prov,
We are getting way off topic. AW wanted to know why Dispenationalism and Covenant theology cannot work together and they cannot. Each one is a hermeneutic. The overarching theme in Covenant theology is the salvation of God's elect from eternity pasted by the covenant of grace. Dispensationalism's overarching principle is the separation of God's people into the Church and Israel. The actual term Dispensation and use of dispensations is secondary.
Sources for quotes:
Presbyterianism and Dispensationalism | The Works of John Frame and Vern Poythress
Darby says:
All this [the Westminster Confessions statement on the covenant and on the law of God] is a fable and a mischievous fable. And I notice it because it is the foundation of the whole religious system to which it belongs.
The basis of the entire system of moral relationship with God in Presbyterianism is false; and it has tainted the whole Evangelical system everywhere.
1944 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.
It is the unanimous opinion of your Committee that Dispensationalism as defined and set forth above is out of accord with the system of the doctrine set forth in the Confession of Faith, not primarily or simply in the field of [e]schatology, but because it attacks the very heart of the Theology of our Church, which is unquestionably a Theology of one Covenant of Grace. As Dr. Chafer clearly recognizes, there are two schools of interpretation here which he rightly designates as Covenantism as over against Dispensationalism.
John Macarthur was mentioned in an earlier post. He is and other 'progressively' minded Dispensationalists have adopted aspects of covenant theology because Dispensationalism was lacking in many areas. Even true Dispensationalists deny MacArthur's 'isms' so he can't be all that bad.
John MacArthur and Dispensationalism
Some helpful quotes on the subject:
Quote, Progressive Dispensationalism is perhaps a misnomer, since it probably has much more in common with Covenant Theology than Classic Dispensationalism, with a few notable differences.
Progressive dispensationalism has departed from one of the historical distinctives of normative dispensationalism, that of the offer, rejection, postponement, and exclusively future fulfillment of the Davidic kingdom. It has also failed to include a related distinctive, the churchs separateness from the Davidic kingdom. Dispensationalists from the successive periods of history have repeatedly emphasized these distinctives, an emphasis that nondispensational critics have also noted. Progressive dispensationalism, on the other hand, has not advocated these distinctives, raising the question of whether that movement deserves the label dispensational or whether it belongs more in the category of nondispensational historical premillennialism. Stephen J. Nichols
Progressive dispensationalism is clearly not your fathers dispensationalism (nor your favorite televangelists).
Radical changes distinguishing it from its antiquated forbears include:
(1) A rejection of simplistic literalism in hermeneutics. Progressive dispensationalists pretty much adopt a genuine grammatical-historical-theological theory of interpretation like the rest of the evangelical world.
(2) A revision of the Israel-Church distinction, allowing that Israel and the Church are two phases of the one people of God. Classic dispensationalism argued for a radical distinction between Israel and the Church that would even continue into eternity; revised dispensationalism maintained that distinction only in terms of the earthly outworking of redemption.
(3) A breaking down of the walls of separation between the dispensations. Their dispensations are not discrete, unmixed time frames, but rather evolving stages of historical development. Contained within any particular dispensation are the seeds of the next dispensation so that the dispensations gradually progress (hence the name). This allows that Christ is now enthroned as king in anticipation of his coming earthly-millennial rule.
Numerous additional issues could be highlighted. But these three are sufficient to establish a radical (and welcome) transformation within dispensationalism. Ken Gentry
Dispensationalists should just give up, come back home to covenant theology and let Dispensationlism pass into church history as a bump in the theological road.
from a summary for
Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth by Gerstner
dispensationalism promotes dubious evangelicalism, spurious Calvinism, and overt antinomianism.