Dispensationalism Among the Anabaptists

It is often claimed that the ideas and concepts of dispensationalism were invented by John Nelson Darby in 1830. Though this assertion is frequently repeated, it is demonstrably false.

In 2015, William Watson took a significant step toward dispelling this myth with the publication
of his 384-page book Dispensationalism Before Darby. His work was soon followed in 2018 by
James Morris’s Ancient Dispensational Truth: Refuting the Myth that Dispensationalism is New,
in which he demonstrates that dispensational concepts were being taught by some Christians
from the earliest times. Then, in 2023, the book Discovering Dispensationalism: Tracing the
Development of Dispensational Thought from the First to the Twenty-First Century was released
—a collection of essays by twelve scholars, proving once and for all that the claim “Darby
invented dispensationalism!” is a myth.

In this article, however, I would like to focus specifically on a group of Christians from the
Reformation period known in history as the Anabaptists of Europe. Is there any evidence that
these much-maligned saints of yesteryear held to a dispensational view of Scripture? I believe
the answer is yes, and I think the reader will agree after reading these few pages.

Before we proceed, let me briefly explain what I mean by “dispensationalism.” In the
aforementioned book Ancient Dispensational Truth, James Morris defines dispensationalism as
follows: 

“Dispensationalism, in its central essence, is simply the doctrine that from time to time,
God changes the way He relates to mankind.”¹

Put a little differently, dispensationalism is simply the belief that God deals with humanity in different ways during different periods of history.

The next obvious question is: what factor would lead us to expect to find any dispensational
views among the European Anabaptists? In short, the answer is that the Anabaptists (and all
Baptistic people) hold, at least to some degree, a dispensational view of Scripture. I base this
conclusion on the fact that many of the unique Baptistic doctrines (often referred to as “the
Baptist Distinctives”) are teachings that are unique to the New Testament. These doctrinal
positions are exclusive to the church age, and some are even opposed to the principles of the Old
Testament period. A clear example of this is the doctrine of the separation of church and state.

This doctrine was nonexistent in the Old Testament. As we see in Deuteronomy 13:6-10, under
the Old Testament theocracy, those promoting the worship of false gods were to be executed. By
contrast, in the New Testament, we see a radically different approach in Luke 9:51-56. With this
in mind, let’s examine the biblical ideas and writings of the Anabaptists from the 1500s.

In his essay for the aforementioned book Discovering Dispensationalism, Dr. Ron J. Bigalke
discusses dispensational concepts during the Reformation era. He writes:

“Seeking to identify any Reformation commentaries based upon prophetic books or writings that even address biblical prophecy is a rather desolate task. Nevertheless, it has been well observed that ‘the strongest statements concerning imminency during this period actually come from Anabaptists, known as the Taufer, (Baptists) who drew their theology from the Scriptures more than other groups that bore the name Anabaptist.”²

Of course, imminency is a dispensational concept. Speaking of the Anabaptist views on church
autonomy, Dr. Bigalke continues:

“Anabaptist ‘rejection of hierarchies… [also got them] into trouble for their disrespect
for leadership structures of the established church and for their refusal to submit to government
hierarchies.’ Dispensational thought in later centuries demonstrates a continuing influence upon
the Reformation recovery of ecclesiastical independence.”³

In other words, the Anabaptists’ views on church autonomy and the separation of church and
state laid the groundwork for the revival of dispensational teaching in the 1800s.

Having noted Dr. Bigalke’s views on the Anabaptist influence on a dispensational understanding
of Scripture, we now turn to the writings of the Anabaptists themselves.

Dirk Philips was a well-respected Anabaptist preacher and teacher during that period, and the
right-hand man of one of the most influential Anabaptist leaders, Menno Simons. In his book
Sending of Preachers or Teachers, Dirk argues for trusting Scripture over signs and wonders—a
position known as cessationism.

Dirk Philips writes:

“False teachers can also sometimes indeed perform signs. One knows well how the Egyptian
magicians withstood Moses and what they did through their magic, Exod.7:11[-12]; 2 Tim. 3:8.
And Christ says that many false prophets and false Christians shall arise [and] do great signs and wonders so that (if it were possible), even the elect should be led astray. Matt. 24:11. And Paul says, ‘The coming of the antichrist will happen according to the activity of Satan with all kinds of deceitful signs and wonders among those who will be lost, 2 Thess. 2:9[-10]. Therefore then, a Christian may not look upon the signs alone, but much more upon God’s Word which is always certain and true, John 17:8.”⁴

While Dirk’s emphasis on the dangers of signs and the sufficiency of Scripture is noteworthy, we
find even clearer dispensational statements in the writings of his friend and fellow laborer,
Menno Simons. In his Reply to Gellius Faber, Menno wrote:

“. . . that each dispensation has its own doctrine, ordinance and usage. From the time of Adam to Abraham no ceremony was practiced on children because the Lord had not commanded it; circumcision was commanded from Abraham to the time of Christ. But now we have Christ, the promised prophet to whom all the Scriptures point.”⁵

Here, Menno not only uses the word dispensation in the same way modern dispensationalists use
it—to describe how God interacts with humanity during a given period—but also affirms that
each dispensation has its own unique doctrine. This is undoubtedly a seed of modern
dispensationalism.

Finally, we examine the writings of an Anabaptist who was nearly forgotten for centuries until
his work was recently rediscovered: Pilgram Marpeck, a significant figure among the South
German Anabaptists in the 1500s.

Marpeck placed great emphasis on the differences between the Old and New Testaments—a
foundational principle of dispensationalism—in stark contrast to the Reformed views of Calvin
and Zwingli, often associated with “replacement theology.”

Concerning Marpeck’s views on Scripture, Baptist historian William Estep wrote:

“Marpeck’s most creative contribution to Anabaptist thought was his view of the Scriptures.
While holding the Scriptures to be the Word of God, he made a distinction between the purpose of the Old Testament and that of the New. As the foundation must be distinguished from the house, the Old Testament must be distinguished from the New. The New Testament was centered in Jesus Christ and alone was authoritative for the Brethren. To hold that the Old Testament was equally authoritative for the Christian was to abolish the distinction between the two. Failure to distinguish between the Old and New Testaments leads to the most dire consequences. Marpeck attributed the peasants’ revolt, Zwingli’s death, and the excesses of the Münsterites to this cause. Making the Old Testament normative for the Christian life is to follow the Scriptures only in part. In Marpeck’s eyes the pope, Luther, Zwingli, and the “false Ana-baptists” were all guilty of this fundamental error.”⁶

We would expect that such a distinction between the two testaments would naturally lead to
dispensational views—and indeed it does. In the preface to his Explanation of the Testaments,
Marpeck writes:

“For some time now, and even at present, there has been dissension over the difference between the Old and New Testaments, between the old Mosaic and the new Christian church. For some say: Christ’s suffering was retroactive to the Old Testament. They also say that there was actual forgiveness of sin in the Old Testament leading to eternal life, just as in the New. Furthermore that there was also actual’ atonement, sacrifice, salvation, healing, comfort, cleansing, sanctification, justification, righteousness, goodness, peace, joy, rest, grace, mediator, hope, faith, love, Spirit, anointing, knowledge, light, life, covenant, Testament, law, kingdom, congregation, mpeople, sonship, food, drink, blessing, and the like in the Old as well as in the New Testaments. Although all these were somewhat less bright, less free, more childish and incomplete, nevertheless the people of the Old Testament were, like us, Christians. Since moreover, among them as Christians the sword was used it is quite as proper to use the worldly sword in the new church, that is today’s Christian church as it was in the Mosaic church, there are however, those who believe that there is a difference. They say that in the Old Testament it was all only fleshly, figurative, shadowy, and temporal, but not actual. Nor did they have the spirit of divine promise which leads to eternal life. Nor did they have other actual things spoken of in this book for they were not then given but only promised. The believers of the Old Testament hoped to receive them only when Christ became Man.”⁷

This is a profound and informative quote. Marpeck here argues for dispensational salvation—the
belief that saints in the Old Testament were not saved and secured in the same way Christians are
today under the blood of Christ. He goes so far as to claim that to deny this view is to reject
Scripture:

“…all holy, clear biblical Scripture, especially of the New Testament, which shows clearly that
the aforementioned actual salvation and other things were not present yesterday but came only today, would be made a lie…”⁸

Conclusion 

In conclusion, based on both the research of modern scholars and the writings of the Anabaptists themselves, there is little doubt that dispensational ideas not only existed among the Anabaptists of Europe but were, in fact, prevalent. Then again, what else would we expect from a people who emphasized the literal interpretation of Scripture?

Sources:

1. Ancient Dispensational Truth, p. 7

2. Discovering Dispensationalism, p. 177

3. Ibid., p. 167

4. Dirk Philips: A Sixteenth-Century Dutch Anabaptist by Insung Jeon, p. 201

5. The Complete Writings of Menno Simons, p. 683

6. The Anabaptist Story, p. 126

7. The Writings of Pilgram Marpeck, pp. 555–556

8. Ibid., p. 557