I just finished reading another of Michael J. Vlach’s books, this short one called Dispensationalism: Essential Beliers and Common Myths. Perhaps you are not acquainted with Vlach and his books. I have also enjoyed his works on the kingdom of God (He Will Reign Forever), Dispensational Hermeneutics, and his book contradicting supersessionism (Has the Church Replaced Israel). I am a dispensationalist, which is no surprise if you have read very many of these posts, so why shouldn’t like Vlach’s work.
One of the things which he says often is that everyone who studies the Bible is a “dispensationalist.” He is 100% right on that. The word “dispensation” is a NT word. It describes the administration of a home where there are slaves/stewards/ servants who help carry out the master’s plan in the home. In Eph. 1:10 the AV and NKJV and various other translations use the term “dispensation.” That in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ. The Greek term is oikonomia, for which Strong gives the following definition: the management of a household or of household affairs; 1 specifically, the management, oversight, administration, of other's property; 2 the office of a manager or overseer, stewardship; 3 administration, dispensation.
In NT Greek there are several words related to this, including oikonomeo (the steward who manages the household), oikodespotes (the head of the house), oikia (a house), oikiakos (one belonging to the house), oikonomos (the steward in charge, as Strongs says, esp. a steward, manager, superintendent (whether free-born or as was usually the case, a freed-man or a slave, to whom the head of the house or proprietor has intrusted the management of his affairs, the care of receipts and expenditures, and the duty of dealing out the proper portion to every servant and even to the children not yet of age), and several others. You don’t have to be a Greek expert (and I am certainly not one) to see the emphasis on a home owned by a wealthy person who entrusts to various people the administration of household affairs. You are, I am sure, aware of various parable of Jesus relating to the carrying out of responsibilities where they are called to account (e.g. Parable of the Talents in Mt. 25). What Eph. 1:10 is referring to is the future Messianic Reign of Christ when all things will be under His “management.”
Not only do we have this NT term; we have numerous examples of different ways God has dealt with man in history (in other words, differences in His administration). It should be easy to see that before sin Adam and Eve enjoyed a relationship with God in the Garden of Eden, and after sin they were banned from the Garden. God did not carry out the “death penalty” before Gen. 8, but then He instituted the “eye for an eye” approach to justice. Further, when Noah disembarked from the ark they were permitted to eat the animals; they were no longer vegetarian. Under the Mosaic law some animals were forbidden. Before Moses there were many types of priests who had access to God (Job for his children, Jethro for Moses and Israel, etc.) but afterwards only the descendants of Aaron could serve as priests. We could go on and on, but this should suffice to substantiate Vlach’s statement that “all students of the Bible are dispensationalists.” The differences are there and must be part of anyone’s approach to God’s continued involvement in the world He created.
So then, let me make one more observation. Not all translations use the term “dispensation” or “administration” in Eph. 1:10. Some (RSV, ESV, NASV20) use the somewhat non-descriptive term “plan.” The NASV95 uses “administration.” Why do you suppose this is, when there is a Greek term for “plan” (boule, counsel) that doesn’t require the “household administrator” concept to be attached to it? Well, I won’t express my conspiracy theory answer to that question, but I will say those translations did a poor job on Eph. 1:10. (More on Vlach in the next post.)
No comments:
Post a Comment