Modern day dispensational premillenialist will cite the early church fathers, as well as some of the protestant reformers,  as being earlier prototypes for their doctrine. This is typically used as defense of dispensational premillenialism, when it is pointed out that this doctrine did not begin until the time of John Nelson Darby.

Those who claim that the early church fathers taught dispensational premillenialism, or that it was the majority view, are falling into the trap of eisegesis (interpreting text through one’s own bias or leanings).  Thus it is then claimed that what is called historic premillenialism as found in the writings of some of the church fathers, is proof for an ancient belief in dispensational premillenialism. However, several key elements of dispensational premillenialism are missing from the writings of the early church fathers. Likewise, historic aka covenantal premillenialism, is closer to amillenialism, not dispensational premillenialism, as we will show.

Historic Premillenialism: The Church Is Israel

The early church fathers never drew a line between the church and Israel, but rather the Church is Israel. This is something you will not find in dispensational premillennialism since Israel, in their view the Jews, are distinct from the Church. Likewise, the early church fathers never wrote of a regathering of the Jews to land that God still “owes: to them and a Church that is secretly raptured (form of ressurection) before the tribulation:

A major difference between historic and dispensational premillennialism is the view of the church in relation to Israel. Historics do not see so sharp a distinction between Israel and the church as the dispensationalists do, but instead view believers of all ages as part of one group, now revealed as the body of Christ. Thus, historic premillennialists see no issue with the church going through the Great Tribulation, and they do not need a separate pre-tribulational rapture of some believers as the dispensational system requires. – Wikipedia

Historic Premillenialism is closer to Amillenialism, not Dispensational Premillenialism:

In seeking a consensus of the early church fathers, it is clear that those who held historic premillenialism (covenant premillenialism) were more in line with their peers who held to amillienialism, as opposed to modern dispensational premillenialist as shown below:

• All of the early church fathers believed that the Church is the ONLY Israel (something dispensational would not agree with)
• the last judgment would come quickly for believers and unbelievers at the same judgement
• thus there was only ONE ressurection (amillenialism), not a secret rapture (ressurection) and later the final ressurection after a thousand years
• Christians would go through the tribulation since the early church fathers thought they were in the tribulation already (amillenialism) due to persecution.
• They did not believe in the regathering of the Jews to the land, or that God still “owes” the land to the Jews,  although some did hold restorationist views – that some Jews would one day come to belief in Christ either slowly over time or at a conversion event in the future, there was no regathering to the land, a political nation state, etc.
• Some of the early church fathers did write of a thousand year reign of Christ on Earth, but again, it did not include a return to the land for the Jews or Jews offering sacrifices to Christ at a third temple.

Here is an example from the writings of Justin Marytr who is cited by proponents of dispensationalism:

the Sadducees, or similar sects of Genistæ, Meristæ,  Galilæans, Hellenists,  Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews (do not hear me impatiently when I tell you what I think), but are [only] called Jews and children of Abraham, worshipping God with the lips, as God Himself declared, but the heart was far from Him. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years  in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare. – Justin Martyr

Justin Martyr’s views of the thousand year reign only included Christians and not the restoration of the Jews to the land, offering sacrifices, an earthly nation state, or renewal of the old laws (old covenant).  He also wrote that the reign of Christ would occur, not on Earth as it exist now, but on a new or renewed Earth, for eternity.  The dead would likewise be ressurected via one ressurection, not a secret rapture of believers living and dead away from Earth to await the end of the thousand years. Make note of Justin’s words here:

“…a thousand years  in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.”

Compared to Revelation 21 on the New Heaven and Earth:

1 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. -NKJV

Thus, in Justin Martyrs writings we find the thousand year reign of Christ was not a literal thousand years, but for eternity (amillenialism) on the new earth as we can see in his quote below from Isaiah:

“For Isaiah spake thus concerning this space of a thousand years: ‘For there shall be the new heaven and the new earth, and the former shall not be remembered, or come into their heart; but they shall find joy and gladness in it, which things I create.” -Justin Martyr

We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’ is connected with this subject.  – IBID

See 2 Peter 3:8, Psalm 90:4, The Book of Jubliees, for more perspective ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’

Justin Martyr also believed the dead will rise and will reign with Christ. This is exactly what Revelation 20 says:

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Thus, in Justin Martyrs “premillenialism” we see that believers wont be raptured away while the Jews stay here along with unbelievers during the tribulation. The early Church did at times mention a rapture, which we will discuss in part 2. But for now, we will just say that this rapture is not the same as the left behind or secret rapture since believers living will be “caught up” to meet Christ at His return, peacefully die so as to be raised with the believing dead to reign eternally with Christ.

Tertullian wrote that the thousand year reign would happen after the ressurection (not a first secret rapture). He also wrote that this actually began during his time and would last only a thousand years. Due to how extremely different this is from modern dispensational premillenialism, Tertuallian can not legitimately be cited as proof for an earlier proto-dispensational premillenialist:

“But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; in as much as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem “let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;” and, while declaring that our politeuma, or citizenship, is in heaven, he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven. …. And the word of the new prophecy which is a part of our belief, attests how it foretold that there would be for a sign a picture of this very city exhibited. to view previous to its manifestation. This prophecy, indeed, has been very lately fulfilled in an expedition to the East. For it is evident from the testimony of even heathen witnesses, that in Judaea there was suspended in the sky a city early every morning for forty days. As the day advanced, the entire figure of its walls would wane gradually, and sometimes it would vanish instantly. We say that this city has been provided by God for receiving the saints on their resurrection, and refreshing them with the abundance of all really spiritual blessings…..After its thousand years are over, within which period is completed the resurrection of the saints, who rise sooner or later according to their deserts there will ensue the destruction of the world and the conflagration of all things at the judgment: we shall then be changed in a moment into the substance of angels, even by the investiture of an incorruptible nature, and so be removed to that kingdom in heaven of which we have now been treating, – Against Marcion, Book II

Likewise, contrasted with dispensational premillenialism, there is no mention an unfulfilled land covenant or regathering of the jews to the land, any zionist leanings such as a third temple or reinstatement of sacrifices of the old covenant.

Gnostic versions of Pre-Darby, Proto-Dispensational Premillenialism:

The only trace of a truly proto-dispensational premillenialism can be found in ancient Gnostic or Judaizing teachings:

“But Cerinthus, too, through revelations written, as he would have us believe, by a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things, which he pretends were shown him by angels; alleging that after the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is to be on earth, and that the flesh dwelling in Jerusalem is again to be subject to desires and pleasures. And being an enemy to the scriptures of God, wishing to deceive me” – Eusebius

“Cerinthus required his followers to retain part of the Mosaical law, but to regulate their lives by the example of Christ: and taught that after the resurrection Christ would reign upon earth, with his faithful disciples, a thousand years, which would be spent in the highest sensual indulgences.” – Gregory and Rulers Church History, page 30

Christ is the Rock by which, and on which, the Church is founded. And thus it is overcome by no traces of maddened men. Therefore they are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years; who think, that is to say, with the heretic Cerinthus. For the kingdom of Christ is now eternal in the saints, although the glory of the saints shall be manifested after the resurrection. – Victorinus

Cerinthus lived during the time of John the Apostle. He taught his followers that there would be a literal thousand year reign, after some form of a ressurection, (maybe similar to the ressurection and the secret rapture) where sensual desires and pleasures (corruption of the flesh or sins) would remain. In dispensational premillenialism, only believers – living and dead – are raptured away and the Jews and unbelievers who remain could still be subject to corruption of the flesh or sins.

On Cerinthus, according to Eusebius, quoting Irenaeus (who was taught by Papias, a disciple of John the Apostle):

“while John was at Ephesus, he entered a bath to wash and found that Cerinthus was within, and refused to bathe in the same bath house, but left the building, and exhorted those with him to do the same, saying, “Let us flee, lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, that enemy of the truth, is within.“—Eusebius’s Eccl. Hist., III. 28.

Cerinthus, the Ebionites and Montanist all held to a some form of this idea of literal thousand year reign of Christ on Earth. However, because a literal thousand year reign was viewed historically heretical by the consensus of the early church, including by those fathers that are claimed to have been proto-premillenial, the Church of England was among other confessions to condemn such teachings. See article XLI COE 1559 entitled, “Heretickes called Millenarii”. The Augsburg confession likewise contains a condemnation of such beliefs in article VI1X.  Add to this, neither Luther, Calvin and later John Wesley, Adam Clarke, among many others, wrote anything that could be taken as dispensational premillenialism.

As mentioned,  Papias was a disciple of John the Apostle. It is claimed by some dispensational premillenialist that he held to a not yet fully developed form of their doctrine. However, it appears that Papias believed in a spiritual version of the millennuim:

Papias Bishop of Hieropolis did also hold this opinion, but not in so gross a way as Cerinthus did, but rather spiritually – Premillennialism Refuted, by Christopher Love, via purelypresbytarian

…he says that there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth. – Fragments of Papias

Irenaeus is another early church father who is often cited as a proto-dispensational premillenialist. However, Irenaues had the same consensus of other fathers:

“The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead“

Irenaeus’ views of the millennium has very little in common with modern premillennialist, in that the risen dead will reign in the Kingdom or the New Heaven and Earth era. The unsaved dead would also be raised at the same time and judged, which places Irenaeus’ view in line with amillenialism:

“Has the Word come for the ruin and for the resurrection of many? For the ruin, certainly, of those who do not believe Him, to whom also He has threatened a greater damnation in the judgment-day than that of Sodom and Gomorrah; (Luke 10:12) but for the resurrection of believers, and those who do the will of His Father in heaven. If then the advent of the Son comes indeed alike to all, but is for the purpose of judging, and separating the believing from the unbelieving,” – Against Heresies, Book 5

Any remaining Jews who have not already professed belief in Christ before or at His return will be judged and seperated from the believing along with all other non-believers. There will not be another chance for them or for them to reign with Him for a thousand years.

No Dual Covenants in Historic Premillenialism

Contrasting with modern dispensational teaching,  Justin Martyr never wrote of dual covenants. This is another aspect of historic premillenialism that is lacking when compared to dispensational premillenialism:

Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law–namely, Christ–has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance.

Other early church fathers held the same views of the Covenants:

 Even as Esaias saith, “The children of Jacob shall strike root, and Israel shall flourish, and the whole world shall be filled with his fruit.” The fruit, therefore, having been sown throughout all the world, she (Jerusalem) was deservedly forsaken, and those things which had formerly brought forth fruit abundantly were taken away; for from these, according to the flesh, were Christ and the apostles enabled to bring forth fruit. But now these are no longer useful for bringing forth fruit. For all things which have a beginning in time must of course have an end in time also.

Since, then, the law originated with Moses, it terminated with John as a necessary consequence. Christ had come to fulfil it: wherefore “the law and the prophets were” with them “until John.” And therefore Jerusalem, taking its commencement from David, and fulfilling its own times, must have an end of legislation when the new covenant was revealed. – Irenaeus, Against Heresies – Book IV

No new covenant was given, but they used the Mosaic law until the coming of the Lord; but from the Lord’s advent, the new covenant which brings back peace, and the law which gives life, has gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: “For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem; and He shall rebuke many people; and they shall break down their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks, and they shall no longer learn to fight.” – Justin Martyr

Finally,  even if we were to say that historic premillenialism is very different from amillenialism, it was still a minority view among the early church fathers. However, dispensational premillenialist will attempt to claim that it was the majority belief until Augustine:

“But it is not correct to say, as premillenarians do, that it was generally accepted in the first three centuries. The truth of the matter is that the adherents of this doctrine were a rather limited number. There is no trace of it in Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Tatian, Athenogoras, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dionysius, and other important church fathers.” (Louis Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrines, p. 262).

Conclusion

Just because something has a few similarities, does not make for proof of a false doctrine that is no where to be found in the history of the Church until the time of Darby and Scofield. So no matter what someone may tell you, the early church fathers were not premillenial dispensationalist. Yes, some similarities can be found in wording and phrases, but when we look at the over all picture,  none of the early church fathers can legitimately be cited by modern proponents of dispensationalism to support their false doctrines.

For more on books that claim the early Church or historic Protestants taught dispensational premillenialism before Darby, please see:

Eschatological Views Among the Church Fathers by Jason Staples

The Amillennialism of Irenaeus [A.D. 120-202] – covers the claims by premillenialist about Barnabus and Ireaneus; writings

A Few Thoughts on William Watson’s “Dispensationalism Before Darby.”

My Journey Out of Dispensationalism

See section entitled, Why Christ cannot come, before His last coming. via purelyprebyterian for some very good scriptural proof against dispensational premillenialism

Falsifying The Fathers: How Pre-Tribulationists Pervert the Apostolic End-times Teaching by Nathanael Lewis