Now that we have spent several hours examining the pre-tribulational rapture, I want for us to take a look at the claim that dispensationalism practices normal literal interpretation. One of the key verses that is used to support this idea of dividing up the Bible into dispensations is 2 Timothy 2, verse 15. Studied to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings, for they will increase into more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker, of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus, who concerning the truth have erred saying that the resurrection is past already and overthrow the faith of some. I wanted for us to be reminded of the context because if we take a look at verse 15 by itself, I believe we can pull that out and force it to say all kinds of different things. John Nelson Darby wrote a book entitled, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth, Taking That Last Statement. And he said this in relation to dispensationalism. Of course, John Nelson Darby is often referred to as the father of dispensationalism. He says, the word of truth then has right divisions. And then he said, on any study of that word, which ignores these divisions, must be in large measure profitless and confusing. And I want you to consider that in the simple reading of scripture, I did not know of these divisions until Bible college. in classes taught by Dallas Theological Seminary graduates or other dispensationalists. So as you think about this statement, any study of that word, of the word of truth, which ignores these divisions and various dispensationalists will say different numbers. The common one amongst Dallas Theological Associated Dispensationalists are seven dispensations. So any study of that word that ignores these divisions must be in large measure profitless and confusing. So again, you can't see these simply reading the Bible. Darby's translation of 2 Timothy 2.15, he worded it this way, cutting in a straight line the word of truth. Here's the meaning, the real meaning of 2 Timothy 2.15, handling the word of truth in a right manner. In a right manner, notice, rightly dividing the word of truth. It does not mean to divide up the Bible, divide up the word of truth into dispensations. That is, again, forced upon the scriptures here. And so again, we're talking about literal interpretation, and they force something on the Bible that it does not mean or say. That's very interesting. The Schofield Bible has no note for 2 Timothy 2.15. One of their primary proof texts for dividing up the Bible, he has no note listing the seven dispensations that he listed back in Genesis. Now, dispensationalists claim to use normal literal interpretation. In other words, they say then that if you interpret the Bible in that manner, in a normal literal way, you will become a dispensationalist. So here's the question that I have, a serious question for us to consider. If that is true, if the normal literal interpretation leads us to becoming a dispensationalist, why wasn't dispensationalism prominent for the 1800 years before John Nelson Darby and C.I. Schofield? If that's what a normal literal interpretation will lead us to, why was dispensationalism not more prominent in Christianity for 1800 years? Without a dispensationalist telling us that there are seven, or four, or nine, or any other number they arbitrarily choose, a person simply reading the Bible would not know that they are there. that there are seven or nine or four dispensations. As far as the word dispensation, it's found in scripture in Ephesians chapter one. Ephesians one verse nine and 10 says, having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to the good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself. that in the dispensation of the fullness of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him. Verse 11 goes on to say, in whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. Again, verse 10, it says that in the dispensation of the fullness of times, he might gather together and won all things in Christ. Now here's the Webster's 1828 Dictionary definition of dispensation. And the reason why I wanna emphasize this is because this is before dispensations became popular. I'm gonna highlight a couple of definitions that relate to our study of scripture in relation to this. Definition number two, the dealing of God to his creatures, the distribution of good and evil, natural or moral, in the divine government. The fourth definition, that which is dispensed or bestowed, a system of principles and rights enjoined. as the Mosaic dispensation, the gospel dispensation, including the former, the Levitical law and rites, R-I-T-E-S, rites or rituals, the latter, the scheme of redemption by Christ. What I think is very interesting, he only emphasizes Old Testament, Old Covenant, New Testament, the New Covenant. only two, not seven, not nine, not four, whatever the case may be. That was the common understanding of the early 1800s for the most part. Without Schofield notes in Genesis that take up more of a page than that of Scripture, how would a person simply reading and studying Scripture understand there are seven dispensations? That is not rightly dividing scripture. That is not normal, literal interpretation if you have to force something into the passage that it does not simply say. Charles Ryrie said that if you use the plain, normal interpretation as being the only valid hermeneutical principle, and it's consistently applied, it will cause one to be a dispensationalist. In fact, David Cloud, as he quotes Charles Ryrie in this case, he says, you will of necessity become a dispensationalist. Again, I point out that I did not know the seven dispensations until I went to Bible college, until I sat under a dispensational pastor. The reality is very clear as far as you look at history. John Nelson Darby did not practice literal interpretation. So John Nelson Darby is referred to as the father of dispensationalism, and he did not practice literal interpretation in many cases. Two examples that I'll give just simply here. First of all, in relation to the doctor of the church. Instead of using the term church or congregation, he emphasized an assembly. And what is very interesting is John Nelson Darby attempted to draw people out of local churches. He discredited a local church. In fact, that's why I believe C.I. Schofield emphasizes the true church, not the local church in the book of Ephesians. So again, he emphasizes an assembly, not a congregation or church. Also wanna mention this as far as the gap theory in the book of Genesis. In Genesis 1, John Nelson Darby accommodated secular geology by inserting a gap theory, a gap of an undetermined amount of time in Genesis 1. Now here's what the Bible says in Genesis 1, 1 and verse 2. In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth, and the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. As far as this gap theory, Darby said this, what came between the first verse and the second does not enter into the object of the revelation. creation and the forming of the present earth did. So in other words, God did not reveal to us what happened between verses one and two of Genesis chapter one. There's a simple word that's found in Genesis chapter one to prove that that statement is wrong. In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth and the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the earth, a face of the deep, I should say, and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters And God said, let there be light, and there was light. And God saw the light, and it was good. There's a continuous flow. You notice here the word and is used to tie all of this together. Darby also said this, scripture which does not reveal scientific facts is totally silent on them, but leaves a gap which may have been filled by millions of years. That is not literal interpretation, that is speculation that is forced upon the text of Genesis chapter one and verses one and two. No one would see a gap simply reading the words of Genesis chapter one without someone suggesting it. That is not literal interpretation. That is not normal, literal interpretation as they claim they possess and they practice. Darby forced his belief system into the text to accommodate the geological times of the evolutionists that were prominent in the 1800s when Darby was teaching his dispensationalism. He also said that he had no opinion or moral objection to the system of the days being lengthened periods. So he's open to suggestions about a day age theory found in Genesis chapter one in the days of creation. But literal interpretation of this passage, when the Hebrew word is used in Genesis chapter one is clarified with a number, it is a literal 24-hour day, the first day, the second day. Used in scripture, literal interpretation shows us that when the Hebrew word yom, I think is the Hebrew word, is used with a number clarification, it is a literal 24-hour day. Darby was skeptical of reports of extinct mammals being found with human artifacts in Europe. Then as far as the Schofield Bible, the Schofield Reference Bible, C.I. Schofield took this further and placed it right into his Bible to suggest all of these things. It's very interesting in Genesis chapter one, looking at the first page of the Schofield Bible printed out here, chapter one, the original creation. In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. Then there's another heading inserted, earth made waste and empty by judgment. And then a reference, Jeremiah chapter four. And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Just before verse three, there's another heading that's inserted into the Schofield Bible. The new beginning, the first day light diffused. When he refers to the heavens and the earth, he speaks of the dateless past. So what are they doing? They're accommodating all of these teachings of evolution so that they can sound scientifically accurate or justified. In a note that Schofield has on Genesis chapter one, by the way, there's only three and a half verses on the first page of the Schofield Bible, Genesis. The rest of it is introduction and notes at the bottom of the page. So there's things like that in the Bible, the Schofield Bible, that emphasizes man's words more than God's words. But this is the second note on Genesis chapter one, but three creative acts of God are recorded in this chapter. The heavens and the earth, number two, second of all, the animal life, verse 21, and human life, verses 26 and 27. The first creative act refers to the dateless past and gives scope for all the geologic ages. Again, they are accommodating dispensationalists claiming to be literal interpreters of the word of God. They are trying to accommodate evolution and geologic ages. John Nelson Darby emphasized typology throughout his writings. That is not literal interpretation, forcing a type onto something that is not a type in scripture. Clarence Larkin and his dispensational charts were published in 1920. Obviously this is an attempt to simplify the system of dispensationalism by visualizing the teaching with these charts. And yet what is very interesting, it takes more than 200 pages to explain the charts. Here's what I believe very strongly as far as dispensationalism. It is not simple Bible teaching. This is similar to Harold Camping in his teaching, his predictions about the coming of the Lord. You had to get his books, his writings in order to understand and comprehend all that he was presenting. It was not a simple presentation of scripture. What do I mean by simple presentation of scripture? When the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense. Simply reading scripture, you will not find seven dispensations listed in the Bible. Simply reading scripture, you won't find a gap theory. You won't find a dateless gap between verses one and two of Genesis chapter one. 2 Corinthians 11 verses three and four says, but I fear less by any means as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety. So your mind should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit, which you have not received, or another gospel, which you have not accepted, you might well bear with him. By the way, what I think is very interesting, there are many dispensationalists who teach that during the seven-year tribulation period that they teach and hold to, that salvation is not simply by faith in Jesus Christ, that they have to keep the Old Testament law, Help the Jews, they have to be kind and do all these works in order to be saved. That's another gospel. They're teaching another gospel other than by grace through faith. Verses 12 through 15 of 2 Corinthians 11 says, but what I do that I will do that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion, that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. For such are false apostles deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works." Again, Paul fears that the church in Corinth would be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. And as far as the spread of dispensationalism, I think this is also very interesting. It started with the Plymouth Brethren in England. And as I've read some historical statements that the Rothschilds even helped fund John Nelson Darby's trips, several trips to the United States. But what I think is very interesting, his teaching, his opportunities to teach were limited pretty much to the Northern part of the United States. Can I emphasize something with that? That that is where liberalism first came into America. Liberalism first came into the United States through the northern part of the United States. Teaching opportunities were in places like New York City, Boston, Chicago. He did not freely enter into the Bible belt. Dispensational teaching did not enter in until prominent Baptist and Bible teachers began teaching dispensationalism across the South. I believe that's very significant that dispensationalism did not take a strong foothold in the South until much after John Nelson Darby. So again, the question I have, does dispensationalism teach, practice, normal, literal interpretation in truth? In the next several lessons, I want to take a look at what dispensationalists have taught, dispensationalists like Hal Lindsey, John Hagee, and so many others, to take what they teach and compare them with the simple statements of scripture, not pulling this verse out here and assembling all these things to prove our system, but to simply look at what the Bible says to see if they practice normal literal interpretation.