In dispensationalism: Was gracious salvation through Christ an alternative plan In the course of doing research in eschatology, I found this quote by the now deceased dispensationalist scholar, and Dallas Theological Seminary founder Lewis Sperry Chafer:


  It may be concluded that the term "kingdom of heaven" as used in the
  early ministry of Jesus referred to the Messianic, Davidic, earthly
  kingdom seen in the Old Testament. As has been noted, the Jewish
  preachers needed no instruction in the details of that message. It was
  the hope of their nation, and it was addressed to that nation alone.
  So, also, an appeal was made with this message for the anticipated
  national repentance, which must precede the setting up of the kingdom
  in the earth, and the requirements set forth were legal rather than
  gracious. Israel's kingdom was faithfully offered to them by their
  King at His first appearing.
   (The Kingdom in History and Prophecy, p. 51)


Here's what I gathered from this quote. 


The Lord Jesus Christ "faithfully" offered the Jews of His day a Messianic kingdom.
This Messianic kingdom would be similar to but grander than the Davidic kingdom.
This kingdom age would be totally legal. In other words, no salvation by grace.


According to Chafer's other writings on the subject, the Kingdom was rejected by the Jews, which prompted God to offer salvation through grace. The writings of Darby, Scofield, and Walford generally concur with Chafer's.

How does the dispensationalist view the Jewish rejection: As a matter of Israel exercising free will prompting God to change His original plan? Or as Christ's "faithful" offer to Israel and subsequent rejection part of God's original plan.

If needed, please correct my shortsightedness on any of the above conclusions.
In dispensationalism: Was gracious salvation through Christ an alternative plan


  Ephesians 1:3-4  Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
  Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly
  places in Christ:   According as he hath chosen us in him before the
  foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame
  before him in love:


The concept of “alternative” does arise periodically in the Bible and it is illustrative of the intersection of free will and God’s plans. For example;


  Exodus 32:9-10  And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people,
  and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people:   Now therefore let me alone,
  that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them:
  and I will make of thee a great nation.


When God offered the nation of Israel the first covenant they all accepted.


  Exodus 24:7-8  And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the
  audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said
  will we do, and be obedient.   And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled
  it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which
  the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.


Jesus offered the second covenant by his sacrifice on the cross. At the time only a few were interested or even cared to understand.

The approximately 70 years between the birth of Jesus and the destruction of the temple, Israel had a legitimate offer of the Kingdom for her to accept. Jesus never once winked and said, “I know you guys are going to blow it, so here is the real plan”.

If Israel had accepted the Kingdom, the last two thousand years would have been war free, people would have longer lives, and nature itself would have been made less hostile.

We get a picture of this possible world from the description Jesus gives his disciples after the resurrection;


  Mark 16:15-18  And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and
  preach the gospel to every creature.   He that believeth and is
  baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
  And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they
  cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;   They shall take
  up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt
  them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.


Regardless if Israel received the kingdom 2,000 years ago or if a future faithful remnant receives the Kingdom at the end of the tribulation, God’s word still stands.

What we have with the example of the offer of the kingdom is the exercise of free will by the nation of Israel. It is not a brutal hand of God forcing the next step of his plan to become a reality. We can see a little of this with Elijah;


  1 Kings 19:14  And he said, I have been very jealous for the LORD God
  of hosts: because the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant,
  thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and
  I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.
  .....1 Kings 19:18  Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all
  the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath
  not kissed him.


It is almost like God is telling Elijah, “Don’t worry about my plans, I still have 7,000 people I can use. I am concerned about you.”

God’s plans will be accomplish regardless of the faithfulness or faithlessness of man.