CTSJ 2:2 (Fall 1996) p.

13
Book Review

Richard T. Zuelch*
Professor in Systematic Theology
[*Editors note: Richard Zuelch received a B.A. from Grace Bible
Institute; and an M.Div. from Talbot School of Theology. He
teaches systematic theology at Chafer Theological Seminary and
has contributed articles to The Banner of Truth magazine.]
The Origins of Dispensationalism: The Darby Factor, by Larry V. Crutchfield
(Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1992).
This book began life as the authors 1985 doctoral dissertation at Drew
University. Crutchfield is currently a mentor with Faraston Theological Seminary
and a freelance writer. He lives in Colorado.
John Nelson Darby (18001882), born in London of Irish parents, trained to be
an attorney, but abandoned his law career after his conversion. He became a priest
in the Church of England in 1826, but left that communion shortly thereafter,
disillusioned with the cold intellectualism he found there. In time, he joined an
already existing group of like-minded individuals, which eventually evolved into
the Plymouth Brethren. Darby became their first spokesman and most prolific
writer.
Due to space considerations, I have simplified Crutchfields discussions of
each of Darbys dispensations. While Crutchfields writing is clear throughout,
his discussions in the book are highly nuanced in places, which I have not been
able to reflect in this review. Crutchfield also discusses Darbys essential
eschatological scheme comparing it with Scofield. He includes a short discussion
of the origins of Darbys dispensational views, linking them primarily with the
Powerscourt prophetic conferences of the 1830s, in which Darby participated.
It is important to note that, although many church historians and theologians
have assumed an unbroken line of dispensational development from Darby to
Scofield to Chafer, there is no direct historical evidence that Scofield knew or
even met Darby personally, although Darby made three trips to the United States
between 1870 and 1874. Rather, Darbys ideas were mediated to Scofield by
evangelist D. L. Moody (18371899), who did know Darby, and whom Scofield
greatly admired (Moody also knew C. H. Mackintosh [1820-1896], the man
originally responsible for popularizing Darbys views in America). A second
mediating influence was Plymouth Brethren Bible teacher James Hall Brookes
(18301897), who became Scofields personal theological tutor upon the latters
conversion in 1879. A third influence was Arno C. Gaebelein (18611945), who
served as a consulting editor for the original Scofield Reference Bible, which was
published in 1909.
Darbys Original Dispensational Scheme
The heart of Crutchfields book, as noted, is his reconstruction of Darbys
original dispensational scheme, with comparisons to Scofields later
simplifications. Crutchfield spends two full chapters (73 of the books 237 pages)
describing Darbys original plan of the dispensations. Here is his reconstruction:
1. Paradisaical State (Innocency) (not a dispensation) (from creation to the
fall)
2. Conscience (not a dispensation) (from the fall to the flood)
3. Noah (from the flood to the call of Abraham)
4. Abraham (from the call of Abraham to the giving of the Law at Sinai)
5. Israel
Under the Law
Under the Priesthood
Under the Kings (from Moses to Nebuchadnezzar)
6. Gentiles (from the captivities until the second advent)
7. Spirit/Christian/Gentile/Church/Present (from Pentecost to the Millennium)
8. Millennial Kingdom (the thousand-year reign of Christ)
9. Eternal State (not a dispensation)
Lets now examine each of these in order.
1. Paradisaical State (Innocency) (not a dispensation) (from creation to the
fall)
For Darby, this is not a genuine dispensation, because God did not institute
any actual governmental structures in the lives of our first parents. According to
Darby, Adam was created innocent, but this innocence included neither
righteousness nor holiness. Crutchfield notes that this view has Darby disagreeing
with later dispensationalists who state that Adam was created with a positive
holiness. Scofield, by contrast, taught that the state of innocency was a genuine
dispensation, as defined by the requirement for obedience placed upon Adam and
Eve.
2. Conscience (not a dispensation) (from the fall to the flood)
In Darbys view, this also is not a true dispensation and for the same reason.
The big difference from the previous era is the introduction of conscience within
the human race. It was a bad conscience that gave Adam and Eve a fear of God.
This is about as far as Darby is willing to go. While agreeing with him that no
formal human government is in place, Scofield maintains that this is a true
dispensation, due to the fact that the conscience establishes categories of moral
good and evil.
3. Noah (from the flood to the call of Abraham)
For Darby, this is the first true dispensation. The new world after the flood
sees the introduction, finally, of Godinstituted government, in the form of two
principles: (1) rule placed in humanitys hands (the death penalty [Genesis 9]),
and (2) separation from the world by the calling of God. For the first time, there is
major agreement between Darby and Scofield. However, says Crutchfield, As is
usually the case, Scofield is
CTSJ 2:2 (Fall 1996) p. 14
the more systematic of the two, while Darby is, doubtless, the more innovative.
4. Abraham (from the call of Abraham to the giving of the Law at Sinai)
The second principle mentioned immediately above now begins to operate
fully. God is now beginning the process of carving out for Himself, from all the
peoples on earth, a special nation. Darby wants to see a clear connection between
Abraham and the Church, with the connection between the two being the concept
of separation. Just as God intended for Abraham to live in Canaan in obedience
and separation, so God also intended for the Church to live as the unique Body of
Christ on earth. Both Abraham and the Church failed, however, and this is what
the two dispensations have in common. Yet, Gods counsels (His internal decrees)
regarding both the Jews and the Church are above failure.
Crutchfield says:
It is this two-tiered understanding of these two dispensations which
seems to cause Darby to vacillate, at times, between responsibility
and, yet, no responsibility; between failure, on the one hand, and
the impossibility of failure, on the other. It is this, too, in large part,
which causes him to see no dispensation in the present time and,
yet, identify the Church age (i.e. Christendom) as the failed
dispensation in which we now live. In these respects, then, both the
dispensation of Abraham and the Church share a certain kinship,
and seem to be presented, by Darby, in something of an italicized,
if not parenthetical, form (page 84).
Scofield simplifies Darbys intentions and counsels by referring to the
covenant and the dispensation, which are connected, but distinguished. As always
for Scofield, the dispensation is a time of testing, which Abraham failed by going
to Egypt instead of living in Canaan in obedience to God. The covenant promises
to Abraham, however, are everlasting because they are unconditional. Crutchfield
catches the distinction between the two men well:
The vagueness and difficulty encountered in Darbys analysis here is due, in part,
to his pressing the connection between the Abrahamic and Church dispensations
beyond the limit of the principles of the calling out and spiritual headship of
Abraham. It is due, to a great extent also, to his failure to explicitly distinguish the
dispensation from the covenant and the conditional from the unconditional
promises. It is a mistake later avoided by Scofield. It seems that Darby is forced
into some rather interesting inventiveness to overcome the difficulties caused by
the oversight (pages 8586).
5. Israel
A. Under the Law
B. Under the Priesthood
C. Under the Kings (from Moses to Nebuchadnezzar)
Darby seems torn about whether this is one dispensation or three. In some
places in his writings, he makes the three divisions noted. In other places,
however, he speaks of this entire period as the Jewish dispensation.
Under the Law, the two principles of government and election are now
combined at the giving of the Law. Darby is careful to explain that the Law was
not given for salvation, but to show the human races incompetence to gain
righteousness on its own. Under the Priesthood, the priests served as the
mediators between God and the people. Conscientious observance of the rituals
on the part of the priests would have guaranteed peace for the nation. But the sin
of Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10) and of Aarons sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, to
perform the correct procedures showed Israels incompetence to live by the Law.
Under the kings, and following their leadership, the nation became increasingly
evil until both kingdoms were consigned to foreign captivity.
Scofield, again by contrast, simplifies Darbys complicated system. While
Darby cannot decide how many dispensations are represented here, Scofield sees
but one, stretching from the giving of the Law until Christs death. Crutchfield
says He maintains that, while the testing of Israel ended with the judgment of the
captivities, the dispensation itself did not end until the cross (page 95).
6. Gentiles (from the captivities until the second advent)
With Israels failures, God now transfers human government to the Gentiles,
who are now, in effect, in control of biblical history. But the Gentile nations, like
Israel, prove themselves incapable of complete obedience to God. Gentile evil
culminates in the murder of the Messiah.
This Gentile control continues until Revelation 11:18. But, Crutchfield notes,
We know of no dispensationalist who would agree with Darbys position here,
for the final destruction of Gentile power does not come until Christs second
coming and the battle of Armageddon is completed (to the end of Revelation 19).
Scofield, along with other later dispensationalists, does not see this era as being a
genuine dispensation.
7. Spirit/Christian/Gentile/Church/Present (from Pentecost to the
Millennium)
There are at least these five names given for this dispensation in Darbys
writings. Crutchfield spends no fewer than 23 pages reconstructing just this
dispensation.
Darby sees the church in a two-tiered way, as noted above under the fourth
dispensation. The church (meaning Christendom) is an earthly, dispensational
entity. The true church (meaning the Body of Christ) is above the earthly order,
making it a heavenly entity and is, therefore, not affected by dispensational
principles.
CTSJ 2:2 (Fall 1996) p. 15
As with all previous dispensations, that of the professing church collapsed
almost immediately upon its commencement. For this, Darby gives two reasons.
First, he believes that the unpardonable sin (the sin against the Holy Spirit) is
the establishment of professional clergymen. To quote Crutchfield,
Darby [believes] that the sin against the Holy Spirit is the
substitution of the notion of a clergyman for the power and
presence of the Spirit which characterizes this dispensation. Every
clergyman, Darby affirms, is contributing in this dispensation to
the sin against the Holy Ghost. The only recognized priesthood in
this age is the priesthood of all believers (page 118).
Secondly, Darby insists that the original twelve apostles were instructed by
Christ literally to evangelize the whole world, completely fulfilling the Great
Commission (Matthew 28:19) in their own earthly lifetimes! And, Darby says,
since the Scriptures fail to mention that this was, in fact, accomplished, this
proves the failure of humankind to obey God during this dispensation.
No modern dispensationalist would agree with either of these interpretations
of Scripture. As to the first, even in Darbys day, none of his major disciples left
his denomination to be an independent believer/priest. The late Scottish New
Testament scholar, F. F. Bruce (19101990), himself a lifelong member of the
Plymouth Brethren, criticized Darbys position regarding clergymen by remarking
somewhere that if everyone is qualified to preach, then, practically speaking, no
one is qualified to preach. As to the second, all that needs to be said is that Darby
misunderstood the Bible at this point, reading an assumption into the Scriptures
that simply is not there.
While Scofield would agree with Darby that the church and the kingdom are
not the same, Scofield disavowed Darbys strong dichotomy between the church
and the true church.
8. Millennial Kingdom (the thousand-year reign of Christ)
For Darby, this is a distinct dispensation from the current church age. The
dispensational principles of calling and government, which were brought together
in Israel but separated during the current dispensation, are remarried during the
millennium, due to the Lords presence and direct rule on earth. Once again,
however, mankind will be tested, when Satan is released from the bottomless pit
to conduct one last foray of evil upon earth. Man will be powerless to resist him,
thereby manifesting, one last time, the weakness and rebellion of man on the
earth. God, in Christ, will then step in to bring permanent victory to Himself and
permanent defeat to Satan.
For the only time within this entire system, Darby and Scofield are in almost
complete agreement, with Scofield simplifying Darbys scheme in minor details.
9. Eternal State (not a dispensation)
This era is not really a dispensation since, as Darby says, it is eternity. God is
glorified in His saints, evil is permanently disposed of in hell, and the ends and
goals of biblical history have been accomplished. Only with the eternal state will
Gods government, originally manifested during the Noahic dispensation, come to
an end.
Having described Crutchfields reconstruction of Darby, Scofields second-
generation scheme will now be presented for comparisons sake:
1. Dispensation of innocency (from creation to the fall; Genesis 1:263:24)
2. Dispensation of conscience (from the fall to Noah; Genesis 4:17:24)
3. Dispensation of human government (from Noah to Abraham; Genesis 8:1
11:26)
4. Dispensation of promise (from Abraham to Moses; Genesis 11:27-Exodus
18)
5. Dispensation of law (from Moses to the death of Christ; Exodus 19:1-Acts
1:26)
6. Dispensation of grace (from the death of Christ to the millennial Kingdom;
Acts 2:1-Revelation 19:21)
7. Dispensation of the kingdom (from the second advent to the eternal state;
Revelation 20:16)
Further simplification has occurred in more recent decades, especially since
World War II. Modern classical dispensationalists, as represented by the third-
generation Walvoord/Ryrie/Pentecost school, have continued to refine
dispensationalism.
Larry Crutchfield is to be commended for the superb job he has done in
clarifying John Nelson Darbys original dispensational scheme. His
reconstruction has both historical and theological importance. It is relevant today
because the new (fourth) generation of modern progressive dispensational ists
(e.g., Bock and Saucy) is currently introducing fundamental changes to the
dispensationalism of the Walvoord/Ryrie/Pentecost (third) generation-
representing a departure from refinement of predecessors views to radical
revision. May the Body of Christ continue to refine (not radically revise)
dispensationalism until it comes to represent truly the mind of Scripture on the
subject of Gods good government of His world.