Most formidable theologian from "the other side?"

Discussion in 'Revelation & Eschatology' started by BayouHuguenot, Mar 12, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    If you were to name a theologian or biblical scholar who represents the most cogent "counter-case" to your own eschatology, who would it be? For me--depending on where I am at the moment--the following:

    1. If I were a premillennialist, then most formidable amillennialist on a popular level would be Riddlebarger. On a scholarly level, of course, Beale.

    2. If I were an amillennialist facing postmils, I would probably say David Chilton.
    2a. If I were an amillennialist facing premils, on a popular level it would be Paul Henebury. On a scholarly level it would be either Bock or Blaising.
    3. If I were postmil, the same.
     
  2. Gforce9

    Gforce9 Puritan Board Junior

    Darth Vader, for sure! His "arguments" squeeze the life right it of you.....
     
  3. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    For the historical premil, or premil in general, both GE Ladd and Robert Mounce would be informative, and Anthony Hoekama was recognized as good for A Mil position, and Postmil, that depends on if one tied into it Theonomy /Reconstructionism or not.
     
  4. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I meant, if you held to position x, which theologian from position y would be hardest to refute?
     
  5. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable Staff Member

    For me it would be Hoeksema's defense of supralapsarianism versus my own lapsarianism.
     
  6. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    When I held to supra it was Turretin's defense of infralapsarianism that made me think the most.
     
  7. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    For me as an Amil, Blaising and Ladd are the most formidable, as they attempt to take most seriously the symbolism that is present in Revelation. I have very little patience for an overly literal interpretation of Revelation, as if "literalness" equals "responsible exegesis."
     
  8. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable Staff Member

    Indeed.
     
  9. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    Which of the main positions regarding eschatology would the so called realized eschatology fall under?
     
  10. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    David, realized eschatology is a part of several eschatological positions. Realized simply means "stuff that was predicted that some believe has now been fulfilled." Some realized eschatology, of course, is essential to any biblical eschatology. We all believe, with Paul, (I hope!) that promises of the Old Testament have been fulfilled in Christ. However, the question usually revolves around when the main "stuff" of Revelation is going to happen. So, your partial and full preterists, for example, have a much more developed realized eschatology than do the idealists or the historicists. Futurists (most of your Dispensational's and premills fall under this category) have the least amount of realized eschatology, except when it comes to Jeremiah 31.
     
  11. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Much of Blaising and Bock's book on Progressive Dispensationalism was good. NOt sure about the land-promises to Israel, but they do understand "already not yet."
     
  12. Ben Zartman

    Ben Zartman Puritan Board Freshman

    I think it would be hardest to defend any position against the Rev. Wizner, with whose posts here I have had some disagreements, though I never interacted with him.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Amen Amen x 1
    • List
  13. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    I have read where some have claimed that Premil Covenant and progressive Dispensational are settling down in a middle position, trying to accommodate both sides.
     
  14. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    There is some overlap, but the former usually hold to post trib and the latter pre trib.
     
  15. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    There does seem to be somewhat of a loosening of the Pretrib among some though in Dispensational circles.
     
  16. earl40

    earl40 Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Scary funny right there. :)
     
  17. KGP

    KGP Puritan Board Freshman

    Any formidable charismatic or continuationist theologians come to mind?



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  18. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable Staff Member

    F.F. Bruce, although NT scholar is likely more appropriate than theologian here.
     
  19. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    Gordon Fee, Dr Grudem and Dr DA Carson.
     
  20. timmopussycat

    timmopussycat Puritan Board Junior

    Was Bruce a continuationist or charismatic? I thought he was PB.
     
  21. timmopussycat

    timmopussycat Puritan Board Junior

    Is DA Carson a continuationist or charismatic?
     
  22. Stephen L Smith

    Stephen L Smith Puritan Board Junior

    He was Plymouth Brethren (Open Brethren)
     
  23. Ed Walsh

    Ed Walsh Puritan Board Junior

    As one leaning towards a Postmill view, I have started to read The High King of Heaven, by Dean Davis. From what I have read so far of Amill Baptist Davis, he seems to be a formidable foe.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2018
  24. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I wouldn't call him a charismatic. He is open to some kind of continuationist exegesis. Or maybe he is just critiquing Macarthur's hatchet jobs, which makes people seem continuationist.
     
  25. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    He and Dr Grudem would both allow for some of the so called sign gifts to still operate in some some fashion, as in the gift of prophecy.
     
  26. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Grudem is an open charismatic. There is no "allowing" on his part. He openly promotes it. But both would reject the category of "sign" gifts
     
  27. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    The gifts both would see still operating would be in the gift of prophecy though mainly.
     
  28. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I can only speak for Grudem, but I doubt he prioritizes one gift over the others. No doubt tongues and healing, too.
     
  29. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    One of the guys that keeps me from going full-blown amillennial is Alan Kurschner. His "pre-wrath" view is quite sophisticated and avoids many of the usual pitfalls of premillennialism. And he is technically a skilled debater. Meaning, he knows how debating mechanics works.
    https://www.alankurschner.com/
     
  30. Pilgrim

    Pilgrim Puritan Board Doctor

    If we're talking about actual books, (hopefully Dr. Henebury will get his into print soon with all the irons he has in the fire) I'd say Michael Vlach on issues like the kingdom and "replacement theology" and Matt Waymeyer on things like combating Riddlebarger et al on "Two Age" eschatology. Dr. Henebury recently said that Vlach's new book on the kingdom is the one (i.e. first) book he'd give to anyone wanting to know the Dispensational approach to Scripture. I will say that Dr. Henebury's take on the Nicene Council's 95 theses against dispensationalism pretty much shook what was left of any amil conviction to the core about 10 years ago, but in retrospect, trying to come up with 95 theses usually results in advancing arguments that are either not that strong or that are just repetition. But it just about made a dispensationalist out of me until I started reading some older covenant premil writers. But I need to begin a more in-depth study soon. As far as Bock and Blaising go, I don't know. Perhaps I wrongly see that is mainly an intra-dispensational squabble. Saucy is another one. I've got most of those books and either need to read them or get rid of them, as I noted in another thread. Vlach seems to be sort of in between Progressive Dispensationalism and the "revised" school of Ryrie, McClain, etc. He's closer to the trads on things like the kingdom but doesn't seem to have any interest in dispensations based on what I've read of him so far.

    For amil, I suspect Hoekema and his more "earthy" or "material" brand of amil may be more persuasive to me than Riddlebarger or Storms at this point, as Hoekema does more to present a "positive" view rather than mostly focusing the guns at LaHaye and Lindsey, who I've never followed to begin with. (The kind of amil that I was exposed to early on among certain Calvinistic Baptists basically viewed the kingdom as being an entirely spiritual matter and was the kind of thing that postmils and premils alike charged with being almost gnostic. I understand Hoekema represented a clear move away from that. Waldron has also acknowledged this tendency among older amil writers, and this was one of the few concessions he made in his review of Horner's "Future Israel.")

    For postmil, maybe Chilton or some of the older writers from the 19th Century and prior.
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2018
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page