Sam Storms has a new 560 page book coming out, Kingdom Come, “a biblical rationale for amillennialism,” I shall read the book when it comes out and intend to review its arguments here. For the present, I am helped by the fact that Storms has written a short post on the subject of Why I Changed My Mind About The Millennium at the Gospel Coalition website. (TGC seems bent on representing “evangelicalism” whether many of us agree with them or …
Category: Dispensationalism
Dan Phillips has asked me to come up with a guide to the reading of Dispensational Theology. I hope this is what he expected. Anyway, this is what I have come up with. No “Progressive Dispensationalist” work is included because I do not consider that approach to be Dispensationalism proper (which does not mean dispensationalists can’t learn from them!). Neither have I included ultra-dispensational works, nor indeed, those post-trib./pre-wrath books which deny imminence. An asterisk indicates my recommendation of where …
I am a Reluctant Dispensationalist. If someone wants to know what my general outlook on the Bible is I will tell them it is Traditional or Classic Dispensational. I then feel compelled to qualify this confession by making it clear that I do not follow the Tim LaHaye’s and Hal Lindsey’s of this world. Where our theological paths cross I might find myself in agreement with them a fair bit of the time. I would not agree with their Arminianism …
Despite exhibiting many positive traits Reformed covenant theologians can usually be relied upon to do two things. The first is to misrepresent Classic Arminianism, and the second is to misrepresent Classic Dispensationalism. They often misrepresent Classic Arminianism by calling it Semi-Pelagianism and claiming the driving force behind the theology is “freewill.” Neither of those claims is remotely true as anyone who has read Jacob Arminius is well aware. Now I am not among the devotees of the former, but am …
The First Twenty Reasons (link) In presenting these objections to the reinterpretation of OT passages by favored interpretations of the NT I am not throwing down the gauntlet to anyone. If someone wishes to respond to these objections I would be fascinated to read what they have to say. But no one is under pressure to agree with me. However, I hope these forty reasons will be given thoughtful consideration by anybody who comes across them. I believe, of course, …
Here are the first twenty of forty reasons (there could be more but it’s a good number) why a student of the Bible should not adopt the common tactic of reading the New Testament back into the Old, with the resultant outcome that the clear statements of the Old Testament passages in context are altered and mutated to mean something which, without universal prevenient prophetic inspiration, no Old Testament saint (or New Testament saint who did not have access to …
I have been asked some questions which I find are better fitted to another post than an interminable reply in the combox. The questioner is my friend Paul Duncan, and I hope he will not be embarrassed if I address my comments directly to him, though with other readers in mind. Hi Paul, I am back in town and will try to answer your questions as asked in the comments on the fourth post. However, I shall have to point …
This post will summarize the main points I would wish to make about how best to understand the seeming tension between Paul’s teaching about the “Seed” in his discussion of faith in Galatians 3. I believe if we are not going to turn much of the testimony of Scripture on its head we should not go down the road suggested by Grover Gunn in his explanation of the passage and his inferences based thereon. In disagreeing with Gunn I am …
So far we have seen that there is something in the contention that the Apostle Paul does have in mind the covenant promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; promises which include the land given to the nation of Israel, in his theology of the Seed (singular) in Galatians 3. But what is that “something”? Gunn, along with supercessionists generally, believes that because the Genesis passages cited or alluded to by Paul include the land-promise, that the Church – the “New …
I’m going out of town again for a few days, and, what with Christmas and everything, I don’t expect to be posting much till the New Year. I wanted to finish this topic off with this post, but I’ve actually become a little engrossed in it, so expect at least one more effort. Part One here Grover Gunn is sure that Paul is quoting Genesis 13:15-17 and 17:8, 10 from the Septuagint to make his argument in Galatians 3:16. There …
