Lulu Marketplace

Hi JJ,

I just found this review, thought I would give a response to clarify a couple things: I think you're misunderstanding the purpose of the book a little -- it was not meant to give an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of two divergent theological systems, representing the best scholarship in each respective field. If that were the intent, I can see how you would take it as a little disingenuous or even intentionally knocking down straw men. The purpose was polemical, as I admitted up front in the description; and it is directed specifically toward popular/"revised" Dispensationalism, which a great many laypersons are deeply affected by in the Church today, but almost... More > no scholars anymore. What I am arguing against, chiefly, is that brand of Dispensationalism most notably championed by Ryrie, and popularized by writers such as Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye. Now, those latter two are certainly no scholars, and to use them as representatives of Dispensationalism would be irresponsible if I were intending to contribute to scholarly discussion -- in that case, I should be using the best of the Progressives (Bock, Blaising, etc.), who would not adhere to many of the points I argue against (as I clearly state in certain places in the volume above). So anyway, I would agree with your admonition to a certain extent -- don't read this if you want an up-to-date understanding of the best scholarly arguments for Dispensationalism. My intended audience is a little different than that -- read it if you're one of the millions of people in America who fear to be "left behind" when the imminent, pre-tribulational rapture takes place. Read it if you've grown up in the popular Dispensationalism of the Dallas Theological Seminary of a past generation. Read it if you're one of the millions of people whose church's or college's doctrinal statements still make a pre-tribulational rapture one of the fundamental doctrines to be supported along with the inspiration of scripture and the Trinity. There are many people out there who have been steeped in this Dispensationalism from childhood, and the effects of that are dangerous and troubling. I have largely written to those people; and I think the case I've made against that sort of Dispensationalism is scriptural and irrefutable, and also something that many people need to consider.

When you take the purpose of the book into consideration, I think the charges of straw men must be dropped. Ready Ryrie's Dispensationalism Today -- I argue against those positions which he is arguing for, accurately represented. You may not like the fact that Ryrie and his crowd really do teach what I argue against from the scriptures, but they really do, and that really affects lots of people. Many of those affected people have no idea about the more scholarly progressives, et al, they have no idea even what to call all of the weird ideas that they've grown up equating with basic Christianity, and those people need to hear that all those weird but popular ideas are not biblical, they're wrong and dangerous.

One more point: the poem "The Dragon and the Whore" is not about Dispensationalism at all -- it is about two characters that I took straight from the book of Revelation, the Dragon and the great Whore Babylon. You may not like the terms, but they're not mine, they're John's, for one thing, and I never even implied that the fulfillment of that character, the Whore Babylon, is to be sought in the Dispensational system.

Anyway, thanks for an honest review and the gracious spirit in which it was given.

Nathan Pitchford < Less

This is a good primer on what Covenant Theology has to say. However, it is a very poor description of what Dispensational Theology has to say. At worst, Pitchford is setting up straw men to knock over Dispensational Theology. At best, he is ably setting forth Covenant Theology. With such an uneven treatment, it is hard to rate this higher than two stars, though I was tempted to give it one. Why? We do not do justice to our own theological perspective by misrepresenting the opposition or by glossing over the considerations so lightly as to present their theology in laughable terms. I don't see the need of the Poem sections that refer to the opposite theology as "the Whore" or other derogatory terms. It is sad that such a good brother as Nathan Pitchford produced such a work. Read it if you want to review Covenant Theology. Don't bother if you are trying to understand the theological depths in either camp's theology.