 |  |
the ultimate question is not, is dispensationalism--or any other teaching--historic, but is
it Scriptural?
Some of the following facts we owe to Dr. Ryrie's researches, but we absolutely reject
his conclusions regarding what he is pleased to call "ultra-dispensationalism" (pp. 66,67).
He points out that the charge of newness was leveled long ago at the doctrine of the
Reformers. Calvin answered it with characteristic straightforwardness. He wrote: "First
by calling it new they do great wrong to God Whose Sacred Word does not deserve to be
accused of novelty . . . . . that it has lain long unknown and buried is the fault of man's
impiety. Now when it is restored to us by God's goodness, its claim to antiquity ought to
be admitted at least by right of recovery" (Institutes of the Christian Religion, prefatory
address to King Francis, p.3).
Sometimes it is alleged that dispensational teaching originated with the Brethren
movement and is linked with the witness of J. N. Darby. This, too, is untrue and not
according to the real facts. We can see its beginnings in the writings of the early Fathers,
although none of them developed it into a system of interpretation. Irenaeus (130-200)
wrote concerning the four Gospels:
". . . . . and the Gospel is quadriform, as is also the course followed by the Lord. For this
reason there were four principal covenants given to the human race; one prior to the
Deluge, under Adam; the second, that after the Deluge, under Noah; the third, the giving
of the Law, under Moses; the fourth, that which renovates man . . . . . raising and bearing
men upon its wings into the heavenly Kingdom" (Against Heresies. 3,11,8).
While he does not call these covenants dispensations, he often speaks of the
dispensations of God and of the Christian dispensation. Here is an attempt to "try the
things that differ" (Phil. 1: 10 margin) which plays a vital part in true dispensational
teaching. Clement of Alexandria (150-220) distinguished three Patriarchal dispensation
(Adam, Noah and Abraham). Augustine wrote the following:
"The divine institution of sacrifice was suitable in the former dispensation, but it is not
suitable now. For the change suitable to the present age has been enjoined by God, Who
knows infinitely better than man what is fitting for every age . . . . . There is no
variableness with God, though in the former period of the world's history He enjoined
one kind of offerings, and in the latter period another, therein ordering the symbolical
actions pertaining to the blessed doctrine of true religion in harmony with the changes of
successive epochs without any change in Himself . . . . . if it is now established that
that which was for one age rightly ordained may be in another age rightly changed--the
alteration indicating a change in the work, not in the plan of Him Who makes the change
. . . . ." (To Marcellinus 138:5,7).
We do not suggest that the church Fathers were dispensationalists as the word is used
today. But some of them saw Scriptural principles which later developed into
dispensational concepts. The Reformation, as we have seen, was largely concerned with
bringing back the basic truths of Christianity, and not until Bible students began to be
once more concerned with prophecy and eschatology, did dispensational truth begin its
part in Scriptural understanding.