The Bible Divides Itself
Pastor Roger G. Anderson


There is a very straightforward and uncomplicated verse, which is very special to all of us who are adherents of dispensational theology. It is 2 Tim. 2:15:

"Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

The result in the heart of the student is positive. It is the absence of shame. That is, he will have to make no apologies for what he says about god and His Word. The methodology is a little more complex. The word "rightly
divided" (and is by some) to mean cutting it straight or using it correctly. Others see it as somewhat analytical as in the King James translation, dividing the Bible into logical partitions for proper application. As dispensationalists we see it in the latter format. However, seeing that way is also seeing it in the former because proper application means it has be used correctly.

The most frequent names associated with dispensational thought have been J. N. Darby, C. I. Scofield and E. W. Bullinger. Darby was modern dispensationalism’s father. Scofield made it very well known and accepted through the notes in his reference Bible. Bullinger demonstrated that even something good can be taken to extremes resulting in damage done to it.

As a new, young Christian, I learned the seven dispensation system taught by Scofield. Growing up in a Grace Church , it meant that I learned the system modified by a recognition of the distinctive ministry and message of Paul. The church, the body of Christ, did not begin in the traditional Acts 2 time frame. It began sometime between the conversion of Paul and the writing of his first epistoe. At that point of time I had never heard of Bullinger! Friends of mine during college days began to attack my posiiton as being the extreme position of Bullinger. It is not! Bullinger divided the ministry of Paul into two sections. Only the latter section really related to the body of Christ. His system yielded a second or intermediate body. One person gave it the very interesting name of the "Mystical Body of the Kingdom."

I learned and then unlearned the traditional definition of a dispensation. Grace does not end in a judgment upon the church therefore to say they end in judgment creates a fallacy. No two of them have been or will be the same length of ime, therefore they cannot be called a period of time. Since they relate to man and man is a creature of time, they all cover time. Into my thinking came the word "administration" which is a far better, more understandable word in today’s world. We understand administrative changes. Our own president’s have served varying length terms and we call them the: "..... administration." Certainly the changes in Russia help us to realize that administrations do change. Finally, my definition narrowed a little in that it became limited to those changes which truly affected the God/man relationship.

In presenting the traditional position, I used the common approach. Law and grace were surely different in nature. The dietary restrictions upon man were changed quite frequently and the cessation of tongues showed that things had changed since Pentecost. Whether I agree with the Charismatic movement’s definition of tongue or not, any mention of that issue in today’s world generates heat and combustion seldom resulting in light. The dietary changes
really did not have anything to do with the God/man relationship. It had to do with the times. The addition of capital punishment was also a human to human thing. In other words they were horizontal rather than vertical changes.

J. C. O’Hair in his final appearance in the chapel of Milwaukee Bible College gave a message which started me thinking in a new vein. The Bible does truly divide itself. There is a series of texts which will show great changes and
even mark their beginning and ending points. Between them there are a few nebulous periods because the marking events leave room for some variation. It is this series of Scriptures which we are going to consider in this lesson.

If you have ever struggled with the same issues, it is hoped that you will find a method of presentation here that is both sound and Biblical, one that you will be able to used without fear of being labeled a follower of man. Take the texts and go home like the Berean to see whether or not what is said here is valid.

Pastor Roger G. Anderson