You stated “Just wondering, can you provide us a list of theologians you have read who aren’t dispensationalists? Are you familiar with the concept of “biblical theology” (as complementary to systematic theology? Redemptive-historical hermeutic?”
My reply: Since Reformed Christian “Biblical Theology” and “Systematic Theology” replaces physical Israel with the Church in most passages dealing with future Messianic prophecy, such a question is merely a guise for entraping me in more fruitless debate.
such a question is merely a guise for entraping me in more fruitless debate.
You know where I stand. I know where you stand. You brought it up with the title of this thread and the first line of your excerpt.
Fruitless? I hope not.
I maintain that dispensationalism's "two peoples of God" axiom has some pretty severe gospel problems. I'd like to get you to examine that presupposition and it's gospel implications.
As far as the immediate question:
Just wondering, can you provide us a list of theologians you have read who aren't dispensationalists? Are you familiar with the concept of "biblical theology" (as complementary to systematic theology? Redemptive-historical hermeutic?
the things I see the average popular dispensationalist speakers and writers say make me wonder if they have any real familiarity with the views they're speaking against. Some of them have consigned us to the outer darkness. Meanwhile they all seem to be spinning in a tight little orbit about their own little common center.
So, who've you actually read?
This is called begging the question. It assumes that the futurist dispensationalists (and their MJ stepchildren) correctly interpret and understand whatever falls under the category of "future Messianic prophecy". This is the very heart of the debate.
"fruitless debate" – Interesting, since you also made the claim "I read enough reformed theology to understand the tremendous error present in reformed thought. " Are we simply to assume you correctly understand Reformed theology and how it applies to Israel v. the Church? You have not demonstrated that ability in your handling, for example, of Matthew Henry’s commentary. You misinterpreted his commentary on the meaning of the "great tribulation", selectively choosing from his commentary of Joel 2 while ignoring his commentary on Acts 2. Folks can see that in this thread.