The Staying Power of Dispensationalism -- Some Observations

In a recent tweet, Aaron Renn (November 5, 2025) opined that “the death of dispensationalism is greatly exaggerated. It seems to me that the vast bulk of evangelicals are still dispensationalist . . . I don't think most evangelicals have ever even heard the term dispensationalism, or have thought much about it. They just think they attend a church that preaches the Bible.”

I am of the opinion that Daniel Hummel’s recent book, The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism, makes a compelling case that dispensationalism (at least that academic form which Hummel identifies as “scholastic dispensationalism”) is clearly on the wane in those circles where it once held dominance (seminaries and evangelical publishing). The perfume is long gone, although a faint scent remains in the empty bottle. But I do think Renn is correct to point out that the majority of rank and file evangelicals are still largely dispensational in their eschatology and overall understanding of the purpose of the church in the end times—which they believe are upon us. Here are some observations as to why I think this is the case.

Effective Dispensational Catechesis:

The current generation of evangelicals and the bulk of those who now attend evangelical churches grew up on Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’s Left Behind novels, or else attended churches which offered a steady diet of dispensational teaching. Despite whatever doctrinal ills someone like me may find in dispensationalism, the Bible is open in these churches and taught simply and as true. In many cases, the gospel is present (though often watered down and not always clearly presented). Jesus is proclaimed to be the only savior and it is taught that good works do not save. The litmus test in many of these circles is a born again conversion experience. People who attend such churches are likely well satisfied with what they hear from the pulpit and assume what they are hearing is correct. These folks are not likely to investigate other views, nor are they going to rush out and buy A Case for Amillennialism.

The News Is Always New:

Given its futurist orientation, dispenstionalism has a huge advantage in maintaining adherents—relevance. Bible church dispensationalism tends to focus upon current events, politics, and concerns about the future as dictated by breaking news, while in their minds confessional and historic Protestants are largely focused upon the past. We frequently refer to the solas of the 16th century Reformation, the Reformation era confessions and catechisms, and we talk about old guys like Martin Luther and John Calvin as well as the Puritans. Given that much of our preaching is based upon redemptive history and our liturgies are an extension of our theology (and not designed to entertain), we tend to stay close to the biblical text as historically understood. We do not see the Bible as a guide to interpreting current events, but as the source for the Christian life and our doctrine (including our view of the end times). But that requires concentration and a willingness to learn new things about the Bible and its doctrines—in other words, hard work and an openness to examine long held beliefs.

I’ve noticed over the years that dispensational media has slowly transformed from a teaching focus (wherein dispensational theology was taught and a case made for it from the Scriptures), to a running commentary on the news. The standard dispensational proof-texts are cited as though they need no defense or explanation. Many of the dispensational teachers and ministries now have sets or studios which look like newsrooms, often with reporting done from the scene of whatever current event is the focus of attention. In an entertainment-media culture such as ours, this is what evangelicals tend to expect.

So, for those who are satisfied with being a simple follower of Jesus and listening to motivational and practicality overloaded sermons, there is no reason to investigate their doctrinal assumptions. The Bible is open and the minister is talking about stuff currently in the news, much of which, it is argued, was foretold in Scripture. There is always something new to talk about so why seek to go anywhere else? Worried about the chaos all around us? You go to a church where it is all explained to you from Scripture.

A Short Memory:

The prophecy punditry class among dispensationalists have made all sorts of wild and flat-out wrong predictions about events involving Israel and anyone who so much as sneezes in the Middle East. I’ve addressed a number of these over the years: Rapture Stuff, Again, What Is so Hard to Understand About No One Knows the Day or the Hour, Trouble in the Middle East, X Marks the Spot, This Will Drive the Bible Prophecy Pundits Wild.

Of course, there are many responsible dispensationlists who eschew the punditry genre, but any theological system which sees the New Testament’s eschatology as primarily oriented toward future events (like the rapture, a seven-year tribulation, end-times centering around events in Israel and betrayal by a future antichrist in a rebuilt temple), is prone to create such speculators. John Walvoord, who died in 2002, was considered by many to be the dean of dispensational theologians. He would likely be a tad embarrassed by a lecture he gave in the late 1960’s, “Vietnam in Bible Prophecy.” Such speculation is a fruit of the system.

But the predictions made by the pundits are quickly forgotten soon after they fail to come to pass. You would think that if so many predictions are made and none of them pan out, the punditry class would be discredited. But given the angst, fear, and uncertainty of our times, there is a ready-made audience for such pundits. Instead of embarrassment and concern about biblical warnings addressed to false prophets, when their predictions fail, they shamelessly retrench and make additional predictions whenever world events provide a new opportunity to speculate. Yet, no one calls them out and few stop listening to them.

The Labels Stuck:

Those of us who embrace covenant theology and Reformed amillennialism had the “replacement theology” label slapped on us years ago—most notably by John MacArthur in 2007. We are also accused of not reading the Bible literally and that we have a bent toward antisemitism because we see Bible prophecy centering around Christ and his church, not Israel. Although the “replacement theology” charge has been capably refuted, the refutations are ignored or dismissed because if your favorite pastor says Amillennarians hold to the `heresy’ of replacement theology, it must be unquestionably true because that pastor says so with authority, even if he has no idea what Reformed Christians actually believe about the church and Israel.

And that is why, despite the effective challenges to dispensationalism as recounted by Hummel, Renn is probably right in his assessment that most evangelicals remain functional dispensationalists.