Finding Objectivity (part 2)

At this point I would like to draw the reader of Word & Truth’s attention to the fact that what will be said over the next couple of posts will be the basis of a distinction between myself and most that consider themselves “Reformed.” I am speaking here of the differences in our hermeneutical stance. Specifically, the Presbyterian Church and many others who consider themselves “Reformed,” hold to a type of Hermeneutic (the science of interpretation) known as Covenant Theology. In fact, in many circles, especially the Presbyterian Church, the terms Reformed and Covenant Theology have become synonymous. This is both inaccurate and possibly destructive to the Reformed view of salvation (Don’t worry, we will further define Reformed, and Covenantalism, as well as Dispensationalism as we proceed.), because it unfairly boxes in the believer of God’s sovereignty in salvation into a method of interpretation, understanding of the church (ecclesiology) and a stance on the end times (eschatology). Of course all theology is related and connected, but to necessitate one in the declaration of the other, when it is unnecessary to do so is academically unfair. And the cause of much confusion and division in the church.

I hold to a hermeneutic called Dispensationalism. Yes, I am reformed in my view of soteriology. No, I do not hold to a Covenant Hermeneutic. Some at this point can’t believe that this is even possible. Most people who have even heard of these two terms show an uneducated hatred of one or the other.

Not only is it possible to hold to both a Reformed Soteriology and a Dispensational Hermeneutic, but I know many who do the same. John Macarthur is more of a public figure who outwardly holds such a view, but also great pastors such as Chuck Swindoll, David Jeremiah, Tony Evans, Tommy Nelson, etc. (I hope they don’t mind me dropping their names. I merely want to point out the fact that the Dispensational Reformed position is not an oddity).

It is my hope to show, over the following posts, the history of both the Covenant and the Dispensational hermeneutic in order to show their development, their distinctions, and their resulting theological stances. It is my hope to present both sides fairly, recognizing the intent of those who developed both branches of this Christian way of interpreting Scripture, while trying to present the positions from the mindset of those who drafted these views. Also, I desire to evaluate both in order to see, and to show which, if either, best helped Reformed Christianity find an objective means of interpreting Scripture.


This will take several posts, so I beg for your patience as we push forward in our study of theology. Also, if you feel I have misrepresented or unfairly presented either side. Please post a comment or email me and I will edit as necessary. Thanks.