Dispensational Study Group Discussion -- By: Anonymous

Journal: Grace Theological Journal
Volume: GTJ 10:2 (Fall 1989)
Article: Dispensational Study Group Discussion
Author: Anonymous


Dispensational Study Group Discussion

The meeting was given to a discussion of Vern Poythress, Understanding Dispensationalism, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987. Papers of response were prepared and read by Dr. Paul Karleen and Dr. Robert Saucy. Dr. Poythress prepared and read responses. The three men were joined by Dr. Craig Blaising, chairman of the Dispensational Study Group, for a panel discussion with questions from the floor. Approximately 100 people participated in the session.

The following is a summary of the panel discussion and question period.

Dr. Blaising asked if moderate Ds and moderate Cs are not closer to each other than either are to classic Ds or classic Cs. It seems both are moving toward each other in rapprochement. That was generally agreed.

He also asked how common Hoekema’s version of amillennialism (which Dr. Poythress shares) is. Dr. Poythress noted old C was oriented toward salvific issues so eschatological, prophetic questions were not central to the discussions. With the new discussions arising from biblical theology and the relevant appreciation of biblical diversity, there has been renewed discussion of prophetic issues. Many covenantalists see this more as new areas of discussion than as concessions or movement. He noted his book Symphonic Theology with its discussions of the legitimacy of multiple approaches to theological thinking.

Does Dr. Poythress have a presupposed covenant of grace in his theology as Dr. Karleen suggests? He responded that he sees it taught in the Bible, but that Dr. Karleen is right that he works out from the salvific issues to the prophetic and other issues.

Is history the realm in which God’s purposes are fulfilled rather than in eternity, the new heavens and new earth? Dr. Poythress responded that he sees a continuity with this earth. If there is radical disjunction between this earth and the new earth, then this is a large objection to amillennialism. The Davidic kingdom does represent a historical continuity from the present history to the eternal state which is without end. Further, Isaiah 65 shows a considerable continuity

with the past, present and future earth. Similarly, the empty tomb shows both continuity and discontinuity of present and future body.

Dr. Poythress laughingly referred to himself as an optimistic premillennialist: It is so good that it goes on forever.

Dr. Karleen agreed to the weakness of a temporal Davidic kingdom, one limited only to millennium.

Dr. Blaising described classic Ds as seeing the new earth basically in Platonic terms, as ...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()