Dispensational Hermeneutics: Interpretation Principles that Guide Dispensationalism's Understanding of the Bible's Storyline

by Michael Vlach

Michael Vlach describes the ten interpretation principles that guide Dispensationalism's understanding of the Bible's storyline from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22. He also lays out the interpretation tactics of non-dispensationalism so the reader can grasp the contrast. If you want to discover why dispensationalists understand the Bible they way they do this book is the answer.

Genres: Theology, Christian

134 pages, Kindle Edition

Published October 20, 2022

Reviews

[Jeff · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent description and explanation of the difference between dispensational and non-dispensational systems. The fundamental difference between eschatology systems lies at root with the hermeneutical approach to Scripture.

[John Waldrip · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant little book! Concise and clear. A great read especially for new Christians.

[Sean Higgins · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you are committed to hating anything Dispensational, then it doesn't really matter what a Dispy says. Alright. But if you are committed to trying to read the Bible and understand what it says, and want the Bible to tell you what "system" (if any) to believe rather than depending on the System to tell you what you can believe in the Bible, _Dispensational Hermeneutics_ would edify you.

Vlach encourages me. He is clear, and he does not overstate his arguments, which is part of what enables him to avoid coming off as combative. I appreciated his start with the Bible's storyline, including God's purposes for "the salvation of nations/society and the restoration of creation" (Loc. 138). The guts of the book are his ten hermeneutical principes:

1. Consistent Use of Grammatical-Historical Hermeneutics to All Scripture
2. Consistent Contextual Interpretation of Old Testament Prophecies
3. Passage Priority: The Meaning of Any Bible Passage Is Found in that Passage
4. Old Testament Prophecies not Repeated in the New Testament Remain Relevant
5. Old Testament Eschatology Expectations Are Reaffirmed in the New Testament
6. Progress of Revelation Does Not Cancel or Transform Unconditional Promises to the Original Audience
7. Fulfillments Occur with the Two Comings of Jesus
8. Partial Fulfillments of Old Testament Prophecies
9. Jesus as Means of Fulfillment of the Old Testament
10. Types, Yes! Typological Interpretation, No!

He argues *against* a "Christocentric" reading, but offers instead "a Christotelic approach (that) asserts that all Scripture is related to the person and work of Christ, even though Christ is not found in every passage. All Scripture is not Jesus, but all Scripture relates to Him" (Location 1132). That's a helpful distinction.

One of the things I've seen going around recently is that the nation of Israel doesn't matter to God at all any more because Jesus is the TRUE Israel and all the OT promises are fulfilled in Him. But Jesus can be the Seed *and* there can still be future fulfillment for the other parts of the covenants.

> "The New Testament writers do not apply a mystical, metaphysical personalism hermeneutic concerning Jesus that makes details of Bible prophecies evaporate into Him." (Location 1757)

The teaching (and hermeneutic) of the apostles did not transform or redefine, let alone cancel, previous revelation. Come on, people.

There are two reasons I'm giving this 4/5 instead of 5/5 stars.

First, I'm sure there's a good reason, but I think calling it "Dispensational Hermeneutics" is the *wrong* name altogether. Until a few years ago, I didn't even know that people talked that way. Grammatical-Historial, YES! But the Dispensational nickname/label is a *result* of Bible reading not a way to get a certain "reading" of the Bible. Dispensational as an adjective should describe the person post-reading, not as an adjective for a pre-reading lens.

*Consistent* (and I know that's not always easy to get) Grammatical-Historical reading of the text would *reject* extra-biblical covenants that are supposedly necessary to understand the story of the Bible. Consistent sola Scriptura bears the fruit of Dispensationalism, Dispensationalism is not the soil or seed. So I love the principles, and don't love the adjective in the title.

Second, I'd love to see more "here and now" application which also comes from avoiding the "spiritualized" reading required by non-Dispy systems. Call it Kuyperian, call it non-gnostic/non-pietistic, you pick. Take this quote:

> "The Christian worldview, though, affirms the goodness of both physical and spiritual realities. While they are distinct, physical and spiritual realities both are important in God’s purposes, and one does not supersede the other." (Location 1433)

Yes and amen, but the book puts this worldview more in the *future* context, which is right, but misses the relevance for the present day. The physical blessings of God on His people will be unparalleled in the Millennial Kingdom and into the eternal state, but those blessings won't be unprecedented, as in, known for the first time only *then*. The blessings of salvation *now* include intangibles and tangibles, even if only a taste during the current time.

This may be an issue of emphasis, not really disagreement, but so many Dispies I know are functional dualists, where only the spiritual things matter, and, ironically, that is *bad Bible reading*, which we claim to be better at.

Regardless, this is a great read, full of plain principles that encourage Bible readers to take God at His Word.

[Reagan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am dispensational in my theology. However, I believe that this short book provides a very clear guide to the primary differences between dispensational and non-dispensational hermeneutics. Vlach deals with literal interpretation (grammatical-historical) and how it includes types, figures of speech, symbols, analogies, etc. He also, I believe fairly, presents the non-dispensational view while also sharing where the differences lie along with criticism. Vlach seems to be the best voice on the topic today. He presents valid arguments against the non-dispensational methods of interpretation. Non-dispensationalists must deal with Vlach if they want to understand the current dispensational theology. If we are going to make any headway in being united in our eschatology, evangelicals must continue to advance the discussion forward and be willing to deal with legitimate challenges to our theological systems. We want to be united, we want to honor Christ. Vlach advances the discussion faithfully and concisely.

I think this is a great resource to point people to in order to get a brief flavor of the overall difference in these different theological hermeneutics.

[Caleb Lawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

"We need a both/and approach when it comes to fulfillment and Jesus' two advents. Either/or thinking can lead to a false dichotomy between the importance of the two advents. One can look forward to the restoration of national Israel and appreciate all Jesus accomplished with His first advent. We can also rightly grasp that Jesus' death directly relates to the future fulfillment of yet unfulfilled prophecies." - Michael Vlach

A concise, helpful work plainly articulating the key hermeneutical differences between dispensational and non-dispensational systems of interpretation. This is a needed work as it shows the "why" and "how" behind both dispensationalists and non-dispensationalists in reaching their biblical-theological conclusions. As a dispensationalist, I also appreciated how Vlach clearly responds to some of the more erroneous and faulty remarks non-dispensationalists make against dispensationalism (Especially his remarks on "Jesus as 'Fulfillment' Means Transforming Old Testament Expectations" and "Emphasis on First Coming Fulfillment"). My only two critiques would be that I wish there was more content! Also, I think the book could have used some more editing as there were some quotes that were repeated on numerous occasions (For example, there's the same Robert Saucy quote on p. 38, 41, and 50. Could be intentional to make a point, just seemed like the same point could be made with different citations.). Overall, a great, brief work on dispensational hermeneutics. Highly recommended.

[Quentin Begley · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was very unhelpful. It did not engage with legitimate arguments from covenant theology. It merely stated that only dispensationalism is consistent, made straw men of covenant theology (and other views), and burned them.

This book doesn't answer my biggest question with dispensationalism, what do you do if your "plain interpretation" disagrees with the interpretation Paul, Peter, or Jesus gives?

Vlach argued for "passage priority" then basically said that you can't use the New Testament to interpret the old.

My favorite quotes were in Chapter 2, page 36. They demonstrate a clear contradiction.

"Later revelation does not reinterpret or change the meaning of earlier revelation. Meaning in a text is found in that text"

"Peter tells us what David meant in Psalm 16:10"

If Peter tells us what David meant, doesn't that mean he interpreted it? And if our initial interpretation is wrong, and he clarifies it, doesn't that mean he reinterpreted it for me?

For Peter to "reinterpret" doesn't mean David is wrong, but that I misunderstood David

[William Jr. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr. Michael Vlach, Theology Professor at the Shepherd's Theological Seminary in Cary, NC did a great job summarizing and presenting distinctions between Dispensational interpretive principles and Non-Dispensational interpretive principles. He promotes 10 concepts relating to Dispensational hermeneutics and he explains and exposes 7 concepts relative to Non-Dispensational hermeneutics (this includes Covenant Theology, Progressive Covenantalism, etc.). Dr. Vlach mentions four types of dispensationalism (Traditional, Classic, Revised, and Progressive), stays somewhere between Revised and Progressive, but fundamentally sees all types as similar and focuses on the general 10 concepts that all dispensationalists agree with in contra distinction from non-dispensationalists. Overall this book is appreciated for its clarity, brevity, and fair treatment of differing perspectives. This is a good read, for real!

[Rachael · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a helpful overview of Dispensationalism. Actually, it's more of an overview of the literal-grammatical-historical principles we use when reading the Bible and how they lead us to a Dispensational conclusion. I found it particularly helpful because I tend to forget what label goes to what debate. So, I know I agree with Dispensationalism, but I can't always define it without mixing in other (often related but separate) topics. Now I think I have a better handle on which debate this is and why I stand on the Dispensational side of the debate. On top of giving an overview of how we're reading the Bible in such a way that we end up at Dispensationalism, it also gives a brief overview of how others read the Bible in such a way that they don't end up at Dispensationalism. Obviously, neither side is in-depth (hence "overview"), but it is a good starting point if you're trying to sort out the differences between Dispensationalism and Covenantalism, etc.

[Valerie Alexanian · Rating 4 out of 5]

“God’s ultimate purpose for man is not just to be “saved” but to rule God’s creation for His glory” 12

10 Hermeneutical Principles
Associated with Dispensationalism
1. Consistent Use of Grammatical-Historical
Hermeneutics to All Scripture
2. Consistent Contextual Interpretation of Old Testament
Prophecies
3. Passage Priority: The Meaning of Any Bible Passage Is Found in that Passage
4. Old Testament Prophecies not Repeated in the New Testament Remain Relevant
5. Old Testament Eschatology Expectations Are
Reaffirmed in the New Testament
6. Progress of Revelation Does Not Cancel or Transfomm
Unconditional Promises to the Original Audience
7. Fulfillments Occur with the Two Comings of Jesus
8. Partial Fulfillments of Old Testament Prophecies
9. Jesus as Means of Fulfillment of the Old Testament
10. Types, Yes! Typological Interpretation, No!

[Raegan Bell · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5 stars

This was short, well written, and easy to understand. There was a lot of Scripture referenced in relation to the arguments made. While I agreed with many of the topics discussed, I do believe there are some arguments that lack and, some of which, when held up against scripture not mentioned, would not stand. While I wouldn’t claim the title for myself, I am grateful for this perspective and definitely learned something new.

Prior knowledge of dispensationalism would be helpful as this does not heavily dive into the beliefs, but more on how they interpret Scripture to arrive at their viewpoints.

[Josh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent overview of dispensationalists’ interpretation of Scripture. Vlach’s position is between revised and progressive dispensationalism, although he adheres to some of traditional dispensationalism as well. His approach is quite balanced as he explains proper interpretation of prophecy, Israel, etc. The book is a must-read for dispensationalists but also a helpful tool for others to understand an accurate understanding of dispensationalists’ viewpoints.

[Elizabeth]

Useful for those seeking to examine the underlying root of the disagreement between covenant theology and dispensational theology. At times, the author seemed to overstate his case, and the material was a bit redundant. This book left me wondering how a number of passages would be understood according to dispensational thinking.

[Pablo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Todo estudiante de hermenéutica debe leer este libro

Este libro presenta de manera equilibrada y honesta tanto la postura dispensacionalista (progresiva) como las posturas no dispensacionalistas. Al mismo tiempo, hace una comparación y valoración entre ambas que permite entender porque ambos bandos creen lo que creen. De fácil lectura.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

Relied a bit too heavily on quotations, and the counter arguments are not presented well enough to gauge their inaccuracy. However, the thesis and main arguments were well presented and explained in a convincing manner. I will keep this book as a tool for eschatological study.

[Joshua Chipchase · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clear and concise explanations and arguments for the superiority of dispensational hermeneutics. Easy to read. Does a good job contrasting with covenant modes of interpretation. A little repetitive at points, but my favorite Vlach book so far.

[Carissa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Small and mighty. Vlach packs a dense punch, giving fair treatment to the 'non-dispensationalists' while giving a clear and concise reasoning for grammatical-historical dispensationalism.

Thankful for this short book.

[Dr. Tony Jr. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Valuable resource

I think that the 10 principles in summary are helpful to reflect upon. The 10 points are simple and helpful. It's a book that one can easily reference to brush up on these things and to share with others. Good work

[Jose Zamora · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un libro conciso y claro sobre la distinción de una hermenéutica bíblica congruente

Ha sido una bendición este libro, sobre todo porque desvirtúa muchos de los argumentos no dispensacionales para el uso del método tipológico de interpretación.

[Mark A. · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was a superb book. I have a few quibbles, and he could have done more to prove the hermeneutical principles of dispensationalism, but the contrast with non-dispensational systems is very helpful. His introduction to dispensationalism in one of the early chapters was very good.

[Tim Ingrum · Rating 2 out of 5]

It gives a decent presentation of a wrong view. Unfortunately, Vlach's portrayal of covenantal hermeneutics falls into straw-man territory at many points. As a covenantalist, I often did not see myself in the position he was refuting.

[Colby Jackson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extremely clear on what distinguishes Dispensationalism and how it interprets the whole of scripture.

[Jon Cheek · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful comparison of dispensational and covenantal hermeneutical methodology.

[Anna Stevens · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dr. Vlach is an excellent teacher. He makes a clear distinction between dispensational and non-dispensational views with strong defense for the former position.

[Eric Hutton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although I disagree with the dispensational hermeneutic
this is a clear, short, and helpful book to introduce a basic understanding of their methods of interpretation.

[Isaac · Rating 2 out of 5]

A difficult book to review. There are three primary aspects from which to consider this book: its presentation of the Dispensational hermeneutic, its defense of the Dispensational hermeneutic, and its presentation & critique of other approaches.

Regarding the first, this book is invaluable. Here in a concise volume is a straightforward statement of the principles guiding the typical Dispensationalists' reading of Scripture. While not every Dispensationalist will agree with everything Vlach has to say, those who fall into the camps of Traditional (Classical/Modified) or Progressive Dispensationalism will find broad agreement with Vlach's presentation. And the student or researcher will find here an excellent source for interacting or learning more about the principles of those positions.

As far as Vlach's defense of this hermeneutic, the book is lacking. It may not be fair to critique him on this; he doesn't claim to offer a defense of these principles. But it is quite strange to read a book which not only gives a positive presentation of the Dispensational hermeneutic but also critiques non-Dispensational hermeneutics and yet does so only by assuming the Dispensational position as an a priori. Which is to say Vlach's critiques are only reassertions of his own position. The historic position of the Church has been to see our hermeneutic as derived from Scripture; and therefore we can appeal to the Scripture itself to argue for or against a specific hermeneutical position. Vlach simply never addresses the question of where his hermeneutic comes from, he just assumes its validity.

Finally, Vlach's presentation and critique of alternate hermeneutics leaves much to be desired. Throughout the book he uses other positions as a foil to the Dispensational approach, often quoting those he disagrees with to show how his position is distinct. But he continually offers straw-man understandings of those he is quoting. For instance, when explaining the "consistent use of grammatical-historical hermeneutics to all of Scripture" (p23) and specifically how that applies to symbols, types, and analogies, Vlach quotes Samuel Waldron who promotes the use of symbolic interpretation; Vlach contends that another interpretive approach is unnecessary since the grammatical-historical is able to encompass symbolism (pp27-28). But here Vlach is mostly arguing about labels; in context, Waldron's disagreement with Vlach appears to be that interpretation of symbols cannot properly be labeled grammatical-historical - "isn't it obvious that we have to interpret different kinds of literature differently? . . . While it seems clear that Vlach and MacArthur are admitting the reality of different kinds of literature, they also seem to say this reality should make no difference in the way we interpret such passages." (Waldron, MacArthur's Millennial Manifesto, p76) To be sure, there is a very real interpretive difference at play here. And Vlach ought to have taken this opportunity to explain how Waldron misunderstood the Dispensational approach and show the true nature of their disagreement (if he in fact did). Disappointingly, Vlach chose to focus merely on the labels used and the reader is left non-the-wiser as to who is misunderstanding whom.

Elsewhere, he charges non-Dispensationalists with "storyline change" (pp 95ff). He offers many quotes from those arguing the New Testament understanding of the Old Testament ought to be our understanding, charging that they advocate for a "shift in reality" (p95). And his quotations often have the appearance of showing exactly that. While I cannot claim that every one of the quotations he uses is misrepresented, for someone familiar with the Reformed hermeneutical approach, it is immediately obvious that the quotes from Reformed authors are arguing that the OT was misunderstood and that the NT corrects those misunderstandings, and not that the NT alters the OT or changes its storyline. In short, the disagreement at this point is "how did God intend the OT to be understood", not "does the NT change the OT." This then casts doubts on Vlach's use of the hermeneutical statements of other positions.

These shortcomings are significant. There is much value in this book if you are trying to study the Dispensational hermeneutic. But for comparing that hermeneutic to other approaches or for defending that hermeneutic, this book largely fails.

[Manuel Alfredo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Muy buen libro para entender la hermenéutica dispendacional

Me gusto el libro. En un lenguaje llano se explican las distintas interpretaciones escatologicas y se fundamenta porque una hermenéutica dispensacional es preferible al acercarse a porciones proféticas de las Escrituras.

[Brandon Siwula · Rating 5 out of 5]

Love my prof. Dr. Vlach. His hermeneutical framework has shaped my thinking more than any theologian. His writings must be seriously considered by those who hold to a covenantal framework.

[Ben Spivey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very concise and focused explanation of the hermaneutics supporting a dispensational interpretation of the Bible. Emphasized that literal hermaneutics is not literalistic, interpreting messages that are clearly metaphors as literal such as the prophecies that come alongside interpretations-e.g. hills are kings in Revelation, Babylon woman is a city. I like how it covered types while explaining that the literal hermaneutics seeks to avoid seeing types where not intended by the author-e.g. a temple with dimensions in Zechariah is actually Jesus. A key message of this book is that promises to ethnic Israel for land, a political kingdom, temple, sacrifices are to be taken literally since there is no OT context to interpret them otherwise, and these are to be fulfilled in the millennial kingdom when Israel is worshiping the Lord. Covenantal authors are quoted as admitted that they are reframing the OT through a NT lens focusing everything mostly on what Christ accomplished in His first coming.

The only reason I did not give it 5 stars is that the end of the book became somewhat repetitive, repeating the same reasoning for interpreting land, kingdom, etc. promises as applying to a future ethnic Israel. One one hand parts seem repetitive, and on the other hand it seems this topic could have been much more extensive with more exposition. However, Vlach clearly intended to write a brief introductory book that does not delve deep into dispensational theology.

Overall I recommend Vlach's book as very well written for it's purpose as a fast efficient read explaining the literal grammatical basis of dispensational hermaneutics.

[Todd Burgett · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent and brief understanding of the consistent hermeneutics involved the dispensational perspective. Highly & joyfully recommended!