensationalism, thus, wants the focus to remain on these covenants. This then leads to a third and related point.
Fulfillment of All Dimensions of Biblical Covenants
Third, PD believes all dimensions of the biblical covenants—spiritual, material, individual, national, and international elements—must be fulfilled. The biblical covenants include spiritual blessings and physical blessings. They also involve individuals and the entities of national Israel and Gentile people groups and nations. Progressive dispensationalism believes all dimensions of these covenants must come to literal fulfillment. Saucy is right that “the Old Testament prophets saw no problem with the physical and material existing together with the spiritual in eschatological times—analogous to the original creation, which included the material.”[25] This differs from other theological systems that often focus exclusively on salvific and spiritual blessings of the covenants.
For example, the Noahic covenant is a creational covenant made by God with “all life on the earth” (see Gen 9:17), showing the inherent value of the earth and all creatures. It is the platform for God’s kingdom purposes and other objectives to play out in history.
The Abrahamic covenant involves Abraham’s and Israel’s role in blessing all people groups and nations (see Gen 12:2–3; 18:18). The Abrahamic covenant also addresses Israel’s land (see Gen 12:6–7; 15:18–21). It results in nations and kings (see Gen 17:6) It includes a rule over the peoples of the earth and agricultural prosperity (see Gen 49:8–12). The Abrahamic covenant also speaks to perpetual peace for Israel from her enemies (see Gen 22:17).
The Davidic covenant concerns the kingly seed line from David that eventually culminates in the Messiah (Jesus). It involves national Israel and the land. It includes the blessing of Gentiles (2 Sam 7:19; Amos 9:11–12). It addresses an earthly kingdom reign with agricultural prosperity (see Psalm 72; Amos 9:13–15). It involves the defeat of Israel’s enemies (see 2 Sam 7:10). With Luke 1:68–74, Zacharias appealed to the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants concerning Israel’s national deliverance from her enemies.
The New covenant promises forgiveness of sin, a new heart, and the indwelling Holy Spirit, along with many physical promises in the land of promise (see Deut 30:1–9; Jeremiah 31–33; Ezekiel 36–37). Jerusalem will be rebuilt (see Jer 31:38–40). People will buy fields, sign deeds and be involved in financial situations (see Jer 32:44). Ezekiel 36:29–30, a New covenant text, combines Israel’s forgiveness with agricultural prosperity: “Moreover, I will save you from all your uncleanness; and I will call for the grain and multiply it, and I will not bring a famine on you. I will multiply the fruit of the tree and the produce of the field, so that you will not receive again the disgrace of famine among the nations.” These are just a few of the physical promises associated with the covenants of promise. Progressive dispensationalism takes these seriously.
Progressive dispensationalism also sees progressive fulfillment of the covenants throughout history. Some covenant promises were fulfilled in the Old Testament. For instance, Abraham’s name became great. Isaac and Jacob arrived as Abraham’s descendants. Israel developed into a great nation. Israel conquered the promised land under Joshua. Next, some covenant promises were fulfilled with Jesus’s first coming. Jesus the Messiah arrived, messianic salvation for believing Jews and Gentiles began. The Holy Spirit permanently indwells God’s people. And New covenant enablement to obey God happened. But fulfillment of other promises awaits Jesus’s second coming such as the restoration of national Israel, the renewal of earth and the animal realm, cultural and social transformation, and so on. While certain spiritual blessings are participated in or partially realized with the church, complete fulfillment of all covenant blessings awaits Jesus’s return and kingdom. According to Romans 11:12, Israel’s coming “fullness” will mean even more blessings for the world. This points to a future age when an abundance of covenant blessings will occur.
With PD, Jesus is the focal point of the biblical covenants. He brings all covenants to fulfillment through His two comings. Jesus is the ultimate Seed of Abraham (see Gal 3:16) who brings salvation to all peoples (see Gal 3:29). He is the ultimate Son of David, the Messiah, who will fulfill the Davidic covenant with an earthly reign from David’s throne over nations (see Matt 19:28; 25:31). Jesus inaugurates the New covenant with His blood and brings redemption to His people (see Luke 22:20). He brings both spiritual salvation to individuals and eventually accomplishes tangible blessings like the new earth, resurrection, homes, and farms to all ethnicities and nations (see Matt 19:28–30; Rev 5:10; 21:24). Jesus fulfilled many promises with His first coming, but will fulfill many others with His second advent.
In sum, PD asserts that all physical, national, and international promises of the covenants matter and must be fulfilled in all their details and dimensions. This makes PD a more detailed and holistic system than either covenant theology or progressive covenantalism.
Israel as Strategic to God’s Purposes
Fourth, corporate national Israel remains strategic in God’s purposes. Israel is a major player in the Bible’s storyline. Unfortunately, the Christian church historically has resisted the continuing theological significance of corporate national Israel. Dispensationalism, though, openly embraces the significance of Israel in God’s purposes. Craig Blaising notes that ethnic-national Israel “is not peripheral but central to the story line of the Bible. How one answers this question affects how one understands the story of the Bible from its beginning to its end.”[26]
Israel was destined by God to bless the world. Concerning Abraham and Israel, God said, “In you all the families of the earth will be blessed” (Gen 12:2–3). Psalm 67:7 states, “God blesses us [Israel], so that all the ends of the earth may fear Him.” God uses Israel to bless the world in three main ways. First, through Israel the Scriptures came to the world (see Rom 3:2). Second, Israel is the vessel for the Messiah (see Rom 9:5), who brings blessings to the Gentiles (see Isa 49:1–6). And third, Israel and Jerusalem will be the geographical center of a worldwide earthly kingdom of the Messiah that blesses all nations on earth (see Isaiah 2; Zechariah 14).
To fully complete its God-given destiny for the world, Israel must be saved. Thus, dispensationalism affirms a coming salvation of “all Israel”—(Rom 11:26). While a present remnant of believing Israel exists (see Rom. 11:1–10), Israel as a whole will be saved (see Rom 11:26; Zech 12:10). This is a corporate salvation and restoration of Israel. To support his statement that “all Israel will be saved” Paul quoted Isaiah 59:20–21 concerning the salvation and restoration of the nation.
In Matthew 19:28–29 Jesus told the apostles that with the coming renewal of the earth they would judge the restored twelve tribes of Israel. After forty days of kingdom instruction from the risen Jesus, the apostles expected the coming restoration of Israel: “Lord, is it at this time that you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6). When Jesus assumes His Davidic throne at His second coming the twelve tribes of Israel will be restored (see Luke 22:30). The nation that received curses for disobedience will receive blessings for belief and obedience (see Deut 30:1–10; Lev 26:40–45). Israel’s land, too, is significant (see Matt 24:15–20; Luke 21:24). Progressive dispensationalism, thus, grasps the continuing significance of Israel in God’s purposes.
Nations in God’s Purposes
Fifth, nations and ethnicities remain part of God’s plans according to PD. In addition to the continuing significance for ethnic, national Israel, PD asserts the importance of other geopolitical nations in God’s plans. Genesis 10–11 reveals that nations and people groups matter in God’s purposes. This is the backdrop for the statements in Genesis 12:3 and 18:18 that the families and nations of the earth will be blessed.
According to Isaiah 19:16–25 the nations Egypt and Assyria will exist alongside Israel as God’s people in a future kingdom of God. During this time five cities in Egypt will speak Hebrew (19:18) and Egypt will make a monument to the Lord near its border (19:19). Assyria and Egypt will build a highway together for worshiping the Lord (19:23). Assyria, Egypt, and Israel will all be God’s people, yet still retain their distinct national identities. Zechariah 14 mentions nations, including Egypt, during a time when the Lord reigns over the earth. Revelation 19:15 says Jesus will rule the nations with a rod of iron when He returns. Revelation 21:24, 26 mentions nations and their kings bringing cultural contributions (“their glory”) to the New Jerusalem. Revelation 22:2 indicates nations will live in perpetual harmony.
Geopolitical nations are significant, even in the future. This means God’s purposes include but go beyond individual human salvation. Progressive Dispensationalism detects this truth in a way other theological systems do not.
Church as a New Testament Entity
Sixth, like all forms of dispensationalism, PD asserts that the church is a New Testament entity with New Testament origins. Two key ingredients make the church: (1) the person and work of the Messiah and (2) the New covenant baptizing ministry of the Holy Spirit. These two realities did not exist in the Old Testament and that is why the church did not exist then.
This understanding influences a progressive dispensational definition of the church: the church is the Messianic, New covenant community of believing Jews and Gentiles. The church is Messianic since Jesus the Messiah had to arrive for the church to begin. And it is a New covenant community since members of the church experience the New covenant ministry of the Holy Spirit. These demand a New Testament origin for the church.
In the Gospels, the church is only mentioned in two verses. With Matthew 16:18, Jesus stated He would build His church, thus showing the futurity of it. In Matthew 18:17, Jesus gave directions for discipline in His church when it begins. The Gospels make no references to the church’s existence. But in Acts, after Jesus sent the Holy Spirit (see Acts 2), an explosion of references to “church” occurs—nineteen times. Significantly, Luke, who wrote both the gospel of Luke and Acts, does not refer to the church in his gospel, but he mentions the church many times in Acts. This is further evidence that the church is a New Testament entity.
Like all forms of dispensationalism, PD rejects replacement theology or supersessionism in which the church is viewed as replacing, superseding, or fulfilling Israel in a way that makes national Israel nonsignificant in God’s purposes. A redefinition of Israel does not occur in Scripture.
Distinction between Israel and Church
Seventh, a distinction exists between Israel and the church. Israel is not the church. And the church is not Israel. Israel is an ethnic, national, territorial entity with the task of blessing other nations in a coming earthly kingdom of the Messiah. As an ethnic entity, Israel involves a physical seed line connection back to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the sons of Jacob. Next, as a national entity, Israel has a history, customs, language, tradition, laws, and other areas connected with nationhood. Then, as a territorial entity, Israel is linked with the land of promise as explained in texts like Genesis 12 and 15. While Israel experiences dispersion and persecution in history, she always remains an ethnic, national, territorial entity. And, as mentioned earlier, Israel, along with the city of Jerusalem, will be the geographical headquarters for Messiah’s earthly kingdom reign (see Isaiah 2).
The church, on the other hand, is a multiethnic entity founded by Jesus the Messiah and the New covenant ministry of the Holy Spirit. It has New Testament origins. The church is not a geopolitical nation with land dimensions like Israel. Instead, it is a spiritual community of believers in Jesus from various people groups. During this time between Jesus’s two comings, when the nations are at hostility with God, the church’s mission is to take the Great Commission of salvation in Jesus to the world. The church of this age is a persecuted minority that faces hostility from Satan and the nations (see Revelation 2–3). But when Jesus comes again to establish His kingdom, the church will reign with Jesus on earth over the nations (see Rev 2:26–27; 5:10).
Israel and the church each has its own identity and role in God’s purposes. Yet, the church has a close relationship to Israel since the church now partakes in the covenants of promise mediated through Israel. In Romans 11:17–24, believing Gentiles now participate in the place of blessing stemming from the root of the Olive Tree, which is the covenants of promise (Abrahamic, Davidic, New). This participation includes the spiritual blessings of these covenants now and the physical blessings of the covenants in the future when Israel’s fullness occurs (see Rom 11:12). Also, the believing remnant of Israel currently is part of the church (see Rom 11:1–6) along with believing Gentiles (see Ephesians 2:11–3:6). Paul calls believing ethnic Israelites the “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16. Thus, believing Israelites of this age are a subset of the church.
Like all forms of dispensationalism, PD rejects replacement theology or supersessionism in which the church is viewed as replacing, superseding, or fulfilling Israel in a way that makes national Israel nonsignificant in God’s purposes. A redefinition of Israel does not occur in Scripture. Jesus’s role as the ultimate Israelite is not to make Israel nonsignificant, but to save and restore Israel (see Isa 49:1–6).
Since the purpose of Israel and Israel’s covenants was to bless Gentiles, and Gentiles are now being blessed because of Jesus, there is partial fulfillment of the covenants of promise in this age with the church. This involves spiritual blessings such as messianic salvation, the permanent indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit, the implanting of a new heart, and Jew-Gentile equality in salvation. But the fulfillment of restoration promises to Israel and nations, along with physical blessings and land promises for Israel, awaits the second coming of Jesus and His earthly kingdom.
Futurism
Eighth, future prophetic events are important to God’s purposes. Like other systems,PD accounts for the great significance of Jesus’s first coming: His great teachings, His perfect life, His atonement and death for sins, and the start of the church. As a comprehensive system, PD also accounts for major events still to come, which include a future Tribulation Period, the Day of the Lord, the Antichrist, cosmic signs, international wars, Israel’s restoration, and other events. These events are linked with the seventieth week of Daniel as found in Daniel 9:27 and texts such as Matthew 24–25, Luke 21, Mark 13, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 6–19. In addition, Jesus will return at His second coming and set up His thousand-year reign upon the earth.
Progressive dispensationalism, thus, affirms “futurism”—the view that the Tribulation Period, Day of the Lord, second coming of Jesus, and Jesus’s messianic kingdom await future fulfillment. It offers specific understandings of events still to come and presents a comprehensive understanding of history, including details of things to come. Covenant theology and progressive covenantalism say little about future events because they focus mostly on Jesus’s first coming and how this relates to individual redemption. Yet PD embraces the significance of major future events and how they contribute to God’s purposes and glory. It affirms specific prophecies important to the Christian worldview and hope. Progressive dispensationalism, therefore, is a comprehensive system that addresses God’s glory in His past, present, and future actions in history. Blaising notes why this is an important advantage PD has over other theological systems,
There are other theological traditions which interpret Bible prophecy almost exclusively in relation to the present ministry of Christ in the church or to a believer’s personal experience of salvation. Dispensationalism, however, interpreting these prophecies in a more “literal” manner has always expected God’s future blessings to include earthly, national, and political aspects of life. Many of these blessings belong to a future dispensation which will be marked by the return of Christ to earth.[27]
Premillennialism as Strategic to God’s Plans
Ninth, premillennialism is necessary for the complete fulfillment of all God’s kingdom and covenant purposes. All millennial positions believe the millennium is the messianic reign of Jesus the Messiah. Each millennial view also holds that when Jesus completes His messianic-millennial kingdom, He then hands this kingdom over to the Father, as 1 Corinthians 15:24, 28 explicitly teaches. The millennium, therefore, concerns the nature and timing of Jesus’s messianic kingdom. These are important issues. To be comprehensive, a theological system should specifically address the nature and timing of Jesus’s kingdom. In short, each system should commit to a millennial view.
Progressive dispensationalism, unlike covenant theology and progressive covenantalism, affirms a specific view of Jesus’s messianic-millennial kingdom. And it incorporates this view into its system. Progressive dispensationalism affirms premillennialism. Jesus’s kingdom will be an earthly reign over nations and all creation as a result of His second coming. Thus, the nature of Jesus’s kingdom is earthly, and its timing is future. This coming millennial kingdom brings complete fulfillment to all God’s kingdom purposes.[28] With it, Jesus, the Last Adam and Messiah, fulfills the kingdom mandate of Genesis 1:26, 28 for man to successfully rule and subdue the earth as God’s mediator. Hebrews 2:5–8 says this kingdom reign over earth has not happened yet. But with His coming messianic-millennial kingdom, Jesus will succeed from and over earth and succeed where Adam failed.
This millennial kingdom also will bring the complete fulfillment of the Abrahamic, Davidic, and New covenants in all their dimensions—spiritual, physical, national, and international. These covenants of promise were inaugurated in Old Testament history and with Jesus’s first coming. Israel has become a great nation. Jesus, the ultimate Davidic King and Messiah, has arrived. Jesus brought messianic salvation to believing Israelites and Gentiles. The New covenant ministry of the Holy Spirit is operating. Yet certain physical, national, and international elements of these covenants have not been fulfilled yet. The transformation of nature, the healing of the animal kingdom, the restoration of Israel as a nation, geo-political nations submitting to the Messiah, economic and agricultural prosperity, and other matters await future fulfillment with Jesus’s return and kingdom.
Also, the coming millennial kingdom will see Jesus vindicated in the realm (earth) of His rejection at His first coming. Jesus will reign in the realm where He was rejected. It also is the time when the saints are vindicated in the realm of their persecution (see Rev 2:26–27; 5:10; 20:4).
Progressive dispensationalism, thus, affirms premillennialism as important to God’s purposes. Unlike other systems, it offers a detailed explanation of the nature and timing of Jesus’s messianic kingdom and shows how this kingdom fits into the Bible’s storyline.
Conclusion
Progressive Dispensationalism is a theology that addresses and harmonizes God’s creation, kingdom, and covenant purposes in all their dimensions from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22. Like other systems it addresses sin and the need for individual redemption in Christ, but, uniquely, it grasps the fullness of the restoration of all things in Jesus through His two comings to earth. Progressive dispensationalism, thus, offers a broad and detailed perspective on all of God’s purposes. Compared to other evangelical theological systems, PD offers the most comprehensive and accurate understanding of God’s activities in history.
[1] William C. Watson, Dispensationalism Before Darby: Seventeenth-Century and Eighteenth-Century English Apocalypticism (Navasota: Lampion House, 2015).
[2] Not every dispensationalist would agree with this exact taxonomy. For example, Fazio’s article on “traditional dispensationalism” is what I classify here as “revised.”
[3] See Christopher Cone and James I. Fazio, eds., Forged from Reformation: How Dispensational Thought Advances the Reformed Legacy (El Cajon: SCS Press, 2017).
[4] George M. Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism: 1870-1925 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), 46.
[5] Marsden, Fundamentalism, 46.
[6] Darrell L. Bock, “Progressive Dispensationalism,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies: Four Views on the Continuity of Scripture, ed. Brent E. Parker and Richard J. Lucas (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2022), 122.
[7] Mark A. Snoeberger, “A Traditional Dispensational Response,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies: Four Views on the Continuity of Scripture, ed. Brent E. Parker and Richard J. Lucas (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2022), 245.
[8] Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 18.
[9] Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today (Chicago: Moody Press, 1965), 43–47.
[10] John S. Feinberg, “Systems of Discontinuity,” in Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship between the Old and New Testaments, ed. John S. Feinberg(Wheaton: Crossway, 1988), 67–85.
[11] Robert L. Saucy, “The Progressive Dispensational View,” in Perspectives on Israel and the Church: 4 Views, ed. Chad O. Brand (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2015), 156.
[12] Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth (Colorado Springs: ChariotVictor, 1991), 241–42.
[13] Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., “The Redemptive-Historical View,” in Biblical Hermeneutics: Five Views, ed., Stanley E. Porter and Beth M. Stovell (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012), 98. Gaffin states this is especially true for “overall generalizations about the Old.”
[14] Darrell Bock, “A Progressive Dispensational Response,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies,222. Bock refers to the essay by the Covenantalist, Michael Horton, with this statement.
[15] Feinberg, “Systems of Discontinuity,” 75.
[16] Paul Feinberg, “Hermeneutics of Discontinuity,” in Feinberg, ed. Continuity and Discontinuity, 127.
[17] Kim Riddlebarger, A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 70. Emphases mine. His full statement is, “The New Testament writers claimed that Jesus was the true Israel of God and the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. So what remains of the dispensationalists’ case that these prophecies will yet be fulfilled in a future millennium? They vanish in Jesus Christ, who has fulfilled them.”
[18] Craig A. Blaising, “A Critique of Gentry and Wellum’s, Kingdom Through Covenant: A Hermeneutical-Theological Response,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 26, no. 1 (Spring 2015): 124.
[19] Mark Yarbrough, “Israel and the Story of the Bible,” in Israel the Church and the Middle East, ed. Darrell L. Bock and Mitch Glaser (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2018), 60–61.
[20] Saucy, “The Progressive Dispensational View,” 164.
[21] Bock, “A Progressive Dispensational Response,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies, 227.
[22] Blaising, “A Critique of Gentry and Wellum’s, Kingdom through Covenant: A Hermeneutical-Theological Response,” 117.
[23] Robert L. Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism: The Interface Between Dispensational and Non-Dispensational Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993), 30.
[24] The Abrahamic, Davidic, and New covenants are perceived as extensions of the Covenant of Grace. The Mosaic Covenant is seen as a restatement of the Covenant of Works or Covenant of Grace (or both). As a result, the explicit biblical covenants are viewed as salvation covenants related to the covenants of works and grace.
[25] Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism, 31.
[26] Craig A. Blaising, “Israel and Hermeneutics,” in The People, The Land, and The Future of Israel: Israel and the Jewish People in the Plan of God (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2014), 152.
[27] Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 18.
[28] These blessings will then carry over into the Eternal Kingdom as the proper aftermath and perhaps reward for Jesus’s successful kingdom. We affirm that the Eternal Kingdom is also related to the fulfillment of God’s purposes.