High King of Heaven by Dean Davis

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have to check it out. What did you like the most?
I’m working through it slowly and reading with a friend who reads a little slower than I do because she’s a young mom with lots of demands from her kiddos.

It really thoroughly handles the hermeneutical method behind each of the four major eschatological views, which is fascinating. But it’s a long one and it takes a more deliberate reading. I do recommend it.
 
I found The High King of Heaven to be a fruitful read, and would particularly recommend Biblical Eschatology by Jonathan Menn, as well. Neither is a quick, light read. :)
 
Sorry for just now getting back to this! Thanks to everyone who answered the question about the position Davis takes.

And many thanks to you @Jerusalem Blade for your original recommendation of this book in previous threads.
 
I just wanted to let y’all know that this book 2.99 on Kindle right now on Amazon. I’m thoroughly enjoying it and thankful for the suggestion to read it from this thread. It’s a must read.

https://www.amazon.com/High-King-He...en&qid=1578185843&sprefix=high+king+of&sr=8-2
Thanks for the recommendation. I just purchased it. I was planning to read through "Foundations of the Christian Faith" by James Montgomery Boice but I might go back and forth between Boice's and Davis's book, reading maybe a couple sections at a time. I haven't made up my mind yet. There is just too many good choices on what to read and not enough time though. It seems like a steal for the price and with Sam Storms endorsement it must be worth the investment.
 
Thanks for the recommendation. I just purchased it. I was planning to read through "Foundations of the Christian Faith" by James Montgomery Boice but I might go back and forth between Boice's and Davis's book, reading maybe a couple sections at a time. I haven't made up my mind yet. There is just too many good choices on what to read and not enough time though. It seems like a steal for the price and with Sam Storms endorsement it must be worth the investment.
I know! So many books and so little time! I’m still slowing working through this one because it’s really long. Kim Riddlebarger’s “A Case for Amillennialism” has still been my favorite on the subject, though. Davis’s is spectacular, but I find myself recommending Riddlebarger more often to those who prefer a more accessible read. Both are very much worth reading.
 
I know! So many books and so little time! I’m still slowing working through this one because it’s really long. Kim Riddlebarger’s “A Case for Amillennialism” has still been my favorite on the subject, though. Davis’s is spectacular, but I find myself recommending Riddlebarger more often to those who prefer a more accessible read. Both are very much worth reading.
I agree with you on Kim Riddlebarger’s “A Case for Amillennialism”. I Have the 1st edition that came out in 2003 and also the expanded edition from 2013 with Micheal Horton's forward. I've read it twice. It's got a lot of info packed in it for It's size and it does seem like if someone wants a good introductory explanation of Amillenialism that is a great choice. I also have Sam Storms "Kingdom Come", Anthony A. Hoekema's "The Bible and the Future" and Cornelis P. Venema's "The Promise of the Future".
There is also a substantial collection of free mp3 lectures on monergism.com that Kim Riddlebarger gave that has a large amount of the same info in his book, but that you might still enjoy.
https://www.monergism.com/legacy/mt/mp3/amillennialism-101-mp3-series-kim-riddlebarger
 
I agree with you on Kim Riddlebarger’s “A Case for Amillennialism”. I Have the 1st edition that came out in 2003 and also the expanded edition from 2013 with Micheal Horton's forward. I've read it twice. It's got a lot of info packed in it for It's size and it does seem like if someone wants a good introductory explanation of Amillenialism that is a great choice. I also have Sam Storms "Kingdom Come", Anthony A. Hoekema's "The Bible and the Future" and Cornelis P. Venema's "The Promise of the Future".
There is also a substantial collection of free mp3 lectures on monergism.com that Kim Riddlebarger gave that has a large amount of the same info in his book, but that you might still enjoy.
https://www.monergism.com/legacy/mt/mp3/amillennialism-101-mp3-series-kim-riddlebarger
Thanks! I have read Hoekema's, too and loved it as well. His was actually the first I read. I also listened to Voddie Bauchum's Revelation sermon series and it was fantastic. Riddlebarger's mp3s are on my list of things to do someday. I'm currently listening to Beale's NT Biblical Theology class from Westminster, which is available on Apple Podcasts. It's basically a course on Inaugurated Eschatology.
 
Thanks! I have read Hoekema's, too and loved it as well. His was actually the first I read. I also listened to Voddie Bauchum's Revelation sermon series and it was fantastic. Riddlebarger's mp3s are on my list of things to do someday. I'm currently listening to Beale's NT Biblical Theology class from Westminster, which is available on Apple Podcasts. It's basically a course on Inaugurated Eschatology.
Riddlebarger should change the name of his book to Closed Case for Amillenialism as far as I’m concerned. Triumph of the Lamb by Dennis Johnson is another great commentary on Revelation which inspired Riddlebarger.
 
I literally just ordered Riddlebarger’s “A Case for Amillennialism" this morning from WTS Bookstore. This thread has me even more excited to read it now!
 
Kim, I also picked up a copy of The High King of Heaven for my Kindle on the basis of several recommendations seen on the board, particularly of @Jerusalem Blade. How could I not, especially for $2.99? :)

I finished Sam Storms' book, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative, last week, which was my first foray into eschatology not derived from dispensational thought, and am currently several chapters deep in Davis' book. The most unique aspect of the book is its exploration of the heremeneutics behind differing eschatological views. Given that there is a plurality of interpretations from faithful Christians on eschatology, I reckon that the differences are chiefly rooted in hermeneutics and presuppositions rather than source material. In other words, we read the same Scriptures but interpret differently. Thus, Davis' approach is particularly appealing because it provides the groundwork for understanding the development of eschatological perspectives from their foundational elements.

I bought a hard copy for my wife as well, since she has a growing interest in this topic and we are surrounded by evangelical dispensationalism, making it difficult to discuss current events from a Biblical worldview without understanding various eschatological frameworks.
 
we are surrounded by evangelical dispensationalism, making it difficult to discuss current events from a Biblical worldview without understanding various eschatological frameworks.
I can totally relate! I'm in West Virginia. Apart from my own church and about one other that I know of in the area, the majority of church options here are IFB (Dispensational and a weird brand of Arminian that believe in eternal security) or NAR style Charismatic (think Bethel Church). The theology here in Appalachia is just terrible. One of my pastors calls it "folk theology" and he hits the nail on the head.

Even within my own church, there is still a heavy Dispensational leaning from most of the members. Not because they've studied it for themselves, but because they've only ever been taught the one viewpoint. So I have to be careful who I share my eschatological convictions with, even there.
 
I can totally relate! I'm in West Virginia. Apart from my own church and about one other that I know of in the area, the majority of church options here are IFB (Dispensational and a weird brand of Arminian that believe in eternal security) or NAR style Charismatic (think Bethel Church). The theology here in Appalachia is just terrible. One of my pastors calls it "folk theology" and he hits the nail on the head.

Even within my own church, there is still a heavy Dispensational leaning from most of the members. Not because they've studied it for themselves, but because they've only ever been taught the one viewpoint. So I have to be careful who I share my eschatological convictions with, even there.
Glad to see someone else from WV here on this board. We certainly do have a strange mix of bad theology in this state. I start many of my posts with "in my part of the country" because it's hard for others who aren't from here to relate. I know of a couple reformed churches in north central WV. That's out of hundreds of churches!
I call the theology in the area a hybrid pragmatic/Pentecostal/dispensational/fundamentalist. Anything but historic or orthodox, yet we're the weird ones!
 
I call the theology in the area a hybrid pragmatic/Pentecostal/dispensational/fundamentalist. Anything but historic or orthodox, yet we're the weird ones!
Exactly! I’m in the southwestern part of the state - in between Charleston and Huntington. My husband and I grew up here, moved away to the south for 15 years and returned 2 years ago due to aging parents.

The Lord redeemed us here in an IFB/KJVO church, then moved us away 6 months later and we’re SO thankful. We discovered Reformed theology while we lived elsewhere, which may never have happened if we had continued to live here, due to the theological climate.
 
I can totally relate! I'm in West Virginia. Apart from my own church and about one other that I know of in the area, the majority of church options here are IFB (Dispensational and a weird brand of Arminian that believe in eternal security) or NAR style Charismatic (think Bethel Church). The theology here in Appalachia is just terrible. One of my pastors calls it "folk theology" and he hits the nail on the head.

Even within my own church, there is still a heavy Dispensational leaning from most of the members. Not because they've studied it for themselves, but because they've only ever been taught the one viewpoint. So I have to be careful who I share my eschatological convictions with, even there.

I grew up in an IFB, dispensational church. I can also relate to the theological oddities that can develop in this setting, even from those who are faithful to the Word of God. What is especially bothersome is that the strength of those convictions can hamper if not eliminate the possibility of exploring theology when alternative views attempting to respect the Biblical data do not conform to the traditional understanding.

I have heard Calvinism declared heresy, any view of the Revelation that is not strictly literal and chronological accused of liberal spiritualizing, and the assertion that the separation of Israel and the Church is an essential element of a proper Biblical hermeneutic, without which you cannot understand Scripture. These are only a few examples, but they can function as barriers to fruitful discussion.
 
I have heard Calvinism declared heresy, any view of the Revelation that is not strictly literal and chronological accused of liberal spiritualizing,
Yep. Our pastor has been labeled a heretic by some in the community here due to Calvinism. And I'm getting ready to teach my ladies Bible study class Matthew 24 next week, so things are going to come out. I might be run out of the church :hunter:
 
Yep. Our pastor has been labeled a heretic by some in the community here due to Calvinism. And I'm getting ready to teach my ladies Bible study class Matthew 24 next week, so things are going to come out. I might be run out of the church :hunter:

Kim, I pray that you will rest in the sure Word of God during this time! I think that your greatest tool will be a faithful, verse-by-verse exposition of the Scriptures. I believe this is the single greatest counter to erroneous theology. What I have consistently noted is that those who are not careful with the text may be persuasive by force of words, but lack the consistency to weave a comprehensive theology. In other words, they may be strong, or at least appear so, in discrete theological units (e.g., eschatology, soteriology), but they are relatively incapacitated when it comes to tying them together with doctrinal consistency.

While good exposition will not necessarily fix improper conclusions immediately, it is the power and authority of the Scriptures plainly read and interpreted in light of their grammatical and historical context which the Holy Spirit uses to change the heart.

We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church [of God] to a high and reverend esteem of the holy scripture, and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole, (which is to give all glory to God,) the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the word of God; yet, notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts. - WCF 1.5 [LBCF 1.5]
 
I think that your greatest tool will be a faithful, verse-by-verse exposition of the Scriptures. I believe this is the single greatest counter to erroneous theology.
Thank you so much for the prayers! I couldn't agree with you more. I've been taking the ladies through Matthew since last September, and I've been helping them to see some things for themselves and most of them are excited because no one has ever taught them how to study the Word on their own, rather than relying only on commentaries. I think they're ready to approach Matthew 24. There are a few who will only see what they've always been taught. But there are probably more that will let the text speak for itself. That's exciting to watch as a teacher.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top