Ancient Dispensational Truth

by James C. Morris

The threadbare argument that dispensational teaching is "new" has been the propaganda of anti-dispensationalists for decades, and many actually believe it. In this fascinating journey through the early Christian writings, James C. Morris demonstrates that dispensational teaching is as old as the church itself. Many attempt to discredit dispensationalism by claiming that the church never taught it before around 1830. Such a claim is ridiculous, for proof that any particular idea was never taught in any particular time period would require an exhaustive examination of every teaching that took place during that period. Even for a relatively short period of time, such an exhaustive search is manifestly impossible, much less for nearly eighteen centuries. But this claim involves a serious falsehood. This is that the accuracy or error of a doctrine can be determined on the basis of how long men have taught it. We have no right to base our ideas on anything other than the word of God itself. Anything less that this is a false foundation. The purpose of the present study is to examine numerous instances of dispensational doctrine that were clearly taught in some of the very oldest Christian writings on Bible prophecy that have survived to the present day, as well as in numerous other truly ancient Christian writings.

Genres: Christian, History

139 pages, Paperback

Published January 1, 2018

Reviews

[John Waldrip · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quite an interesting book. I am quite sure some will denigrate this little book for being a paperback and of relatyively small size. However, the book is valuable with regard to its sources, classic works of indisputable value and reputation, that disprove the common misconception that eschatological dispensationalism is new. It is not new. It is old. It is ancient. The author proves it beyond doubt. Now you must wrestle with whether it is true.

[Paul Frederick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A pastor friend gave me this book to read through. It is a short read on a subject that I am interested in (dispensationalism), but it is not an easy read. This is no fault of the author as the majority of the book is made up of quotes from theologians and church leaders from days gone by. If you are a dispensationalist who is tired of hearing the tired argument that dispensationalism started with Darby, this would be a great resource for you.

[Rachel Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you are looking for a primer in dispensationalism, this is not for you. But this book uses good research and scholarship to prove that dispensationalism is older than most people claim. This book is heady, and be prepared to read a whole lot of quotes, but it’s important information for proponents and critics alike

[Isaac · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book sets out to show that essential doctrines of Dispensational Theology are to be found in the early Church fathers. The author is to be commended for his attempt to engage with early writers and their doctrine. I can't say much else positive here though as the book suffers several serious flaws.

First, the author engages in a kind of self-contradictory approach to historical theology; on the one hand he understands that the non-historical nature of Dispensationalism is problematic and seeks to establish historical grounds for it (hence the book), but on the other hand he condemns seeking to support theology from history. In this regard, his opening comments seem to undermine his own book.

Further, no definition of Dispensationalism is offered that sets it apart from other systems. Morris states that the distinguishing characteristic that enables us to "recognize Dispensational doctrine when we see it" is "the doctrine that from time to time, God changes the way He relates to mankind." Depending on what exactly is meant by this, this might possibly be an adequate definition. However, this definition fails to agree with the defining characteristics given by most prominent Dispensational theologians (such as Charles Ryrie, Michael Vlach, Darrell Bock, Craig Blaising, Renald Showers, etc). Also, Morris' statement can be applied quite well to other orthodox theological positions, such as the Covenant Theology of the Reformation. Morris does mention some specific doctrines that he equates with Dispensational thought, such as a "literal interpretation," the Church/Israel distinction, the Daniel gap theory, and a pre-tribulational rapture. These specific doctrines are more helpful in discerning Dispenational ideas, but they fail to entirely salvage Morris' confusion over what is distinctly Dispensational and what is not. This leads to significant problems with the rest of the book.

Throughout this book, Morris examines various quotations and attempts to show how said quotations espouse something that is uniquely Dispensational (though he acknowledges Dispensationalism as a system can only be properly spoken of in recent years). These attempts all fail, largely due to the above mentioned confusion over what is and is not distinctly Dispensational doctrine. Possibly the worst example of this is the entirety of chapter 1 where Morris claims the use of the word "dispensation" is grounds for seeing proto-Dispensationalism. This of course is not true as the word and at least some of its meanings are accepted among even Covenant Theologians. The word is in fact embedded in both the Presbyterian Westminster Confession as well as the Baptist 2nd London Confession. The examination of a literal interpretation also suffers in this regard as the literal interpretation, far from being rejected by Reformed and Covenantal positions, is embraced by them. Most of the other specific examinations are similarly flawed.

Finally, Morris' understandings of many of the quotations he uses are suspect or even out-right incorrect. For instance, Morris' selection from Tertullian attempting to show Tertullian embraced a literal hermeneutic explicitly states that Tertullian regarded the allegorical method as valid. Similarly, when reading more than the specific quotes used by Morris to show Tertullian taught a pre-tribulational rapture of the Church, we see that Morris' understanding of Tertullian makes Tertullian speak of chronological absurdities. Morris argues that Tertullian distinguished between "the Church" and the "righteous" when he wrote of the end times. If this is true, then Tertullian wrote that the Antichrist's wrath directed at the non-Church righteous came into being prior to the existence of those the wrath is directed against. Similarly, the two quotations given for Victorinus might be read together as espousing a pre-tribulational rapture, but they can just as, if not more, easily be read as discussing entirely different events and therefore speaking nothing of the timing of the rapture. There are several other instances of misunderstandings or special pleadings by Morris.

Due to these numerous flaws, this book fails to establish what it intends. Morris has not shown anything unique to Dispensational doctrine in the Church Fathers.