Understanding Dispensationalists

by Vern Sheridan Poythress

Vern Poythress believes that dialogue is possible between dispensationalists and covenant theologians. This second edition adds a postscript in which Poythress responds to feedback from dispensational readers.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Christianity, Religion, Nonfiction, Biblical Studies, Church History

144 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1993

About the author

Vern Sheridan Poythress was born in 1946 in Madera, California, where he lived with his parents Ransom H. Poythress and Carola N. Poythress and his older brother Kenneth R. Poythress. After teaching mathematics for a year at Fresno State College (now California State University at Fresno), he became a student at Westminster Theological Seminary, where he earned an M.Div. (1974) and a Th.M. in apologetics (1974). He received an M.Litt. in New Testament from University of Cambridge (1977) and a Th.D. in New Testament from the University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa (1981).

He has been teaching in New Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia since 1976. In 1981 he was ordained as a teaching elder in the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod, which has now merged with the Presbyterian Church in America.

More information about his teaching at Westminster can be found at the Westminster Seminary website.

Dr. Poythress studied linguistics and Bible translation at the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Norman Oklahoma in 1971 and 1972, and taught linguistics at the Summer Institute of Linguistics in the summers of 1974, 1975, and 1977. He has published books on Christian philosophy of science, theological method, dispensationalism, biblical law, hermeneutics, Bible translation, and Revelation. A list of publications is found on this website.

Dr. Poythress married his wife Diane in 1983, and they have two children, Ransom and Justin. He has side interests in science fiction, string figures, volleyball, and computers.

The family lived on a farm until he was five years old. When he was nine years old he made a public commitment to Christ and was baptized in Chowchilla First Baptist Church, Chowchilla, California. The family later moved to Fresno, California, and he graduated from Bullard High School in Fresno.

He earned a B.S. in mathematics from California Institute of Technology (1966) and a Ph.D. in mathematics from Harvard University (1970).

Reviews

[Russell Sigler · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is an excellent example of how to deal charitably with those across the theological spectrum. Poythress points out the common ground among Dispensationalists and covenant theologians before addressing our many differences. Very helpful read.

[John Boyne · Rating 5 out of 5]

Understanding Dispensationalists is an excellent, short introduction to the theology of dispensation. Poythress writes from a covenant theology background but works to see the theological questions from both sides. He does a good job of distinguishing the more classical dispensationalism with the more modified form that is largely held today. The biggest point that I took from it was understanding the distinct roles between the nation of Israel and the church and how to apply biblical prophecy to those two groups. I found the book immensely helpful for people who haven't had the opportunity to study theses issues much and serves as a good introduction.

[Robert · Rating 5 out of 5]

This will hopefully be a literal review of Vern S. Poythress’ book Understanding Dispensationalists the second edition which was published in 1994 by P & R Publishing. By literal I mean that it will be a straight forward, plain, normal, non fictional, containing no symbols or typologies that may allude to secondary meanings and the such, review that gets to the core of the subject matter which Poythress writes. If and when you read the book I hope you’ll understand that opening better. For those of you who have not read the book yet: It’s a joke, which I hope you will appreciate. I find that after reading any complex argument in a book that if I’m able to formulate any type of humor based on the subject matter of the book I, at least, think that I have some grasp of the argument. But (there’s always a but), since this review is part of a grade for a course and if I don’t get an “A” then this review is not “literal” but is symbolic of the perfect work which it has not yet attained but will attain in the future eschaton and therefore the grade I receive should reflect this future fulfillment and I should receive an “A.” With that type of circular reason I can not help but to get an “A” so I’m happy. (Yea I couldn’t resist).

Seriously though, that is the heart of Poythress’ book, open it up to the center and we find this statement at the beginning of Chapter 8: “In a sense nearly all the problems associated with the dispensationalist-nondispensationalist conflict are buried beneath the question of literal interpretation” (pg. 78). So if you want to understand dispensationalists you need to understand the arguments over how to interpret the Bible—hermeneutics, between dispensationalists and nondispensationalists. If you’re not familiar with these terms yet don’t worry, Poythress contributes about the first quarter of the book setting the stage by defining the players and a short history of the development of dispensationalism. A short history maybe all you want for now and it is all you really need to get your arms around the subject matter. Now you can’t interpret that last sentence in a flat literal sense or you’ll think that dispensationalism is an object that you can lift and not an abstract concept; but you must allow for the context to dictate the literal interpretation. But more importantly since I am the author of this review I can tell you directly I am using a metaphor and I hope you know what “flat” interpretation is now before you get to it in the book.

Before he begins Poythress opens with an argument for the need to have dispensationalist and nondispensationalists to listen to each other. Both can’t be right or one is mostly right and by implication the other mostly wrong, which is more likely what Poythress actually believes, so both sides need to listen to the other in order to reform their own position if warranted. At this point I thought Poythress was going to argue some synthesis between the two but I found that he holds a reformed covenantal position so this book I find is written more so to those in Covenant Theology so that they can better understand dispensationalism. In this primary objective I find Poythress does a reasonable job. And as with all books that are involved in a dialogue between two opposing views it is also written to dispensationalists who would be reading to see what the other side is saying about them so this becomes the reason for Poythress to take time to expose the virtues of listening to the arguments and not making ad hominem attacks with each other. In this respect I was happy that Poythress didn’t engage in ad hominem attacks particularly against John Darby which I hear quite often in polemics against dispensationalism.

Dispensationalist means varies things within dispensationalism. Poythress, as I said is a nondispensationalist, examines what he calls D-Theologians. D-Theologians have a common view of parallel but separate roles of Israel and the Church. A particular hermeneutic is developed where Israel is viewed as earthy and the Church spiritual. In the broad sense a dispensationalist is anyone who recognized distinct epochs, or dispensations, in God’s government of the world. Poythress argues there is a second sense of the term (dispensation) that D-Theologians use to apply only to their particular eschatology and because of such the belief in dispensations has little to do with D-Theologians. Poythress suggests alternative names for D-Theologians dispensationalism such as: “Darbyism,” after John Darby who is considered the founder; “Dual Destinationism,” highlighting the distinctive paths and final destination held within classical dispensationalism; and “Addressee Bifurcation,” because dispensationalism has been modified to the extent that some theologians don’t maintain a separate parallel path for the Church & Israel. Poythress defines classic dispensationalism as D-Theologians who practice the hermeneutical separation between the Church & Israel and modified dispensationalism for the others. Frankly I didn’t see the need to define and use the term D-Theologians since beyond Chapter 1 I never saw the word used again, only indirectly in the use of “classical dispensationalism.”

Poythress argues that dispensationalism arose at a time when orthodox theology did not emphasis the historical and progressive nature of Biblical Revelation and its genuine concern over the grace of God and the second coming of Christ. The founder of dispensationalism, John Darby (1800-1882) lived after the beginning of the Enlightenment and during the rise of scientism, incorporated in Darwinism and liberal theology. Poythress doesn’t really engage this fact which I would have been interested in and his thoughts on how he thinks they might have been an impetus for it. Regardless its beginning is based on a defense of Christianity which orthodox theology didn’t appear to be addressing. In Darby Poythress finds these distinctives:

1. a sharp distinction between law and grace.
2. a vertical distinction between “earthly” and “heavenly” peoples of God.
3. a literal interpretation of prophecy tying fulfillment with the Jew at an “earthly” level.
4. a strong premillenial emphasis.
5. a negative, separatist evaluation of the existing institutional church.

Darby lived in England and dispensationalism came to the United States through the literature of Darby, through prophetic conferences (Niagara), and particularly through the Scofield reference Bible. America was more attracted to the eschatology of dispensationalism then the separation of Israel and the Church. C. I. Scofield is the next major figure in the progress of dispensationalism and in Scofield Poythress identifies four main differences between Scofield and other Evangelicals:

1. A literal approach to interpreting the Bible.
2. A sharp distinction between Israel and the Church as two peoples of God.
3. Division of history into epochs (dispensations) which are: Innocence, Conscience, Human Government, Promise, Law, Grace, and the Kingdom.
4. A pretribulational rapture.

Since Scofield separates Israel and the Church and this separation therefore requires a bifurcation in hermeneutics Scofield introduces a history/prophecy distinction in his hermeneutics rather than a meaning/application distinction. Historical passages speak about what literally happened in the past and yet they have an allegorical or spiritual significance. In the same sense prophetic passages also have a literal future fulfillment, which can only be fulfilled by Israel, and a spiritual fulfillment which is only by the Church. This spiritualization of prophetic passages only occurs where the NT authors apply OT prophesies to the Church; otherwise, Schofield holds only to a hard literalism towards prophecy.

At this point Poythress discusses variations of dispensationalism but these variations all center on debate over this “hard” literalism. Poythress notes that not all dispensationalists are hardliners and that some read the Bible as if it speaks directly to them and they can apply it to their lives; these Poythress labels as “applicatory” dispensationalists. Poythress provides a pragmatic argument here as to why applicatory dispensationalists should join nondispensationalists against hardliners because if they are wrong then their interpretation of the Bible, which leaves very little for the Church today, would be greatly destructive to them and the Church. While I understand the pastoral motives Poythress may have in mind with this type of argument it really isn’t a proper rejoinder in the argument.

Poythress goes over the variations in dispensationalism and compares their dispensations against covenant theology but the heart of the issue, and the majority of the book, is his arguments against the literal interpretation of the classical dispensationalists. In a nut shell words do have meanings and those meanings change over time and over cultures and it is important to understand the correct grammatical-historical usage of any piece of ancient writing to come to understand what the author intended it to mean, and how it can be applied to us or not. In this part of the book is really where I sensed Poythress was talking to and arguing against dispensationalists especially in arguing against their use of circular reasoning and their imprecise use of the word “literal.” Here I thought Poythress did a very good job of using New Testament passages in Hebrews and Revelation that effectively argued against the dispensational apparent randomness in the usage, or misusage, of a literal interpretation that seemed to be used when and where it was convenient for them to use.

It would have been interesting if Poythress had applied Barth’s concept of the three-fold form of the Word of God in his argument against dispensationalism; maybe in his next book.

[Mitchell Traver · Rating 4 out of 5]

Potentially the most valuable thing to gain from reading this book is a great example of what charitable interaction looks like. Especially in theological disputes, I don’t find a lot of Christians who take the time to understand and articulate those in other camps in a way that the other Christians would say, “yes, that’s a fair representation of my position.” Much easier is straw-manning and cherry-picking because thorough engagement requires more patience than what most people possess.

Aside from that lesson, the book itself is clear and short. If you’re not *really* interested in the topic, the book will be too much. But if you really want to dive in to Classic Dispensationalism with a Covenantal commentary, this is the book for you. Dr. Poythress did a great job in several respects.

[Zack Hudson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A wonderfully charitable reading of, and response to, a theological tradition which rarely gets a fair shake. Perhaps an updated work of the same spirit is needed in response to modified forms of dispensationalism, as classical dispensationalism appears more and more to recede back into the shadow from whence it came.

Dr. Poythress is the final boss of the Left Behind movie tie-in game.

[Adam Nesmith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good book overall and does a good job of defining some key areas of disagreements between covenantal and dispensational theologians. I thought his section on defining what “literal” means as one of the books best sections as well as an early chapter where laid out the issue of prophetic fulfillment. My biggest complaint is that the book seems overly optimistic in terms of the two sides “meeting in the middle”. If you read Paul Karleen’s review of the book and Poythress response to that review, you can see that there are fundamental disagreements at the systematic level that will never go away. And in some ways they shouldn’t because those disagreements are actually distinctive as of each systematic understanding of scripture.

So read this book to get a high level “lay of the land” in terms of some of the main disagreements that occur between covenant and dispensational theologians. But ironically, after reading the book, I am less confident that some “meeting in the middle” of the tow positions will ever occur, particularly in terms of Presbyterian covenant theology. Maybe 1689 particular Baptist flavor covenant theology could end up meeting in the middle with progressive dispensationalists, but beyond that, I have my doubts.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read my Dad's copy of this, so I didn't underline or highlight, and I didn't absorb as much. I appreciate his acknowledgement that a "literal" interpretation of Scripture is attractive in the face of Darwinism's undercutting of Scripture's doctrine of creation. Of course, then he took quite a bit of time explaining that Dispensationalists "literal" translation is hard to define (and they themselves don't do it, or apply it consistently). Another big point was that because of our union in Christ, Jews and Gentiles cannot be viewed as people with two parallel-but-separate destinies or spiritual benefits. You can read it online for free.

[Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a must read for dispensationalists and covenant theologians alike.

Understanding the history of dispensationalism was very helpful, and he goes over it in a brief and interesting way (not getting bogged down in boring dates and names), showing why the dispensationalists sought to create a new system as opposed to covenant theology. It was very helpful in understanding not only "classic dispensationalists", but also modified (aka progressive) dispensationalists. I really appreciate his honesty and obvious understanding and sympathy of dispensationalists in all of their variations. Mr. Poythress avoids over-generalization, and gives some very helpful terms to use in distinguishing between the differing views within dispensationalism, which I found extremely helpful.

I also really appreciated the tone of his book. It's a great example of how to winsomely and straightforwardly argue a position, being honest about what the differences actually are, and clearly and kindly pointing out discrepancies. He does a great job of conceding all the points that he can, and pointing out where the dispensationalists have a valid concern, but then showing how they do not themselves do not escape falling into the traps they try to avoid. I think this would make a great book to give to any dispensationalist because of the way in which Mr. Poythress manages to avoid confrontational language and attitudes towards those who hold this belief, while giving a fair and honest look at it.

Although some of this went over my head (I think I will need to revisit this one when I have a better grasp on the dispensational/covenant issue, and especially the eschatology issue, to fully appreciate what he says) I found this to be a very helpful read!

Mr. Poythress comes from a Amillenial and non-theonomist position, which is why I rated this with only four stars. Still, I did not notice this in reading his book (although it may have just gone over my head). All that I did understand I agreed with, but there may have been ideas which I did not pick up on, which is why I cannot give it my 100% endorsement.

I was a little disappointed that he didn't really get into the more moderate dispensational views, but mainly focused on the classic dispensational position as held by Darby, Scofield, Ryrie, and others. It still lays good foundations for discussing those views as well, though.

[Wallace · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book that will have a limited readership but is useful for protagonists of the competing eschatological views to read.

The author, Vern S. Poythress is a covenantal theologian and therefore sees Old Testament Israel replaced by the New Testament church. In this work, he is trying to explain and understand the variant issue with dispensationalism, which classically holds that Israel and the Church are separate peoples of God.

His primary focus is on hermeneutics, the nature of prophecy, the 'last trumpet', the book of Hebrews, typology, and fulfillment of OT promises and prophecies in Jesus Christ. His points are fairly and considerately made and the book has a most conciliatory tone. However, the contents are a bit tense and reading it was not as conducive to understanding as I had hoped.

Certainly, I am happy to have read it, for my own edification and learning purposes.

However, IMHO only a 3-star read!

[Alan Fuller · Rating 2 out of 5]

Poythress takes a look at Dispensationalism from a covenantal premillennialist point of view. Dispensationalists take pride in literal interpretation, but what that means is confusing. Poythress discusses grammatical-historical interpretation, flat interpretation, plain interpretation, and other types of interpretation. He concludes literal would best be thought of as the opposite of figurative.

"In the meantime, what is “literal” interpretation? It is a confusing term, capable of being used to beg many of the questions at stake in the interpretation of the Bible." - Poythress

Early dispensationalist's restricted literal fulfillment to prophecy, with an earthly fulfillment in Israel and a “spiritual” application to the church. Neither Darby or Scofield had theological training, but both had worked as lawyers.

[J. Alfred · Rating 3 out of 5]

A high level of difficulty, but healthful. Broccoli for your spirit.
Poythress gently untangles some of the real difficulties between Dispensationalists of various stripes and Covenant Theologians, and suggests ways that those can be thought through. And he suggests that we should think through the issues, rather than just retreat into our little interpretive camps:

“But we must ask ourselves, ‘Are we seeking another security than that of being one of Christ’s sheep?’ Being a sheep means being secure, not because one has all the answers, but because one is in Christ’s care.”
“The Bible is able to protect us from going astray. We do not have to cling tightly to our previous beliefs in order to be safe. In fact, we will not be safe if we are not open to having the Bible challenge even views that we deeply cherish.”

Eat some more broccoli, oh my soul.

[William Schrecengost · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very good overview of some of the problems with the dispensational system. He is very charitable and approaches the issue with the goal of try to get you to understand their view so that you can have better interactions with those holding to the dispensationalist view. I think he is correct that the primary issue between dispensationalism and covenant theology is that of hermeneutics and Bible interpretation. We usually approach it from an eschatological perspective, but the problems are deeper than that. Poythress helps flesh those problems out in the later portion of the book and that gets more technical and harder to follow along with. It was still very good, but it's more advanced to be a good introduction.

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

More current, charitable, and irenic than Gerstner's Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth and therefore less fun, but still valuable for dialoguing with dispensationalists.

[Camden Garrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent and charitable discussion on dispensationalism. Classic dispensationalistsm's "literal" hermeneutic prevents them from seeing the glorious prophetic fulfillments in the New Testament era. Of all the material I've read on dispensationalism, this laid out the system most simply!

[Austin Cox · Rating 3 out of 5]

Irenic

[Nathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very well done study. The author is perhaps the humblest and fairest opponent to dispensationalism I have read. He consistently gives their statements the benefit of the doubt, contra (for instance) Kimbro's The Gospel According to Dispensationalism. [However, I highly recommend Kimbro's later work, Not As a Theif.] Poythress fights, but always as a gentleman, and provides valuable lessons applicable to a broad range of theological debates. Here are a few that stood out to me:
- Don't respond too hastily. Many anti-this or anti-that books (even some by people who formerly held to "this" or "that"--as in Scot McKnight's book on baptism) make the mistake of not taking their opponents seriously enough to try to understand what they believe, why they believe it, or what they mean by what they say. You can always tell when someone hasn't done their homework on what you believe--and they can tell when you haven't. Poythress gives dispensationalism the courtesy of trying to understand it, its modes of communication, and its reasons. I think he does reasonably well. His description certainly matched in form and emphasis the kind of dispensationalism I grew up with.
- Along with that, don't emphasize the more extravagant or outlandish expressions of your opponent's camp. Chances are they could do the same to your position. It may lead to an easy win, but a very shallow one. If you want to take on continuationist theology, for instance, deal with the Craig Keeners, or at least the Michael Browns, and not the Benny Hinns. There is certainly a time to deal with destructive error head on--for instance, to rescue those caught up in cult-like movements--but Hinn (for instance) would hardly be a fair target if your goal is to dismantle continuationism in total. Fighting weak opponents who specialize in discrediting themselves will probably lead to dependance on weak arguments--just enough to do the job. If you want to make strong arguments, take on strong opponents. Dispensationalism has certainly produced its fair share of eye-rolls. Poythress does not bother with these. Getting us to roll our eyes has no part in his arguments. He deals with serious-minded authors in serious-minded ways for a serious-minded audience.
- Lean in to assuming the most favorable understanding of your opponents statements [contra Kimbro's early work mentioned above].
- Not all lines of argument against a position are equally effective; less effective ones should not be pursued in most cases. Discernment and experience should clue us in to what is what.
- Large thought systems usually have inbuilt answers to objections that seem powerful and obvious to those outside the system. Take the time to find out how they have already responded to what you might think are obvious objections before raising them.
- Argue from common ground, rather than from your own system or unshared presuppositions. This kind of mistake has led Calvinists and Arminians to accuse each other of being necessarily universalists if they just followed their system to the logical end. Neither are right, and the argument only works by taking a piece of what their opponent says and combining it with one of their own presuppositions not shared by their opponent. The Calvinist sees that the Arminian believes Christ died for everyone, and since Christ effectually saves all that he dies for (the Calvinist's position), then Arminianism would mean everyone would be saved. On the other hand, the Arminian sees that the Calvinist believes that God will save all whom he desires to save, and since he desires all to be saved (the Arminian's position), then Calvinism would mean everyone would be saved. Whether you shake your head harder at one of those lines of thought than another is a likely clue to which way you lean, if you weren't already sure. :D
- Sometimes the head-on attack is less effective. I know this is true of my own migration away from King James Version Onlyism years ago. It wasn't arguments against the KJVO position that moved me. It was undermined by very different considerations of much greater importance in a Biblical framework.
- Rather than attacking an opponent where they are most wrong (in your judgment), sometimes the best approach is to encourage them where they are most right, or where developments within their system have a trajectory toward truth.
- Sometimes arguing specific Bible verses back and forth is not the most productive. (Read Poythress for explanation here.)
- Recognize that in many such debates, the difference is not between those who take Scripture seriously and those who don't (or those who take it less seriously). This happens in the credo- and paedo- positions regarding baptism, in the Calvinism and Arminianism debates, etc., where adherents of one position think it so obviously Scriptural that they assume their opponents must simply be ignorant of Scripture, or have a lower view of it. Poythress acknowledges that Dispensationalists for their part are definitely taking Scripture seriously. Conversely, he would serve Dispensational readers well by his own demonstration page after page that he himself takes Scripture quite seriously--as would Kimbro's later work.
- All of our theological systems are shaped by historical developments, whether the stage of development of hermeneutical thought, or the cultural situation of the church in the world at the time of a systems early development, or the personalities and circumstances of particular foundational thinkers.
- The goal may not be to make all our opponents to be replicas of ourself. While Poythress does not seem to be premillennial, he seemed content with the more realistic prospect of seeing dispensationalists become covenantal premillennialists rather than a full but unlikely conversion to his own system.

There are a couple things I found very helpful in this book:
- A reasonable and Scripturally based account of the "spiritualization" of promises made to Abraham and David.
- Though the basic continuity of the people of God before and after Christ was a position I did not need argument for, he nevertheless provided a very helpful way of making the presentation in terms that might help bring understanding to dispensationalists regarding where the differences are.
- The challenge to the use of the word "literal." Later classical Dispensationalists insist that their system naturally emerges from a literal reading of the Biblical text. But sometimes the meaning of literal is a bit vague, or seems rather too conveniently flexible. Poythress had helpful thoughts here.
- Lastly, he drew out what I had not known in all my years as a dispensationalist and after, unless I have merely forgotten it: that important early dispensationalists (Darby and Scofield) were less consistently "literal" in their hermeneutical process than their successors often claim to be.

If the issue of dispensational and covenantal theologies is one that interests you, then I would readily commend this book, perhaps not to persuade, but definitely to foster a more respectful dialog either direction. He is a model for us all.

[Joseph · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a very useful treatment on the topic.

Rather than getting into a scripture battle against dispensationalists, the book is much more theoretical. It explains how dispensationalism is read from (or read into) texts. Basically, Poythress takes all the little things you find wrong when you read a dispensationalist book (whether it is conceptual like Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism or writing on eschatology from the dispensationalist perspective like Tim lahaye's The Rapture), all the separate little things that pop up in your mind all jumbled and unorganized, and puts them into one clear, systematic treatment. It is very conceptual and only occasionally touches upon the biblical texts, and for that reason, it can be a little dry. However, if you have any interest in this topic (which every believer should), a work like this is very important.

Also, it is far less bitter and obnoxious than a lot of writings on eschatology, which is refreshing. He obviously is critical of dispensationalism, but he isn't a jerk about it. It is how Christian books should be.

It is very useful theologically and also sets a good example, and therefore I recomend it.

[Joseph · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an excellent book although brief. I think that one thing that really stood out for me was the spirit of the book. This book was written with grace and kindness towards those who hold to dispensationalism. I was actually encouraged to love those who don't hold to my theological positions from reading this book.
It also did a good job of explaining exactly what the system is, and where it came from. I thought the brief explanation of where Darby got his hermeneutic from was excellent.
This is a great book that gives a good start on the topic, with a good bibliography in the back.

[Rylan S. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent resource on understanding and interacting with dispensationalism. Poythress doesn't offer an in-depth defense of covenentalism but suggests some topics/passages of significance for both sides to discuss. Also really helpful in diffusing frustration related to the difficulty of the conversation.

[John Yelverton · Rating 2 out of 5]

Despite the misleading title, this was more of a book on how to apologetically argue with a dispensationalist. I understand as much about dispensationalism as I did before I started reading this book.

[John Gardner · Rating 4 out of 5]

When it comes to theological discussion, few topics stir up more controversy than eschatology. One thing at least seems certain to Christians of all eschatological persuasions: What we believe about the "End Times" is extremely important! As Christians, our hope is based on our understanding of Christ's victory and future return in glory, and so our interpretation of how and when this return will be manifested has a tremendous impact on how we articulate and practice our faith.

So why are there such widely varying accounts of the Biblical account of the future? How can theologians and laypeople read the same Scriptures yet interpret them so differently? Why, when two Christians are in total agreement about nearly every other doctrine of the faith, might they disagree so vehemently on the topic of eschatology that — in some instances — one might even cast doubt on the other's salvation?

These are some of the questions Vern Poythress — an amillenialist — hoped to address when he took a sabbatical from Westminster Theological Seminary in 1983 to spend a semester studying at Dallas Theological Seminary, a school founded for the propagation of dispensational theology .

Unlike so many books on eschatology which are written to promote or discredit a system of interpretation, this is a book written to unify believers. Poythress seeks to promote understanding and gracious dialogue between Christians with varying beliefs. The fact that many of this book's endorsements come from stalwart dispensationalists proves that this was a discussion long overdue, even when it was written more than twenty years ago. It is a much needed addition to the canon of theological discussion, and I'm so thankful to have read it!

Poythress begins by pleading with dispensationalists and non-dispensationalists to listen to one another. He acknowledges that "both sides cannot be right", but proposes that, rather than argue over which side might be right, both sides consider the possibility that no one has eschatology completely correct; that all might have something to learn from trying to see things from different points of view.

He models this type of understanding by listing many of the merits of dispensational thought, among which are an End Times-driven zeal for evangelism and defense of the inerrancy of Scripture. This is followed with a summary of the history of dispensational theology, beginning with its creator, John Nelson Darby, and tracing its development through the teachings of men such as C.I. Scofield, Lewis Sperry Chafer, Charles Ryrie, and others. This section closes with a look at some modern variations within dispensationalism.

Poythress follows this with a similar summary of the teachings and developments of covenant theology, the primary evangelical alternative to dispensationalism. This chapter is written primarily for the benefit of dispensational readers, as the author focuses on things the two views share in common ("the inerrancy of the Bible, the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, the subsitutionary atonement of Christ, the bodily resurrection of Christ, etc.") and on common misunderstandings or misconceptions of non-dispensational views such as historic premillenialism, amillenialism, and postmillenialism. Many of these wrong conceptions stem from misrepresentation of these views in the writings of dispensational theologians. The most prominent of these misconceptions are that covenant theologians (1) do not interpret the Bible literally (more on this later); (2) do not believe in different dispensations throughout redemptive history; and (3) believe that the church replaces Israel as the recipient of God's promised blessings.

After these introductory chapters, Poythress gets to the crux of the matter. The differences between these views are much more complex than most people realize, and this makes simple refutations nearly impossible. Unfortunately, few from any side of the debate are willing to dig deep and address the real issue, which is hermeneutics . Rather than focusing on the interpretation of specific passages — which is where most eschatology arguments begin and, abruptly, end — Poythress investigates the entire interpretive system of dispensationalism, comparing it with a covenantal viewpoint at every step.

One of the primary reasons dispensationalism is so attractive, says Poythress, is that it is completely consistent within its own system. In other words, given the presuppositions with which dispensational theology approaches Scripture, it "works". All of the various interpretations of Scripture passages line up. Challenging a dispensationalist on the interpretation of a single passage would require a reinterpretation of a host of other passages as well.

Instead, Poythress focuses on one of the largest presuppositions of dispensational hermeneutics: the concept of "literalness". In what is probably the book's best section, he devotes two chapters to showing that "literal" can have several different meanings, and that dispensationalism as a system relies on the ability to frequently change between some meanings of "literal" while excluding others. Poythress advocates avoiding the use of the word "literal" when dialoguing with dispensationalists, instead favoring more descriptive terms such as "grammatical-historical interpretation" and "plain interpretation".

The remainder of the book does break down a few specific interpretive differences, illustrating how various systems of interpretation deal with certain passages or ideas. These include typology and the interpretive viewpoint of Israel in the Old Testament, as well as how much and in what way God's promises to Israel were fulfilled in Christ. The two passages of Scripture Poythress does address are 1 Corinthians 15:51-53 — which he says offers particular difficulties for dispensationalists — and Hebrews 12:22-24 , which he shows can be a fruitful passage to begin a dialog with dispensationalists about their understanding of the separate parallel destinies of Israel and the church.

The book closes with a list of areas not explored in this book, but which will be necessary points of discussion for dispensationalists and covenant theologians seeking understanding and unity.

While nothing is covered exhaustively in this relatively short book, it's a refreshing approach to discussion of a critical doctrine. As one of the very few non-dispensational members of my church, I'm quite motivated to promote understanding in this area, and am indebted to Poythress for his work in this area.

[Stephen Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent book that provides really good background on the debate over hermeneutics between dispensational and covenant theologians (along with some passing notes for those who exist along the spectrum between them). It's an irenic dialogue that gives a very evenhanded critique of dispensationalism from a fellow evangelical who views those who disagree with him as evangelicals as well. It's a great example of how to handle internecine debate among fellow Christians.

Poythress skillfully shows where the dialogue falls into unnecessary pitfalls while asking the probing questions that are still left outstanding from the dispensational side. His review of some key passages such as 1 Corinthians 15:51-53 and Hebrews 12:22-24 along with key theological issues such as the understanding of OT prophecies and what exactly constitutes NT fulfillment, the role of typology, and eschatology were very illuminating for where the disagreements lie.

The only reason I leave it as 4 stars is because I wish there were more! I would have liked to have seen a few more passages worked out and some more discussion of covenant theology's hermeneutical principles. Nevertheless, I heartily recommend this book to anyone looking to get their feet wet in this very important debate.

[Parker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Clear, and very concise. It could perhaps have been longer, in my opinion (Certainly the font could have been larger!). Poythress is fair in his presentation of dispensational theology, and is quick to point out where the dispy instincts are right and areas of commonality between them and covenantal thinkers. His arguments against the dispensational system and methods are strong, and he doesn't hold back from exposing the dangerous implications of the dual-destiny concept which is central to classical dispensationalism.

I only wish he'd spent a bit of extra time on the ideas of "modified" dispies because I still don't have a clear picture of them in my head. I also wish he had written more on the eschatological concepts of rapture and tribulation. He remarks that these ideas don't require the dual-destiny concept to stand, but I don't see how that can be.

At any rate, this is top-dollar work, and an excellent example of how theological disagreements should be handled.

[Cole Brandon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was raised dispensational, and moved away from it after one month of reading Galatians daily in college. Ironically, Poythress ends this book saying dispensationalism shatters on Galatians 3, and it most certainly did for me right there(!) particularly Galatians 3:16.

Poythress does an excellent job explaining dispensationalism charitably, starting with a definition, moving into church history, and spending a lot of time in the Bible. A bit academic, so I would not hand this out to just anyone in church, but it did help me understand where to go in a conversation with a dispensational, which is why I picked it up in the first place. I felt sidelined at times as a postmillennial, but overall this is a good book for someone who has a few systematics books under their belt who wants to engage with dispensationalists.

Poythress puts forth Biblical arguments that are easy to follow, without ignoring the complexities of systematic theology, and in the same short book.

[Sean Dickard · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was not what I expected! I read it in order to learn more about Dispensationalism...which I did. But almost from the very beginning I saw that it had much more to offer. Rather than just explain and argue like many theology books do, Poythress wants you to understand. The title is very intentional and descriptive of what follows. Whether you agree or disagree with Dispensationalism, he does an excellent job of getting you to see where the other side is coming from. He tries to explain foundational differences and why people often end up talking past one another rather than getting at the core issues, all while holding fast to and being clear about his own beliefs. This book is an excellent example of how to have theological dialogue with the goal of truly understanding your conversation partner instead of just trying to make your point and win the argument.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

The title of the book is fitting, " Understanding Dispensationalists". I believe too often when interacting with Christians who have differing views (within Christian Orthodoxy) there is a tendency to say I'm right and not hear what our other brother believes. To interact with understanding is not a compromise to what you believe, but instead provides the opportunity for genuine and fruitful discussions. I highly recommend this book to others as it truly seeks to understand a particular view held on eschatology within Christian Orthodoxy and I pray it is used by believers to learn a way to interact with others who hold a view different from yours and do so in a way which shows a proper balance of grace and truth to the glory of God (Soli Deo Gloria)!

[C.S. Wachter · Rating 3 out of 5]

I appreciate Mr. Poythress’s attempt to help those of us who find stronger Biblical evidence for Covenant theology gain a firmer grip on Dispensationalism. Unfortunately, I think his presentation falls short. It was interesting, but as one reviewer stated in his review, though I speak here from opposite perspective, “so far, Dispensationalists simply haven't provided me with a compelling argument for their eschatology.” One thing Mr. Poythress did do well is expose the problems with how Dispensationalists define “plain” or “literal” interpretation. This sliding scale of interpretation is one of the weaknesses with their approach.

[Rob · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great introduction to what dispensationists believe from them perspective of covenant theology. I really appreciate how the author takes great pains to articulate the dispensational view honestly and fairly. There are no straw man arguments here. He does point out the difficulties of the dispensational view but with a goal of conversation and further understanding. This little book was very informative and I expect to be referring back to this book again.

[Ben Chidester · Rating 4 out of 5]

Poythress's book made me appreciative of the important distinctions between dispensationalism and covenantal theology and also the importance of clarifying one's meaning of 'literal' interpretation. The point of Poythress's writing is not to systematically compare these two theological systems, but to lay out points of dialogue for fruitful discussion, which I appreciate.

[WH · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this in seminary and didn't get a lot out of it. Now that I'm much more familiar with the broad landscape of evangelical theology, the book made much more sense this time around. Poythress is always charitable, but this book in particular is an exemplar in writing charitably.