Book Review: A Study of Dispensationalism

A Study of Dispensationalism by Arthur Pink

I have several books written by Arthur Pink and enjoy his astute perspectives.  He is a godly man seeking after God’s heart and seeking to please the Lord in all he does.  I normally enjoy his content, although I was disappointed in reading his “Study of Dispensationalism.”  He purportedly was a devout Dispensationalist in his early spiritual life but he had rejected that.  I was disappointed in how he chose one aspect of Dispensationalism – Hyper-Dispensationalism – and grouped all Dispensationalists under that perspective.  I agree with some of the things he writes about “Hyper-Dispensationalism”, but they are not representative of Dispensationalism.  I’ve noticed that Pink and other writers have taken comments and views of Dispensational authors and built straw men to make their point, which either shows a lack of understanding, a lack of scholarship, or a lack of professionalism.  The book is quite short and the straw is so thick that there is little substance for his case.  He alleges that Dispensationalists view the Gospels and General Epistles as Jewish and therefore only Pauline Epistles contain “Church truth.” (p. 9)  That is Hyper-Dispensationalism, not Dispensationalism.  He argues that both Testaments supplement each other (p. 12).  Assuredly, they supplement, but why do we not sacrifice animals today?  Some of his analogies, like saying the two Testaments resemble the dual structure of the human body (two eyes) seem to be very weak.  He accuses Dispensationalists of closing Scripture to people (p. 24), which is Hyper-Dispensationalism, but Dispensationalism adheres to Romans 15:4, “…whatever things were written before were written for our learning…”  I do agree that Pink is right in saying Dispensationalists argue that promises made to Israel should not be applied directly to the church (p. 33).  As a Dispensationalist, I can apply the principle, but not the direct promises.  His categorizations affirm his Replacement Theology, to which I would not agree.  I’m glad I read his book, so that I can be more alert to other writings he has made.  I know we’ll have great conversations in heaven.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s