That’s the one.
When you actually read his description of what he is calling dispensationalism in this passage, you find he is really referring to something quite different than what we are discussing above.
He is speaking of those who do not see Scripture as a unity. A little further down, one reads “The Bible consists of many parts, exquisitely correlated and vitally interdependent upon each other. God so controlled all the agents which He employed in the writing of it, and so coordinated their efforts, as to produce a single living Book. Within that organic unity there is indeed much variety, but no contrariety. Man’s body is but one, though it be made up of many members, diverse in size, character, and operation. The rainbow is but one, nevertheless it reflects distinctly the seven prismatic rays, yet they are harmoniously blended together. So it is with the Bible: its unity appears in the perfect consistency throughout of its teachings. The oneness yet triunity of God, the deity and humanity of Christ united in one Person, the everlasting covenant which secures the salvation of all the election of grace, the highway of holiness and the only path which leads to heaven, are plainly revealed in Old and New Testament alike. The teaching of the prophets concerning the glorious character of God, the changeless requirements of His righteousness, the total depravity of human nature, and the way appointed for restoration therefrom, are identical with the Apostles’ teaching.”
When one actually doesn’t “cherry pick” Pink one also sees these statements by the esteemed theologian, you find that his views are really quite in harmony with modern dispensational thought. For example:
“It is a ground for thanksgiving that during the last three or four generations the people of God have given considerable attention to the prophecies of Scripture which treat of the future of Israel. The old method of “spiritualizing” these predictions, and making them apply to the Church of the present dispensation, has been discarded by the great majority of pre-millennarians. With a steadily increasing number of Bible students it is now a settled question that Israel, as a nation, shall be saved (Rom. 11:26), and that the promises of God to the fathers will be literally fulfilled under the Messianic reign of the Lord Jesus (Rom. 9:4). Jerusalem, which for so many centuries has been a by-word in the earth, will then be known as “the city of the great King” (Matthew 5:35). His throne shall be established there, and it shall be the gathering point for all nations (Zech. 8:23; 14:16-21). Then shall the despised descendants of Jacob be “the head” of the nations, and no longer the tail (Deut. 28:13); then shall the people of Jehovah’s ancient choice be the center of His earthly government; then shall the Fig Tree, so long barren, “blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit” (Isa. 27:6). All of this is common knowledge among those who are in any-wise acquainted with dispensational truth.
But the same Word of Prophecy which announces the glorious future awaiting the children of Israel, also contains another chapter in the history of this peculiar people; a chapter yet unfulfilled, setting forth a period in their history darker and sadder than any of their past experiences. Both the Old and New Testaments plainly tell of a season of suffering for the Jews which will be far more acute than even their afflictions of old. Daniel 12:1 says, “And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time.” And in Matthew 24:21,22 we read, “For there shall be a great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved.”
http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Antichrist/anti_16.htm
and
It should now be evident to every unprejudiced reader that there are two distinct stages in the Second Coming of Christ:—His coming in the air, and His coming to the earth; His coming for the saints, and His coming with the saints. The first great purpose before Him in connection with His return is to receive His people unto Himself. Just as of old God translated Enoch to Heaven before He sent the Deluge upon the ungodly, so will the Church be removed frown this earth before the vials of His wrath are poured out upon it. The second great purpose before the Lord Jesus will be to return to the earth itself, there to set up His Kingdom and reign in righteousness, and it is the nature, the scope, the blessedness, and the duration of this Kingdom-reign which is now to engage our attention.
http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Redeemers_Return/return_10.htm
Sure sounds like a pre-tribulation dispensationalist to me.
I hope you follow in his footsteps.
Later, after he came to biblical truth, he wrote:
First, we must seek to remove a radical misconception which obtains in certain quarters as to the ones with whom God here promised to make this "new covenant," namely, "with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." Modem dispensationalists insist that this says just what it means, and means just what it says; and with this I am in hearty accord. Nevertheless, we would point out that it is entirely a matter of interpretation if we are to rightly understand what is said; and this can only be accomplished as the Spirit Himself enlightens our minds. Any method of Bible study, or any system of interpretation (if such it could be called) that renders us self-sufficient, independent of the Holy Spirit, is self-condemned. An unregenerate man, by diligent application and the use of a good concordance, may soon familiarize himself with the letter of Scripture, and persuade himself that because he takes its letter at its face value, he has a good understanding of it; but that is a vastly different thing from a spiritual insight into spiritual things. ...Make sure you are using the right Pink.When the apostle here affirms that "they are not all Israel, which are of Israel" (Rom. 9:6), he means that not all the lineal descendants of Jacob belonged unto "the Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16)—those who were God’s people in the highest sense. So far from that being the case, many of the Jews were not God’s children at all (see John 8:42,44), while many who were Gentiles by nature, have (by grace) been made "fellow-citizens with the [Old Testaments saints" (Eph. 2:19) and "blessed with faithful Abraham" (Gal. 3:9). Thus the apostle’s language in the second clause of Romans 9:6 has the force of: Not all who are members of the (ancient) visible church are members of the true church. The same thought is repeated in Romans 9:7, "Neither because they are the [natural] seed of Abraham, are they all children" —that is, the "children [or inheritors] of the promise," as verse 8 explains—but "in Isaac the line of God’s election and sovereign grace] shall thy true and spirituals seed be called." God’s promises were made to the spiritual seed of Abraham, and not to his natural descendants as such. ...
In the second half of the last chapter it was shown that the name Israel has a twofold application, both in the Old Testament and in the New, being given to the natural descendants of Jacob and also to all believers. Nor should this in anywise surprise or stumble us, seeing that the one whom God first denominated "Israel" was henceforth the man with the double name, according as he was viewed naturally or spiritually. It should also be duly noted that God’s giving this name unto Jacob is recorded twice in Genesis: "And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed" (32:28); "And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name" (35:10). Is there not here something more than bare emphasis—namely, a divine intimation to us of the dual application or usage of the name?
Not true.
...let us now examine a striking yet little-noticed expression, namely "the children of the promise" (Rom. 9:8). In the context the Apostle discusses God's casting of the Jews and calling of the Gentiles, which was a particularly sore point with the former. After describing the unique privileges enjoyed by Israel as a nation (verses 4 and 5), he points out the difference there is between them and the antitypical "Israel of God" (verses 6-9), which he illustrates by the cases of Isaac and Jacob. Though the Jews had rejected the Gospel and had been cast off by God, it must not be supposed that His word had failed of accomplishment (verse 6), for not only had the prophecies concerning the Messiah been fulfilled, but the promise respecting Abraham's seed was being made good. But it was most important to apprehend aright what or whom that "seed" comprised. "For they are not all Israel [spiritually speaking], who are of Israel [naturally]: neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called" (verses 6 and 7). The Jews erroneously imagined (as modern Dispensationalists do) that the promises made to Abraham concerning his seed respected all of his descendants. Their boast was "we be Abraham's seed" (John 8:33), to which Christ replied, "If ye were Abraham's children ye would do the works of Abraham" (verse 39 and see Romans 4:12). God's rejection of Ishmael and Esau was decisive proof that the promises were not made to the natural descendants as such. The selection of Isaac and Jacob showed that the promise was restricted to an elect line. "The children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted [regarded] as the seed. For this is the word of promise. At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son (Rom. 9:8,9). The "children of God" and the "children of promise" are one and the same, whether they be Jews or Gentiles. As Isaac was born supernaturally, so are all of God's elect (John 1:13). As Isaac, on that account, was heir of the promised blessing, so are Christians (Gal. 4:29; 3:29). "Children of the promise" are identical with "the heirs of promise" (Heb. 6:17, and cf. Rom. 8:17). God's promises are made to the spiritual children of Abraham (Rom. 4:16; Gal 3:7), and none of them can possibly fail of accomplishment. "For all the promises of God in Him [namely Christ] are yea, and in Him amen" (2 Cor. 1:20). They are deposited in Christ, and in Him they find their affirmation and certification, for He is the sum and substance of them. Inexpressibly blessed is that declaration to the humble-minded child of God -- yet a mystery hid from those who are wise in their own conceits. "He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?" (Rom. 8:32). The promises of God are numerous: relating to this life and also that which is to come. They concern our temporal wellbeing, as well as our spiritual, covering the needs of the body as well as those of the soul. Whatever be their character, not one of them can be made good unto us except in and through and by Him who lived and died for us. The promises which God has given to His people are absolutely sure and trustworthy, for they were made to them in Christ: they are infallibly certain for fulfillment, for they are accomplished through and by Him. A blessed illustration, yea, exemplification, of what has just been pointed out above is found in Hebrews 8:8-13, and 10:15-17, where the Apostle quotes the promises given in Jeremiah 31:31-34. The Dispensationalists would object and say that those promises belong to the natural descendants of Abraham, and are not to us. But Hebrews 10:15 prefaces the citation of those promises by expressly affirming, "Whereof the Holy Spirit is [not "was"] a witness to us." Those promises extend to Gentile believers also, for they are the assurance of grace founded in Christ, and in Him believing Jews and Gentiles are one (Gal. 3:26). Before the middle wall of partition was broken down, Gentiles were indeed "strangers unto the covenants of promise" (Eph. 2:12), but when that wall was removed, Gentile believers became "fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph. 3:6)! As Romans 11 expresses it, they partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree (verse 17)! Those promises in Jeremiah 31 are made not to the Jewish nation as such, but to "the Israel of God" (Gal 6:16), that is to the entire election of grace, and they are made infallibly good unto all of them at the moment of their regeneration by the Spirit...""But there is further reason, and a pressing one today, why we should write upon our present subject, and that is to expose the modern and pernicious error of Dispensationalism...
Much appreciate your Biblical consistency and diligence on such topics.
Thx.