# Works of James Hamilton?



## dgumprecht (Jun 18, 2016)

Hey everyone,

I was interested in the works of James Hamilton, and wanted to hear everyone's thoughts about them.

Would you recommend them? What have you benefitted from when reading them?


I plan to get the works of both Erskine brothers in due time, but was considering Hamilton first.

Thank you for your help!


----------



## dgumprecht (Jun 21, 2016)

...surely someone has these and could speak to their benefit? 

Any other Scottish Presbyterian writers?


----------



## psycheives (Jun 21, 2016)

I read his "God's Indwelling Presence" book and would express deep caution. His views did not come across to me as Confessionally Reformed but as leaning Dispensationalist to the point of dividing Christ from His benefits (as I understood him). His argument is about how the OT saints were not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Reformed Christians affirm all the same benefits of NT saints to OT saints in terms of salvation benefits - we teach that all OT saints were indwelt. It is a standard Dispensationalist argument that seeks to draw drastic contrasts between OT and NT ways of salvation.

When challenged with the Reformed question, "Then how were they sanctified?" I understood him to say only when they walked into the Temple were they then able to be in the presence of God and thus be sanctified while in the temple. Really? Only while in the temple? What about when they stepped out and went home? That doesn't solve anything because most of the OT, the temple hadn't been built yet and even when it was built, it was limited to one location. So how were God's people sanctified before the Temple and in other locations. I was surprised a scholarly work would employ such drastic stretching of the Scripture to make it support his argument and also how badly the logic fails. He never addresses the many verses that contradict his argument. He reads the verses ULTRA literally (again like a Dispensationalist) and misses their meaning. I don't think he ever mentions Union with Christ and so his teachings are divorcing Christ from his benefits. Very flawed arguments. I would encourage extreme caution. 

Stick with Confessionally Reformed guys who are employ consistent arguments. I've seen these sorts of arguments employed routinely by many Southern Baptist guys (not to beat on any who know better) and so I generally avoid them. I have not found most of their arguments convincing but the ones I have read are making these exact same mistakes, which was surprising to me. I thought these brilliant men would have a lot more logically coherent arguments.

Example:
Hamilton wrote, "Gospel of John suggest that believers would not be indwelt by the Spirit until Jesus was glorified" = he understands one ultra-literal definition of "indwelling" rather than seeing the Bible (OT & NT) use. The Bible speaks of at least two kinds of "indwellings." One to impart power/gifts/influence and another to describe indwelling for union with Christ. The first is used to show the Holy Spirit's influence upon believers & unbelievers but the second is a permanent abiding of only believers (union with Christ). Mr. Hamilton misses the many verses that use "indwelling" in these two ways and he only reads one way to use it and so reads the verses incorrectly. So he eliminates Indwelling/Union from OT believers (making an exception for only a few OT saints for at least a temporary moment). So how could the OT saints receive the blessings of Christ if they did not have Christ himself? I think we Reformed would again say such a view leads to teaching a different way of salvation in the OT.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 21, 2016)

dgumprecht said:


> Hey everyone,
> 
> I was interested in the works of James Hamilton, and wanted to hear everyone's thoughts about them.
> 
> ...



If you are referring to Dr. James Hamilton of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, he is somewhere between covenant theology and dispensationalism, as almost everyone at SBTS is, it seems. Despite what some of his colleagues and others may state, his teaching is not standard "Reformed Baptist" theology if that's what you're looking for. It's an oversimplification, but it could be said that the "Progressive Covenantalism" that is largely emanating from SBTS is New Covenant Theology worked out in an academic context. This is not to say that Hamilton can't be read without profit. I certainly don't think he's a heretic or anything of the sort. But I think its safe to say that his teaching diverges from the 1689 at several points. 

Welcome to the PB, by the way. This is a confessional board. So it can be expected that some here will give a caution when discussing certain authors who teach contrary to the confession. (And sometimes where a teaching diverges from traditional Reformed teaching (whether Baptist or Presbyterian) may not be immediately apparent.) 

I'd Google "1689 Federalism" if you are looking for confessional Baptist literature that explains how it differs from Reformed paedobaptist covenant theology, New Covenant/Progressive Covenantal theology and various forms of dispensationalism. There are a few threads here about it, but more information can probably be found elsewhere. 

I see that you have done some work for the Banner of Truth, so you're likely familiar with some of the authors I'll name. But with regard to Scottish Presbyterians, if you like M'Cheyne, then I'm sure you'll also like his friends Horatius and Andrew Bonar. Thomas Boston's _Human Nature in its Fourfold State_ is also highly recommended, as is the Marrow of Modern Divinity. The latter didn't technically originate from Scotland, but it had a massive impact after Boston republished it. Sinclair Ferguson's recent book "The Whole Christ" is an excellent introduction to that controversy and theology, from what I understand.


----------



## py3ak (Jun 21, 2016)

I thought the question was about the Rev. James Hamilton, D.D. who died in 1867. Unfortunately, I am not acquainted with his writings.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Jun 21, 2016)

I went to church with him for a few years when he lived in Houston. He is a good teacher. But, I doubt he would fully hold to the 1689. He is pre-mil for sure. I haven't read any of his books.


----------



## dgumprecht (Jun 21, 2016)

py3ak said:


> I thought the question was about the Rev. James Hamilton, D.D. who died in 1867. Unfortunately, I am not acquainted with his writings.



I am sorry for not being clearer with my original post—you are correct, I am referring to James Hamilton and these works: https://www.tentmaker.org.uk/product/sets/works-of-james-hamilton-6-vols/

I thought my reference to the Erskines might have made that clearer—I am sorry!


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Jun 22, 2016)

> I am sorry for not being clearer with my original post—you are correct, I am referring to James Hamilton and these works: https://www.tentmaker.org.uk/product...milton-6-vols/
> 
> I thought my reference to the Erskines might have made that clearer—I am sorry!



Nevermind. I didn't go to church with that guy. Looks like someone I should read.


----------

