What do you think?
Rate this book
Progressive Dispensationalism
Thoughtful and accessible. An up-to-date, comprehensive overview of the most important issues in dispensationalism, underpinned with accurate scholarship and summarized with clarity.
336 pages, Paperback
First published December 12, 1991
56 people are currently reading
179 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
February 19, 2024
A book like this really serves two purposes, one descriptive, the other prescriptive. On the one hand, this book defines Progressive Dispensationalism in relation to previous forms of Dispensationalism. On the other hand, it recommends Progressive Dispensationalism as a framework the reader ought to adopt.
As regards the first purpose, this book is successful. It's answered nearly every question I've had about PD. It's a bit repetitive at times, a little long-winded, but ultimately effective at giving the information.
As regards the second purpose, it's clear that the authors had other Dispensationalists in mind. They succeed, I think, at demonstrating PD as superior to prior forms of Dispensationalism. However, as somebody who holds to Westminsterian Covenant Theology, there's just about nothing here to entice me into switching sides. What's good about PD is what it holds in common with modern Covenantalism (e.g., belief in only one people of God, inaugurated eschatology, etc.). Where we differ (e.g., dispensations over and behind the biblical covenants, interpretation of prophecy, etc.), I see PD as an improvement on prior Dispensationalism but not a significant rival to my own position.
As regards the first purpose, this book is successful. It's answered nearly every question I've had about PD. It's a bit repetitive at times, a little long-winded, but ultimately effective at giving the information.
As regards the second purpose, it's clear that the authors had other Dispensationalists in mind. They succeed, I think, at demonstrating PD as superior to prior forms of Dispensationalism. However, as somebody who holds to Westminsterian Covenant Theology, there's just about nothing here to entice me into switching sides. What's good about PD is what it holds in common with modern Covenantalism (e.g., belief in only one people of God, inaugurated eschatology, etc.). Where we differ (e.g., dispensations over and behind the biblical covenants, interpretation of prophecy, etc.), I see PD as an improvement on prior Dispensationalism but not a significant rival to my own position.
October 12, 2015
This book is important for the ongoing discussion between covenantal and dispensational interpreters. While the length of the work does not offer substantial response to critiques, it does offer implied critiques of prior dispensational interpretations and appears to take seriously those criticisms of dispensationalism from covenantal interpreters. For dispensationalists, this book signals the beginning of a more robust use of Biblical Theology in doing systematic theology. Importantly several BT ‘tools’ are used – typology, intratextuality, progressive revelation, and redemptive historical epochs.
For my own theological development, the chapter on dispensations in biblical theology helped to dispel some of the negative connotations associated with the word “dispensationalism.” All biblical theologians have spoken of dispensations, so dispensationalism is not de facto unbiblical because of its use of that particular word. However, I was frustrated by the assumptions of the authors in the areas of biblical interpretation. Proof texts are often used without as much as a footnotes as to why they do not accept viable alternatives to their interpretations. Furthermore, it is not entirely clear why they ignore the important aspects of the NT use of the OT, which I think is the greatest challenge to their hermeneutical model, which appears to use the Bible differently than the NT authors. Regarding their understanding of the future promises of Israel, it is not clear to me why they are able to include gentiles in the promises of Israel but kick them out when it comes to the material promises. Why can’t those promises be fulfilled in the New Heavens and New Earth, as Hebrews 11:8-10 clearly teaches? Furthermore, they focus on the ethnic nature of the Jews without considering whether the NT thinks that is the most important aspect of being part of Israel. The OT contains examples of non-ethnic Jews being part of the material covenant blessings, so why would the gentiles not be part of that? I could go on and on with this, but I will refrain. With such large questions looming from covenantal interpreters, it is not clear why they would ignore these questions and gloss over these interpretive hurdles in just several paragraphs. This book is a good sign from dispensationalism, but it clings to the same tired interpretations that make dispensationalism so dangerous to biblical interpretation and the discipline of biblical theology.
For my own theological development, the chapter on dispensations in biblical theology helped to dispel some of the negative connotations associated with the word “dispensationalism.” All biblical theologians have spoken of dispensations, so dispensationalism is not de facto unbiblical because of its use of that particular word. However, I was frustrated by the assumptions of the authors in the areas of biblical interpretation. Proof texts are often used without as much as a footnotes as to why they do not accept viable alternatives to their interpretations. Furthermore, it is not entirely clear why they ignore the important aspects of the NT use of the OT, which I think is the greatest challenge to their hermeneutical model, which appears to use the Bible differently than the NT authors. Regarding their understanding of the future promises of Israel, it is not clear to me why they are able to include gentiles in the promises of Israel but kick them out when it comes to the material promises. Why can’t those promises be fulfilled in the New Heavens and New Earth, as Hebrews 11:8-10 clearly teaches? Furthermore, they focus on the ethnic nature of the Jews without considering whether the NT thinks that is the most important aspect of being part of Israel. The OT contains examples of non-ethnic Jews being part of the material covenant blessings, so why would the gentiles not be part of that? I could go on and on with this, but I will refrain. With such large questions looming from covenantal interpreters, it is not clear why they would ignore these questions and gloss over these interpretive hurdles in just several paragraphs. This book is a good sign from dispensationalism, but it clings to the same tired interpretations that make dispensationalism so dangerous to biblical interpretation and the discipline of biblical theology.
December 17, 2013
Blaising and Bock (BB) gives us an excellent update on how dispensationalism has changed over the past two centuries. They begin with a thorough chapter on the different variety of dispensationalisms (plural) with their unique emphases. They are not afraid to point out where some models fall short. Then the discuss hermeneutics. It is no longer true that dispensationalists simply claim that “They interpret the bible literally.” The newer dispensationalists are very sensitive to the different genres of literary method.
BB accept a lot of George Ladd’s “already-not yet” paradigm. This allows them to say that the New Covenant really does apply to believers while the specific land promises are yet to be realized. This point should not be missed: earlier dispensationalists had a hard time saying that the New Covenant applied to believers today, since the land promises were tied to it. This led some to posit two new covenants and others to posit a “shadow new covenant.” Yet, as BB note, this is NOT what the New Testament says. Ladd’s approach allows them to keep the land-promise while applying the substance to believers today.
The section on biblical covenants was particularly good. BB gives particular attention to the principle of mediation. The Abrahamic covenant introduces this principle. The promises will be passed through Abraham’s descendants (13). The Davidic covenant provides the means for which the Abrahamic promises will be realized. More specifically, we see that the office of mediator belongs to a King (140; Psalm 72).
There are striking similarities between BB’s portrayal of the Mosaic Covenant and some modern Reformed portrayals. BB note that when God appeals to his faithfulness, he does so on the grounds of the promises made to Abraham, not on the Mosaic covenant (Dt 4:29). God promises judgments based on violating the Mosaic covenant, but eternal faithfulness on the ground of the Abrahamic-Davidic covenant (Psalm 89).
They end with some suggestions for the church. Of particular interest was the claim that any “muting” or denying the Jewishness of Jesus gives one a Nestorian and Docetic Christology. This is a great point which they didn’t develop. This book is superior to some Covenant Theology accounts. It is worth noting that PD listened to the criticisms of Covenant Theology and adapted.
BB accept a lot of George Ladd’s “already-not yet” paradigm. This allows them to say that the New Covenant really does apply to believers while the specific land promises are yet to be realized. This point should not be missed: earlier dispensationalists had a hard time saying that the New Covenant applied to believers today, since the land promises were tied to it. This led some to posit two new covenants and others to posit a “shadow new covenant.” Yet, as BB note, this is NOT what the New Testament says. Ladd’s approach allows them to keep the land-promise while applying the substance to believers today.
The section on biblical covenants was particularly good. BB gives particular attention to the principle of mediation. The Abrahamic covenant introduces this principle. The promises will be passed through Abraham’s descendants (13). The Davidic covenant provides the means for which the Abrahamic promises will be realized. More specifically, we see that the office of mediator belongs to a King (140; Psalm 72).
There are striking similarities between BB’s portrayal of the Mosaic Covenant and some modern Reformed portrayals. BB note that when God appeals to his faithfulness, he does so on the grounds of the promises made to Abraham, not on the Mosaic covenant (Dt 4:29). God promises judgments based on violating the Mosaic covenant, but eternal faithfulness on the ground of the Abrahamic-Davidic covenant (Psalm 89).
They end with some suggestions for the church. Of particular interest was the claim that any “muting” or denying the Jewishness of Jesus gives one a Nestorian and Docetic Christology. This is a great point which they didn’t develop. This book is superior to some Covenant Theology accounts. It is worth noting that PD listened to the criticisms of Covenant Theology and adapted.
April 28, 2021
The more one has wrestled with this topic the more helpful this resource will be. It is not introduction to the topic but a guide to someone who is already in the topic. A chapter on the history of dispensationalism was immensely helpful. Just like any theological system dispensationalism is not and has not ever been monolithic. I also found chapter 4 and dispensations in biblical theology very helpful.
July 20, 2021
2021 reads: #28
Rating: 4.5 Stars
An excellent analysis of the interplay between biblical covenants, dispensations and the Kingdom of God.
Includes in-depth analysis of the inauguration of the promises of the Davidic Covenant in the person of Christ and manifested in the church - this is often lacking from other dispensational treatments.
Some of the contemporary applications focus too much on multiculturalism. An emphasis on the multiethnicity of the church would be far better. This is a minor criticism in a book that provides so much clarity on the progress of God's redemptive plan and the fulfilment of both earthly and spiritual covenant blessings.
Rating: 4.5 Stars
An excellent analysis of the interplay between biblical covenants, dispensations and the Kingdom of God.
Includes in-depth analysis of the inauguration of the promises of the Davidic Covenant in the person of Christ and manifested in the church - this is often lacking from other dispensational treatments.
Some of the contemporary applications focus too much on multiculturalism. An emphasis on the multiethnicity of the church would be far better. This is a minor criticism in a book that provides so much clarity on the progress of God's redemptive plan and the fulfilment of both earthly and spiritual covenant blessings.
May 13, 2025
Great biblical treatment of the covenants, dispensations, and the kingdom of God. Demonstrates that God has one redemptive plan fulfilled in Christ through the covenants that culminates in a holistic redemption (physical and spiritual) at the eschaton. I have often been frustrated at the many misrepresentations of Dispensationalism I read, even those written by more scholarly authors. But if more people read this book, we would have more fruitful dialogue as the concerns often cited are easily dispelled. Covenantal theologians will find that they have much more in common with modern reformed dispensationalists than they thought.
March 22, 2018
I was surprised at how much of this book I agreed with, seeing as I am not a dispensationalist. The particular “progressive” dispensationalism found in this book does a good job of correcting some of the more obvious errors in classic and revised dispensationalism, and provides a good overview of the structure of redemptive history. It still, however, is stuck on an insufficient understanding of typology that fuels the “double-fulfillment” of many promises to Israel and the Church. I had to read this for a class, but was pleasantly surprised at what I found - even though I still disagree with their fundamental argument.
December 25, 2019
This book simply spells out what Progressive Dispensationalism is. The authors discuss the development and issues of earlier Dispensationalism. Moreover, they provide the contours of this important system of progressive and related dispensations. This approach to Scripture (Progressive Dispensations) tends to regard both the unity and diversity of the books of the Bible (complexity of Scripture). The influence of Biblical theology, Grammatical- historical method, and the theme of the kingdom of God are apparent in this work.
September 2, 2011
“The failure of this dispensation comes when the church thinks that it has an earthly purpose, when it begins to think of itself as an earthly people and becomes preoccupied with earthly things.” (p. 25). This quote strikes early in the book in the history of classical dispensationalism and it makes me wonder if it is statements like this that have caused others to rethink about their position within dispensationalism. Maybe it’s me, and I don’t like to start a review of a book on a negative basis, but this is the characteristic of progressive dispensationalists, at least Craig Blaising that wrote that section, on classical dispensationalism. The stark dualism demonstrated by classical dispensationalism causes me to wonder what exactly the difference is between an earthly purpose and a heavenly purpose. Yes the quote does indicate that its looking to materialism, when the church is focused on the material position of this world or at least that is what I think they want us to think; but that is a far cry from thinking that its “purpose” is earthly and it really doesn’t feel like it’s the meaning trying to be conveyed. It’s very allusive to determine what exactly classical dispensationalism is trying to say without thinking that they really do believe the whole of Christianity is apostate except for those who believe like they do. Is it that they have become so reductionistic in trying to determine the fundamentals of Christianity that all they can do is polarize the issue as an either or consideration. Is there some middle ground, a synthesis, between Covenant theology and Dispensationalism? And more importantly is that what Blaising and Boch are attempting to do in their book “Progressive Dispensationalism.”
For now my third review of a book on dispensationalism I am starting to see a pattern develop. First there is always a need to bring the reader up to date and present a history of the subject matter. Craig Blaising is assigned this task in the first chapter titled “The Extent and Varieties of Dispensationalism.” Blaising begins with Darby and Scofield and assigns their variety as classical dispensationalism. He notes that there is no real consensus within dispensationalism about dispensationalism and that the dispensationalism of today is not like that of classical dispensationalism although he attempts to define common issues within that tradition. As a parenthetical note I wonder if it is too soon to start calling dispensationalism a “tradition?” Not quite two hundred years old now against two thousand years for all of Christianity and still the new kid on the block—ah but then perhaps just my bias? The common features Blaising finds in all dispensational theories are: authority of scripture; dispensations; uniqueness of the church; practical significance of the universal church; significance of Biblical Prophecy; futurist premillennialism; the imminent return of Christ; and a national future for Israel. That’s eight common features and within each of those eight features disagreement exists within dispensationalism thus accounting for all the different forms of dispensationalism which Blaising appears to identify as: classical (Darby, Scofield, and Chafer); revised (Walvoord, Ryrie, Pentecost, and Toussaint); and progressive dispensationalism (Blaising and Block—they list no others).
The fact that Blaising and Block do not, or cannot, list any other theologians holding to their view of dispensationalism indicates that there are presenting a new form of dispensationalism, or at least what they think is dispensationalism. But latter in the book when they finally get into what exactly progressive dispensationalism is I wondered why they didn’t just call it progressive revelation? In fact the second part of the book and the second pattern in books of dispensationalism is the need to provide a lengthy discussion of hermeneutics. Darrell Bock weighs in on these two chapters, in fact the only time in the book we hear from Bock, and breaks hermeneutics into two subsections on how we read texts and how the text speaks to us. And after reading both of these chapters I wondered where exactly the disagreement between Dispensationalism and Covenant theology is. Bock seems to have an understanding on how one’s hermeneutics effects ones interpretation that is the same as Covenant theology—at least from what I know of Covenant theology to this point. In fact Karl Barth might even agree with Bock in these two chapters! Now I wonder if Blaising and Bock can take the next step in their progressive dispensationalism and their understanding how hermeneutics effects our interpretation and consider other cultural influences on our hermeneutics—our hermeneutics is in a context which is dictated by our world view so will they be able to join the emerging church movement? I have a feeling they can’t because of dispensational insistence on a literal interpretation of scripture that seems to suggest that if you don’t end up with a dispensational theology then something is wrong with your hermeneutics so therefore you are not interpreting the scriptures literally. It does seem circular how they are going about this. But since there doesn’t appear to be any problem with how Bock defines his hermeneutics what is the reason that we come to different interpretations? Even within dispensationalism Blaising and Bock indicate the many differences with it that one would think they would have discussed this issue rather then defining the what and how of hermeneutics.
While I did agree with Bock for the most part on his hermeneutics there were several buttons he pushed with me that I can’t let pass without discussion. His distinction between presupposition and preunderstanding appears tenuous at best. It appears to be the same as the difference between dogmas and conviction, or better yet the difference between conviction and opinion. It may have been better at this instance if he had discussed presuppositions like a web, belief’s closer to the center of our web are going to be harder to take out without destroying the web while links in our web farther away from the center of our web are going to be easier to take out—the line between presupposition and preunderstanding is just too vague. In any event while describing how our presuppositions effect our thinking regarding a text he uses Psalm 19:4b-6 as an example: “In the heavens He has pitched a tent for the sun, which is like a bridegroom coming forth from his pavilion, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is hidden from its heat (NIV)” (p. 59). Bock informs us now that the medieval reader, steeped in their Ptolemaic presupposition of the universe would have advised us that this passage describes the movement of the sun through the sky. What is it about our current presupposition in our model of the universe that would make us not say the same thing? It does describe the movement that we sense with our vision which and, setting aside epistemological issues, we can assume the same thing that the medieval reader sensed with their senses. And I think both we and the medieval reader would have said this passage means more then just that! Why do so many people have the presupposition that people in ages past were dense idiots? How did we ever get this wonderful sense of knowledge that we are now at: thanks be to God can be our only response. And in my sarcasm I think Bock proved his point in his own presupposition of this analogy; that we all need to be humble and cry out to God for mercy and His help as we seek to hear Him through His Word as we listen to Him through the testimony of the witness’ He has provided for us.
The heart of the book begins in part three: Exposition. And if you are already familiar with the history of dispensationalism and have an understanding of hermeneutics you may want to start your reading here. For brevities sake the remainder of the book from this section forward is a discussion on dispensations, how God deals with humanity throughout history; how God uses Covenants prior to Christ and their fulfillment in Christ; and a discussion on the Kingdom of God in both the Old and New Testaments. So just from the table of contents we can see the two main issues: How do the Covenants relate to how God deals with His people (dispensationally) and what is the form and function of the Kingdom of God? The main feature of progressive dispensationalism which distinguishes it from classical dispensationalism is that they see the dispensations as progressive, still related to the past dispensations through the covenants. They find the fulfillment of the covenants, and therefore the progression of dispensations, in the eschatological kingdom of God, which is now but not yet. Now if they could just see the fulfillment in Christ and the establishment of His Kingdom at the ascension I think we can welcome them back to Covenant theology, and perhaps why other dispensationalists think they are covenant theologians.
For now my third review of a book on dispensationalism I am starting to see a pattern develop. First there is always a need to bring the reader up to date and present a history of the subject matter. Craig Blaising is assigned this task in the first chapter titled “The Extent and Varieties of Dispensationalism.” Blaising begins with Darby and Scofield and assigns their variety as classical dispensationalism. He notes that there is no real consensus within dispensationalism about dispensationalism and that the dispensationalism of today is not like that of classical dispensationalism although he attempts to define common issues within that tradition. As a parenthetical note I wonder if it is too soon to start calling dispensationalism a “tradition?” Not quite two hundred years old now against two thousand years for all of Christianity and still the new kid on the block—ah but then perhaps just my bias? The common features Blaising finds in all dispensational theories are: authority of scripture; dispensations; uniqueness of the church; practical significance of the universal church; significance of Biblical Prophecy; futurist premillennialism; the imminent return of Christ; and a national future for Israel. That’s eight common features and within each of those eight features disagreement exists within dispensationalism thus accounting for all the different forms of dispensationalism which Blaising appears to identify as: classical (Darby, Scofield, and Chafer); revised (Walvoord, Ryrie, Pentecost, and Toussaint); and progressive dispensationalism (Blaising and Block—they list no others).
The fact that Blaising and Block do not, or cannot, list any other theologians holding to their view of dispensationalism indicates that there are presenting a new form of dispensationalism, or at least what they think is dispensationalism. But latter in the book when they finally get into what exactly progressive dispensationalism is I wondered why they didn’t just call it progressive revelation? In fact the second part of the book and the second pattern in books of dispensationalism is the need to provide a lengthy discussion of hermeneutics. Darrell Bock weighs in on these two chapters, in fact the only time in the book we hear from Bock, and breaks hermeneutics into two subsections on how we read texts and how the text speaks to us. And after reading both of these chapters I wondered where exactly the disagreement between Dispensationalism and Covenant theology is. Bock seems to have an understanding on how one’s hermeneutics effects ones interpretation that is the same as Covenant theology—at least from what I know of Covenant theology to this point. In fact Karl Barth might even agree with Bock in these two chapters! Now I wonder if Blaising and Bock can take the next step in their progressive dispensationalism and their understanding how hermeneutics effects our interpretation and consider other cultural influences on our hermeneutics—our hermeneutics is in a context which is dictated by our world view so will they be able to join the emerging church movement? I have a feeling they can’t because of dispensational insistence on a literal interpretation of scripture that seems to suggest that if you don’t end up with a dispensational theology then something is wrong with your hermeneutics so therefore you are not interpreting the scriptures literally. It does seem circular how they are going about this. But since there doesn’t appear to be any problem with how Bock defines his hermeneutics what is the reason that we come to different interpretations? Even within dispensationalism Blaising and Bock indicate the many differences with it that one would think they would have discussed this issue rather then defining the what and how of hermeneutics.
While I did agree with Bock for the most part on his hermeneutics there were several buttons he pushed with me that I can’t let pass without discussion. His distinction between presupposition and preunderstanding appears tenuous at best. It appears to be the same as the difference between dogmas and conviction, or better yet the difference between conviction and opinion. It may have been better at this instance if he had discussed presuppositions like a web, belief’s closer to the center of our web are going to be harder to take out without destroying the web while links in our web farther away from the center of our web are going to be easier to take out—the line between presupposition and preunderstanding is just too vague. In any event while describing how our presuppositions effect our thinking regarding a text he uses Psalm 19:4b-6 as an example: “In the heavens He has pitched a tent for the sun, which is like a bridegroom coming forth from his pavilion, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is hidden from its heat (NIV)” (p. 59). Bock informs us now that the medieval reader, steeped in their Ptolemaic presupposition of the universe would have advised us that this passage describes the movement of the sun through the sky. What is it about our current presupposition in our model of the universe that would make us not say the same thing? It does describe the movement that we sense with our vision which and, setting aside epistemological issues, we can assume the same thing that the medieval reader sensed with their senses. And I think both we and the medieval reader would have said this passage means more then just that! Why do so many people have the presupposition that people in ages past were dense idiots? How did we ever get this wonderful sense of knowledge that we are now at: thanks be to God can be our only response. And in my sarcasm I think Bock proved his point in his own presupposition of this analogy; that we all need to be humble and cry out to God for mercy and His help as we seek to hear Him through His Word as we listen to Him through the testimony of the witness’ He has provided for us.
The heart of the book begins in part three: Exposition. And if you are already familiar with the history of dispensationalism and have an understanding of hermeneutics you may want to start your reading here. For brevities sake the remainder of the book from this section forward is a discussion on dispensations, how God deals with humanity throughout history; how God uses Covenants prior to Christ and their fulfillment in Christ; and a discussion on the Kingdom of God in both the Old and New Testaments. So just from the table of contents we can see the two main issues: How do the Covenants relate to how God deals with His people (dispensationally) and what is the form and function of the Kingdom of God? The main feature of progressive dispensationalism which distinguishes it from classical dispensationalism is that they see the dispensations as progressive, still related to the past dispensations through the covenants. They find the fulfillment of the covenants, and therefore the progression of dispensations, in the eschatological kingdom of God, which is now but not yet. Now if they could just see the fulfillment in Christ and the establishment of His Kingdom at the ascension I think we can welcome them back to Covenant theology, and perhaps why other dispensationalists think they are covenant theologians.
January 4, 2024
Not a bad book. But maybe not a great one either? I am torn on this. Some of my recent reading and studies have been a slow dive into the topics surrounding dispensationalism and covenant theology (or perhaps more broadly, the studies into how God works throughout the ages and interacts with the people He's created). I think perhaps that this book, while being geared towards the intellectual/scholastic level, may not be the best entry level book for someone seeking to understand a newer understanding of dispensationalism. Progressive dispensationalism is contrasted to the classical and revised understandings of dispensationalism and while the author does a decent job of showing the advancement in thought over the past hundred years, I frankly would have liked an even more comprehensive study! Would have greatly enjoyed a look at the historical landscape of the past two thousand years and how the work of God through covenants has been understood. Still, perhaps this book does the job of introducing one to progressive dispensationalism and I simply did not have the intellectual tools to grapple with it. This book does feel sometimes like both too much of an overview and also too technical at the same time. The charts were...not always helpful, and usually ended up confusing me rather than helping me!! I will say that I greatly appreciated the authors' focus on God's covenants and their eventual (or coming!!) fulfillment in Christ. The first few chapters on dispensationalism as a whole and on hermeneutics were helpful and (I believe) very intellectually honest in presenting multiple approaches to such.
As I'm trying to wrap up these few words, I think I've identified my real issue with this text. And it may only be my own and I may be being unfair! But at the end of the day, this book was written as what seems to be a technical guide to the workings of God. It's dry at times and frankly? I wanted to see a little more passion, a little more excitement in getting glimpses behind the veil. We serve a God who has chosen to communicate to us and make Himself known, most particularly in His Word and most magnificently through Christ Himself! There is a dryness to this work that I think at times discouraged me from reading further. Maybe that's what I get for reading an academic tome! I do think this book has value and I do think it brings a fresh perspective on the workings of God throughout the ages. Perhaps I'm just not currently in the right frame of mind to appreciate a book such as this.
As I'm trying to wrap up these few words, I think I've identified my real issue with this text. And it may only be my own and I may be being unfair! But at the end of the day, this book was written as what seems to be a technical guide to the workings of God. It's dry at times and frankly? I wanted to see a little more passion, a little more excitement in getting glimpses behind the veil. We serve a God who has chosen to communicate to us and make Himself known, most particularly in His Word and most magnificently through Christ Himself! There is a dryness to this work that I think at times discouraged me from reading further. Maybe that's what I get for reading an academic tome! I do think this book has value and I do think it brings a fresh perspective on the workings of God throughout the ages. Perhaps I'm just not currently in the right frame of mind to appreciate a book such as this.
November 24, 2022
Dispensacionalismo Progresivo por Craig A. Blaising y Darrell L. Bock. Este ha sido el mejor libro que he leído este año. Hace casi 30 años que se escribió y sigue siendo muy útil por sus aportaciones a la hermenéutica, especialmente a la escatología y a la eclesiología. El Dispensacionalismo Progresivo presenta la mejor versión del sistema dispensacional. Todo amante de las Escrituras, especialmente los que se adhieren al sistema dispensacional, deberían leer este libro. Es una lectura obligatoria. Espero en Dios que alguna editorial en español lo traduzca pronto.
Este libro está dividido en 4 partes:
Primera parte: Historia
Segunda parte: Hermenéutica
Tercera parte: Exposición
Cuarta Parte: Teología y Ministerio.
Es un recorrido por la historia del dispensacionalismo; como trabajar aspectos de interpretación; un panorama de teología bíblica; también un llamado a poner en practica lo aprendido y aportar nuevas ideas al sistema, especialmente desde la misión de la iglesia.
Este libro está dividido en 4 partes:
Primera parte: Historia
Segunda parte: Hermenéutica
Tercera parte: Exposición
Cuarta Parte: Teología y Ministerio.
Es un recorrido por la historia del dispensacionalismo; como trabajar aspectos de interpretación; un panorama de teología bíblica; también un llamado a poner en practica lo aprendido y aportar nuevas ideas al sistema, especialmente desde la misión de la iglesia.
December 13, 2019
Brings much needed correction to the dispensational perspective on what God is doing in the world. This is a dispensationalism I can fully endorse. Blaising and Bock make a very tight case for their argument about various phases of the Kingdom, depending very heavily on exegesis from both Old and New Testaments. Their careful use of Scripture is the strongest point of this book. Highly recommended.
This is my second reading of the book. I absorbed much more this time. I think in 5-10 years I want to come back to it for a third and final reading.
This is my second reading of the book. I absorbed much more this time. I think in 5-10 years I want to come back to it for a third and final reading.
November 5, 2023
Helpful. Blaising & Bock helpfully provide the foundational argument for progressive dispensationalism. Significant focus on the history of the biblical covenants and their role in redemptive history. This redemptive history "unfolds in a progression of divine dispensations." (199)
Of the current spectrum of Dispensational & Covenantal views, Progressive Dispensationalism seems to present the best arguments and has the fewest problems.
Of the current spectrum of Dispensational & Covenantal views, Progressive Dispensationalism seems to present the best arguments and has the fewest problems.
December 31, 2024
A helpful if academic history and summary of the distinctives of dispensationalism in general, and progressive dispensationalism in particular, as distinguished from its predecessors in classical and revised dispensationalism. Not really aimed at the rank and file believer in the local church, but not inaccessible on that level either. Overall a solid resource that I see myself referring back to as an authority on the subject matter addressed.
March 19, 2020
The authors provide a compelling case, rooted in biblical theology and exegesis, for a form of dispensationalism that promotes more continuity than its predecessors. The first chapter compares and contrasts the different forms of dispensationalism. It will likely prove to be the chapter I return to most often as a refresher.
October 9, 2019
With this book being of a more technical book, dealing with theology I didn't consistently read through it. Therefore I couldn't really follow the authors thoughts through the book. Also I have failed to see how each chapter fits into a whole argument.
October 22, 2018
The best book I’ve read on what dispensationalism is today, especially progressive dispensationalism. Critics might find themselves surprised with how much they agree with the book.
December 3, 2019
While I don’t hold to progressive dispensationalism, it was a well written book.
January 30, 2022
Shined best when explaining the relationship between the covenants of promise.
August 5, 2022
Provides a helpful overview and challenges readers to reckon with the implications of the here-not-yet reality of the kingdom of God.
July 29, 2015
This book was useful in distinguishing the three different types of dispensationalism: Classical,Revised, and Progressive, but there are still nuances that theologians in either of those three categories have who are dispensationalists. Unfortunately this book lacked exegesis, I was expecting to see some use of Greek and Hebrew, at least in the endnotes, for a rigorous defense of progressive dispensationalism, but the arguments given consisted primarily of proof texting and stringing texts together assuming their hermeneutical presuppositions, without actually defending them. Also the authors undermined the Gospel when he argues that Christ only died under the curse of the Mosaic law, last paragraph on page 197, but that would mean Christ's death could only apply to Jews who were under the Mosaic law, so a different form of justification would be required for Gentiles, resulting in 2 forms of justification, due to the authors' denial of the covenant of works, which they skip over in their discussion of covenants providing no interaction with arguments in favor of the covenant of works. They also quickly pass over the crucial hermeneutical question of whether the apostles' hermeneutic of interpreting previous scripture is prescriptive or descriptive.
July 20, 2015
The recounting of the historical developments of dispensationalism from classical to revised ultimately to progressive (which is what the authors defend) was at least helpful. The latter portion where the authors stumble around in their biblical theology trying to prove the dispensationalist system with a flawed hermeneutical presupposition to begin with was dreadful to slog through. Texts about the Kingdom not being of this world, or the Kingdom is within you are reinterpreted in light of OT prophetic literature. Ironically, the authors defense of premillennialism rests on John being given progressive revelation! I guess the progressive revelation Jesus preached about the manifestation and inauguration of the Kingdom is not as important as the OT types and shadows of their limited prophetic and apocalyptic vision. If you want to find some answers, especially if you grew up believing dispensationalism was your only option, read Kim Riddlebarger's "A Case for Amillennialism."
September 25, 2012
The most helpful chapter in this book was Blaising's chapter on the history of Dispensationalism. As a freshman I recall being confused by Ryrie's insistence on literal interpretation when Scofield obviously did not always follow that method. Blaising cleared up that confusion by documenting, among other things, changes in dispensational hermeneutics. Bock's chapters on hermeneutics and Blaising's closing practical chapter were mildly helpful. The core of the book on the covenants and the kingdom contained helpful material. Though other books so into greater detail on these matters, I think Blaising provides a good perspective.
July 8, 2012
really enjoyed this book! it was very well laid out and helped to explain the progression in dispensational thought since its advent. personally, it was helpful for me to see the connectedness of the various covenants as being progressive historical revelations of God's redemptive plan. despite the accusation by some classic/revised dispensationalists, this book did not present a covenant theology view. the only thing i would like to have seen is more treatment on the specific role of israel in light of the current dispensational epoch. overall, a great read!
February 15, 2012
Very thorough and clear presentation of progressive dispensationalism. It also give a fair picture of covenant theology and classic dispensationalism. Helpful charts.
December 14, 2012
I aprreciated the overall premise.
January 2, 2015
A good survey of how Dispensational thought is changing.
January 2, 2024
Incredible understanding of the best hermeneutic the Bible offers!!
November 7, 2013
Fantastic!
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews