Salvation in differing dispensations

[Captain Picard]

I recently finished "Three Central Issues in Contemporary Dispensationalism: A Comparison of Traditional and Progressive Views", which may be rather dated, as it was a dialogue published in '99, and as a covenant theology adherent myself, I was left with as many questions as answers, specifically on the nuances of the "traditionalists" soteriology. My question is basic, and hopefully won't be viewed as a tired canard, but: if in fact, dispensationalists affirm salvation by grace in all dispensations (and part two of the question is "do they"), then how did salvation in the mosaic dispensation function exactly?

 

[Edward]

Scofield taught that there was no grace before Christ. See, generally, Scofield's notes from 1917 at John 1:17. I'm not sure if it is appropriate to link to heresy here, so I'll leave it to a Google search - the 1917 notes are public domain and available online.

Virtually all of the present day Dispensationalists have realized that this position is bankrupt (indeed, Scofield himself changed his tune with later editions)

To answer your later question, it was a salvation by works. Scofield said, "Law blesses the good; grace saves the bad"

 

[Gforce9]

James,
I have not read the book. I have heard, however, the distinctions between the era's/views of Dispensational history. There are more than two. What I have read/heard is the Darby era, the Schofield era, the more modern era, and the progressive movement. In the first (maybe the first two) era(s), there was a salvation by obedience. Modern and progressives deny this vigorously. They would deny (and they had better deny) any salvation by works.
My question is that if Dispensationalism was correct from the beginning, why all the modifications? Darby, it seems to me, was a theological fruitcake. Schofield was only slightly less fruity.....

 

[Captain Picard]

I was refraining from using...ill-tempered language of fellow professors of Christ, but my opposition to the traditional Dispensational position is about where yours is, gforce. The traditionalists in the book I mention said many true things, but when I got to gems like "there is no inauguration of the new covenant until the millenial kingdom, and since it is for the Jews, the church is not a people in covenant with God", my eyebrows just about cleared the ceiling. I recently became aware that Ryrie held at least parts of the Zane Hodges/Bob Wilkins "Dispensational soteriology/free grace" position where repentance is not part of the gospel, which I would identify as downright perverse. This contributed to my asking the OP question. @Edward: that was what I was afraid of re: Schofield. Looked up the note. Goodness.

 

[Gforce9]

but when I got to gems like "there is no inauguration of the new covenant until the millenial kingdom, and since it is for the Jews, the church is not a people in covenant with God", my eyebrows just about cleared the ceiling.

I about choked and fell out of my chair.......

 

[psycheives]

how did salvation in the mosaic dispensation function exactly?

Not having studied their teachings directly relating to salvation, I do see part of the trouble is in Classical Dispensational's (and also some Baptists like James Hamilton, Bruce Ware) splitting Old Covenant believers and New Covenant believers at Acts 2/Pentecost and then some denying "indwelling" and also sometimes "regeneration" to OC believers until Acts 2/Pentecost. See the other thread going on right now here. I posted a lengthy response explaining how I believe such a denial results in teaching a different way of salvation for OC (not only Mosaic) believers. I do not believe they have provided an adequate explanation for how OC saints partook of Christ's benefits (regeneration, justification, adoption, sanctification, perseverance, etc) without regeneration or union with Christ Himself. We would not want to affirm that one can have Christ's benefits apart from Christ Himself.

 

[earl40]

I remember back in my "baptist days" I was glad, the baptist got at least this dispensation correct.