DR. TONY EVANS ON "TRANSDISPENSATIONALISM" is this Biblical?
Tony Evans on “Transdispensationalism”
In his book, Totally Saved, Tony Evans attempts to answer the question, “What about those who have never heard?” in the appendix section. Evans argues for an explanation which he calls “transdispensationalism” (rivaled only by transubstantianism in a contest for most theological syllables). What I did not know was that the appendix in which this material is found was NOT printed in the future paperback edition. Jim Sutherland, who recognized this problem, wrote the following:
"Not knowing if this appendix omission was due to criticism of Moody Press for printing the appendix, or due to a change in Dr. Evans’ position, I tried for over 4 months to determine from Dr. Evans if he still would continue to teach and promulgate this particular doctrine. I could get no reply, so must assume that he may continue to teach and promote “transdispensationalism.” What was said of learned Greek father Origin could be said of Dr. Evans, that in his pastoral concern he has turned a hope into a doctrine."
So what exactly is transdispensationalism? It is a whacky word for a whacky idea. But instead of attempting to sum up what Evans argues, I am reproducing the section of the appendix where Evans himself explains the idea (bold faced mine):
Now there’s a third way God can deal in grace with those who can’t believe because they have never heard the gospel. He can apply another dispensation and its criteria to them. A dispensation is simply an economy or an administration of God, a way in which He deals with people based on the information he has given them.
For instance, people in the Old Testament were saved without hearing the name of Jesus, because Jesus hadn’t come to earth yet. But they were saved because they believed in the revelation of God.
The Bible says Abraham believed God and was accounted as righteous, or saved, for believing in God’s promise of a son and a seed (Genesis 15:6). This was long before the Mosaic sacrificial system was ever begun.
Abraham believed without hearing about Jesus, but I am not saying that people can be saved apart from Jesus. Never. Nobody can get saved without Jesus, because He is the Savior of all men, as we read in 1 Timothy 4:10. Everybody is saved through Christ, even those who lived before Jesus came, because in the mind and heart of God, Jesus was already sacrificed to pay for sin before the world was ever created (see Revelation 13:8). So a person can be saved without knowing Jesus’ name, but not without Jesus’ provision for sin.
In the case of a person who never hears the gospel and never knows the name of Jesus, but who responds to the light he has, God treats that person like an Old Testament saint, if you will. That is, if the person trusts in what God has revealed, God deals with that person based on the knowledge he has, not the information he never received. I call this transdispensationalism.
By this I mean if a person is sincerely seeking God and desiring to know Him, and is responding to the truth he knows, if there is no missionary or direct manifestation of God, then God judges that person based on his faith in the light he has received. And as in the case of Abraham, God will retroactively count this person as righteous by applying the death of Christ from the dispensation of grace.
John MacArthur, in a question and answer session was asked about his reference to the idea of transdispensationalism in a message to which he replied:
“Obviously, there is no biblical defense for that, and none is attempted in the book—none. There isn’t even a verse to defend that. Furthermore, living up to natural human light, apart from the revelation of the true and living God, wouldn’t save anybody in any dispensation. But, it is a very—it is a very strange thing and, to this degree, to the degree that He gives salvation to those who have never heard the gospel, it’s a departure from what we believe the scripture teaches. . . .
There was a radio interview that followed that book that’s available. You can get the transcript of that radio interview, in which the host was interviewing Tony Evans and said to him, “You’re saying, if a Hindu looks up and says, ‘I know you’re up there somewhere. I don’t know who you are, but I’d really like to know you,’ God will count that as sufficient as salvation?” And the answer to that was “Yes.”
Evans recognized a future objection: “Tony, if you say people can be saved by general revelation, why preach the gospel? Why bother sending missionaries around the world and translating the Bible?” Evans gives two (really bad) answers to this objection:
1. Because Christ has commanded us to go and tell the whole world the good news of His salvation.
2. Because the process I just described for those who haven’t heard of Christ is far from automatic. Whatever we may try to deduce from Scripture about those who have never heard about Christ, we know without a doubt that those who hear and believe the gospel will be saved. (emphasis mine)
One answer to this question is “because I said so,” and the other is “well, it might not actually work.” After having read this piece one will easily see that there is no substantive biblical warrant for such a position. However, as I have come to find out, this is an argument being many by several inclusivists. In a follow-up post, I will provide quotes as well as the line of argument for what Millard Erickson called “chronologically displaced persons” (which is the same thing as Evans’ transdispensationalism).
What say you, so what happens to those who never heard of Christ and dies?
In his book, Totally Saved, Tony Evans attempts to answer the question, “What about those who have never heard?” in the appendix section. Evans argues for an explanation which he calls “transdispensationalism” (rivaled only by transubstantianism in a contest for most theological syllables). What I did not know was that the appendix in which this material is found was NOT printed in the future paperback edition. Jim Sutherland, who recognized this problem, wrote the following:
"Not knowing if this appendix omission was due to criticism of Moody Press for printing the appendix, or due to a change in Dr. Evans’ position, I tried for over 4 months to determine from Dr. Evans if he still would continue to teach and promulgate this particular doctrine. I could get no reply, so must assume that he may continue to teach and promote “transdispensationalism.” What was said of learned Greek father Origin could be said of Dr. Evans, that in his pastoral concern he has turned a hope into a doctrine."
So what exactly is transdispensationalism? It is a whacky word for a whacky idea. But instead of attempting to sum up what Evans argues, I am reproducing the section of the appendix where Evans himself explains the idea (bold faced mine):
Now there’s a third way God can deal in grace with those who can’t believe because they have never heard the gospel. He can apply another dispensation and its criteria to them. A dispensation is simply an economy or an administration of God, a way in which He deals with people based on the information he has given them.
For instance, people in the Old Testament were saved without hearing the name of Jesus, because Jesus hadn’t come to earth yet. But they were saved because they believed in the revelation of God.
The Bible says Abraham believed God and was accounted as righteous, or saved, for believing in God’s promise of a son and a seed (Genesis 15:6). This was long before the Mosaic sacrificial system was ever begun.
Abraham believed without hearing about Jesus, but I am not saying that people can be saved apart from Jesus. Never. Nobody can get saved without Jesus, because He is the Savior of all men, as we read in 1 Timothy 4:10. Everybody is saved through Christ, even those who lived before Jesus came, because in the mind and heart of God, Jesus was already sacrificed to pay for sin before the world was ever created (see Revelation 13:8). So a person can be saved without knowing Jesus’ name, but not without Jesus’ provision for sin.
In the case of a person who never hears the gospel and never knows the name of Jesus, but who responds to the light he has, God treats that person like an Old Testament saint, if you will. That is, if the person trusts in what God has revealed, God deals with that person based on the knowledge he has, not the information he never received. I call this transdispensationalism.
By this I mean if a person is sincerely seeking God and desiring to know Him, and is responding to the truth he knows, if there is no missionary or direct manifestation of God, then God judges that person based on his faith in the light he has received. And as in the case of Abraham, God will retroactively count this person as righteous by applying the death of Christ from the dispensation of grace.
John MacArthur, in a question and answer session was asked about his reference to the idea of transdispensationalism in a message to which he replied:
“Obviously, there is no biblical defense for that, and none is attempted in the book—none. There isn’t even a verse to defend that. Furthermore, living up to natural human light, apart from the revelation of the true and living God, wouldn’t save anybody in any dispensation. But, it is a very—it is a very strange thing and, to this degree, to the degree that He gives salvation to those who have never heard the gospel, it’s a departure from what we believe the scripture teaches. . . .
There was a radio interview that followed that book that’s available. You can get the transcript of that radio interview, in which the host was interviewing Tony Evans and said to him, “You’re saying, if a Hindu looks up and says, ‘I know you’re up there somewhere. I don’t know who you are, but I’d really like to know you,’ God will count that as sufficient as salvation?” And the answer to that was “Yes.”
Evans recognized a future objection: “Tony, if you say people can be saved by general revelation, why preach the gospel? Why bother sending missionaries around the world and translating the Bible?” Evans gives two (really bad) answers to this objection:
1. Because Christ has commanded us to go and tell the whole world the good news of His salvation.
2. Because the process I just described for those who haven’t heard of Christ is far from automatic. Whatever we may try to deduce from Scripture about those who have never heard about Christ, we know without a doubt that those who hear and believe the gospel will be saved. (emphasis mine)
One answer to this question is “because I said so,” and the other is “well, it might not actually work.” After having read this piece one will easily see that there is no substantive biblical warrant for such a position. However, as I have come to find out, this is an argument being many by several inclusivists. In a follow-up post, I will provide quotes as well as the line of argument for what Millard Erickson called “chronologically displaced persons” (which is the same thing as Evans’ transdispensationalism).
What say you, so what happens to those who never heard of Christ and dies?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Scott R. Newman on
-
And I thought it was our collective sins that place Jesus on the cross for our transgressions and iniquities. Taking your reasoning, why would anyone tell anyone about Jesus, whether it be locally or globally if God through this "transdispensationalim" ideal would be sufficient in gaining all of us to gain heaven without any witnesses and ambassadors and apostles as sent ones to Go ye Therefore??? Is what your saying biblical or wishful thinking? Then if so, what was the book of ACTION, called Acts all about? Why did Christ command us to Go Ye Therefore if Christ will do it through another way in witnessing to those outside the speaking of someone proclaiming Christ through repentance?? So should all missionaries come back home???? Why are they there? To make them feel all warm and fuzzy looking for their "harvest" to get their benz's, or is the Gospel really the Good News? And if the Good News is only through Christ one is saved by faith in Him, then if that is so, what is the bad news? I thought the bad news is apart from Christ, they perish! Just asking....
-
Permalink Reply by Archbishop Trevor 'Elihu' Greene on
-
It was our collective sin that placed Him on the cross. He died for the entire world, not just Christians. The strength of sin is the Law. If CHRIST has redeemed us from the Law, then we are back to the essence of the Laws of Eden. Paul said, while filled with HOLY GHOST wisdom:
Romans 4:13-15 "For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression."
This thing we call Christianity is not a religion as many treat it, and its actually bigger than a relationship. Its a governmental order. What happened on the cross was the changing of government in all of creation. GOD reclaimed a section of His kingdom by way of the cross. We do not "accept Christ into our lives". Thats foolishness! He's already apart of our lives, deaths, resurrections, and judgments!! What we are doing is honoring the King through the Son of GOD, the Prince of Life. What happened was a great and grand "coup". Satan tried it first, but CHRIST reclaimed all that was His. All creation is now His. If the non-believers weren't apart of His Kingdom, then He would have no right to judge them! When He sentences one to death by way of the Lake of Fire, He is casting them into the prison of the Kingdom of Heaven. The wise King David asked "where can I go to escape your presence?" A King's presence is felt within His domain. GOD's domain is all of creation and eternity, thus making Him "omni-present".
Isaiah 6:1 "In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the LORD sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and His train filled the temple."
The train of a king's robe was usually long, signifying the extent of their glory and the dominance of their Kingdom. GOD's train just so happened to literally fill the temple, though He Himself sat on the throne. what does that mean? His authority is wherever you can imagine it to be. This is why I said "everyone has a GOD-conscience". The reign of CHRIST is not yet known to all, though it is truly His. We as Apostles (literally Ambassadors of the Kingdom setting up the Embassies), Prophets (royal messengers of GOD), Evangelists ( Paul Revere-type town criers proclaimers of the good news) Pastors (Shepherds of the flock of GOD and Bishops of the districts of the Kingdom), and Teachers (educators on "Kingdom Culture") have the job of informing the world of the change of government from Democracy, Dictatorships, Monarchies, Communisms, and the like in to the Theocracy ran by YHWH the FATHER and His Prince, the LORD JESUS CHRIST.
-
Permalink Reply by Caral on
-
Can I just mention that universal atonement is a doctrine not necessarily held by all, and of course the below scriptures need to be reconciled, (says I, an almost Calvinist.)
John 10:2-5,11,14-15 - But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. Yet they will by no means follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers...I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep...I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
John 17:9 - ...I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours.
Ephesians 5:25 - Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her
Acts 20:28 - Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Romans 8:33-34 - Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
-
-
Amen Scott.
I am standing with you on this one. The traditional reformed protestant evangelical viewpoint is that we are all born in sin, in total depravity. And we are saved by grace and sancified by faith alone and that faith is in Christ Jesus.
Evans is suggesting that there is another way to God. Based on a person seeking God and his desire to know God. Sorry, but this is scriptural untenable. Evans relies on the saints of the Old Testament, in which He totally overlooks the fact that the OT Saints showed that their faith was in Christ, the promise of the Christ, they just did not see the realisation of Him.
-
-
He is not suggesting another Gospel at all. Its the same Gospel. However, you have yet to provide a clear cut answer to the question of "What happens if you never heard?" By charging someone guilty of a sin that they never committed, then you are charging GOD with being an unrighteous Judge.
-
Permalink Reply by James Pierce on
-
Trevor,
There you go again with the unscriptural "laws of Eden." lol
-
-
Show me where it is unscriptural!
-
-
Hi Trevor,
He is not suggesting another Gospel at all.
What he is suggesting, means as long as someone is desiring and seeking God they will be judged on that, Logically this translates that all faiths lead to God, as long as we seek and desire god.
By charging someone guilty of a sin that they never committed, then you are charging GOD with being an unrighteous Judge.
This raises the question "who has not committed sin?" We are all born in sin, thus there is no charge against God.
With regard to "What happens if you never heard?" There is varying thought, one of the most prevalent that I have heard is that everyone gets to hear the chance to hear the gospel at the white throne of judgment. Some of the neo orthodoxy followers suggest that ALL are saved in Christ, but this is soft universalism.
-
-
Hey Caral, you said:
This raises the question "who has not committed sin?" We are all born in sin, thus there is no charge against God.
This doesn't raise that question at all. It goes RIGHT BACK TO WHERE IT WAS. Its not a matter of who hasn't sinned. This is a matter of "what sin you are guilty of". If you find on your credit report or your bank statement that a car was purchased, you'll have a fit! You have to pay for an item that you never purchased. If I never raped or killed, can you charge me with that justly? Therefore, you have to answer to the crime that you are a criminal to: If I never heard of JESUS I didn't accept Him according to you. However I never rejected Him either, so I'm not guilty of that particular crime. What standard am I judged by then?
-
-
Exactly my point Trev, so if one is innocent simply by reason of never being told of Jesus then missionaries are condemning many to hell simply by telling them in countries where Jesus name is not yet known, when most will reject Jesus, then they will be condemned and perish. So isn't it better then to not go to the unevangelized world with the Gospel so that ALL will make heaven?
-
-
On the contrary Scott. You do not understand the mission that we have. Do not look at this as a religious assignment, because its not: its governmental. The reign of CHRIST is not yet known to all, though it is truly His. We as Apostles (literally Ambassadors of the Kingdom setting up the Embassies), Prophets (royal messengers of GOD), Evangelists (Paul Revere-type town criers proclaimers of the good news) Pastors (Shepherds of the flock of GOD and Bishops of the districts of the Kingdom), and Teachers (educators on "Kingdom Culture") have the job of informing the world of the change of government from Democracy, Dictatorships, Monarchies, Communisms, and the like in to the Theocracy ran by YHWH the FATHER and His Prince, the LORD JESUS CHRIST.
-
-
Okaaaay, so its the change of Kingdom understanding, to move from an earthly Kingdom to an Eternal Kingdom understanding? So telling them that, which is accurate, how does them knowing that give them eternal salvation? Isn't that what Christianity is all about to proclaim and to preach the Gospel of salvation? I may not be fully understand...
-
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
