Dispensationalism is under attack from many sides. The opponents of dispensationalism have hurled various false charges against dispensationalists, and some of these are discussed below:

1)     Dispensationalists Teach More Than One Way of Salvation.

In the 1967 preface to the New Scofield Reference Bible (p.vii) the following note is given:

As a further aid to comprehending the divine economy of the ages, a recognition of the dispensations is of highest value, so long as it is clearly understood that throughout all the Scriptures there is only one basis of salvation.

Charles Ryrie, in his excellent book Dispensationalism, has a whole chapter which answers this false charge (see Chapter 6—“Salvation in Dispensationalism”).  Ryrie in this same chapter clarifies the true position of Scofield and Chafer.  These men did not believe that a person could be saved by keeping the law.

Dr. Renald Showers, in his book, There Really is a Difference--A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology, makes the following clarification:  "The different dispensations are different ways of God's administering His rule over the world. they are not different ways of salvation. Throughout history God has employed several dispensations but only one way of salvation. Salvation has always been by the grace of God through faith in the Word of God, and God has based salvation on the work of Jesus Christ" (page 31).

Dispensationalist William MacDonald (known especially for his one excellent one volume commentary, Believers Bible Commentary), in his book Here's the Difference, wrote the following:   "While there are differences among the various ages, there is one thing that never changes, and that is the gospel.  Salvation always has been, is now, and always will be by faith in the Lord. And the basis of salvation for every age is the finished work of Christ on Calvary's cross. People in the Old Testament were saved by believing whatever revelation the Lord gave them...We must guard against any idea that people in the Dispensation of Law were saved by keeping the Law" (page 98).

Yet in spite of these clarifications, many who are opposed to dispensationalism continue to insist that dispensationalists teach different ways of salvation.  Have they not read what leading dispensationalists have said on this issue?  Salvation has always been by grace through faith based on the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.  

For a discussion on God's way of salvation, including Old Testament salvation, see our study notes on Romans Chapter 3 and Romans Chapter 4.

2)     Dispensationalists are Guilty of Antinomianism

“Some dispensationalists have held that since Christians live under a dispensation of grace, not law, keeping the moral law is at no stage necessary for them” (New Geneva Study Bible, p. 1990).

The argument is this: If you are not under the law then you must be lawless. The Bible, however, gives this answer:

“For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world” (Titus 2:11-12).

“For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God” (Galatians 2:19).

“Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God” (Romans 7:4).

“That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Romans 8:4).

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.” (Galatians 5:22-23).

Remember, Paul himself was accused of being antinomian (Rom. 6:1-2)!

For a thorough answer to this charge see The Believer's Rule of Life

            3)     Dispensationalists Teach that the Sermon on the Mount is Not for the Church Today.

See the following document:

The Sermon On The Mount - Is it for the church today? [PDF Version]

          4)   Dispensationalists Teach that the Death of Christ was an Afterthought and that the Church is "Plan B" in God's program.

The opponents of dispensationalism characterize our teaching as follows:  Dispensationalists believe that God's main program was the kingdom but since that did not work out He decided to send His Son to die on the cross as an afterthought. 

Philip Mauro said it this way:

When we press the vital question, what, in case the offer had been accepted, would have become of the Cross of Calvary and the atonement for the sins of the world? (The Gospel of the Kingdom with an Examination of Modern Dispensationalism, p. 23).

O.T. Allis made this statement:

If the Jews had accepted the kingdom would there have been any place, any necessity for the cross? (Prophecy and the Church, p. 75).

These are unfair characterizations.  Dispensationalists are convinced, as are Reformed men, that Christ was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (compare Revelation 13:8).  I have never met a dispensationalist who did not believe in the centrality of the cross of our Saviour.  God forbid that we should glory or boast in anything else (Gal. 6:14).  May we join Paul in saying, "For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified" (1 Cor. 2:2).  Dispensationalists know and teach that there is a scarlet cord that runs throughout the Bible.  The cross of Christ is central.  It is the focal point of all history.  Its place of absolute preeminence must never be diminished or minimized.

What about the Church being "Plan B" in God's program?   This false charge is similar:    Dispensationalists (so we are told) teach that the Church is God's "Plan B."  "Plan A" is the kingdom which did not work out so God had a backup plan, "Plan B," which is the Church.  Reformed theologian R.C. Sproul Jr. says it this way,

We're not dispensationalists here . . . We believe that the church is essentially Israel. We believe that the answer to, "What about the Jews?" is, "Here we are."  We deny that the church is God's "plan B."  We deny that we are living in God's redemptive parenthesis, and that sometime in the next three, no two, no eight, no seven years, He'll get back to His real work, dealing with the Jews (Table Talk magazine, published by Ligonier Ministries, Spring of 1999).

The church is not "Plan B" and Mr. Sproul Jr. would have great difficulty finding any dispensationalist who would refer to the church in such a way.  Dispensationalists never speak of the church being "Plan B" even though we are accused of doing so.  Again it is a false characterization.  "Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world" (Acts 15:18), and this includes His plan for Israel and His plan for the church. 

The church, instead of being "Plan B," might be referred to as a "mystery plan."   It was something that was not made known to man for ages and for generations.  It was something locked up in the loving heart and mind of God.  See Ephesians 3:3-10; Colossians 1:26-27; etc.  Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Isaiah, Daniel, John the Baptist---these men knew nothing of God's plan and purposes which would involve "one new man" (Eph. 2:15), even the body of Christ.

To deny God's parenthesis (that period of time between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel 9) is to plunge the Bible interpreter into a faulty and erroneous system of preterism (the teaching that says that all or most prophecies found their fulfillment in or around 70 A.D.).  Bondage to this system makes it impossible to understand Bible prophecies in a normal and natural way.  When the plain sense makes good sense they must seek some other sense lest they end up agreeing with the dispensationalists! 

            5)     Dispensationalism is a new doctrine.

Any student of church history will understand that the basic truths of God’s Word were lost and had to be rediscovered and recovered. For example, at the time of the Reformation the most basic truths of how a person is saved had to be rediscovered. It took nearly 1500 years just to rediscover the truth of justification by faith, the supreme authority of the Bible and the priesthood of every believer.
 

If it took this long for the most basic truths to be recovered, it should not surprise us that it took even longer before the church rediscovered certain truths about the nature of the church, and certain facets of God’s prophetic program, etc. We are thankful that the Reformers recovered some basic truths relating to salvation and justification, but in many other respects they did not break free from certain errors that had been held for centuries, such as the teaching that the church is the kingdom (Augustine) and that the Old Testament prophecies cannot be taken literally (Origin’s allegorical approach).

New Testament mystery truths, which relate to the nature of the church and to God’s program and purpose for this present age, were not recovered until the 19^th and 20^th centuries.

See for example The Mystery of Godliness.