37 of 39 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Helpful; Not an Unbiased Comparison, but Argument for Dispensationalism, August 20, 2007
This review is from: There Really Is a Difference!: A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology (Paperback)
This is a helpful book in that the first few chapters give a cursory overview -explaining, comparing, and contrasting-of dispensational and covenant theologies. The explanation of coventant theology is definitely more cursory than that of dispensational and is primarily limited to an explanation of the writings of Berkhof from his systematic theology.
The author, then explains some of his primary concerns with covenant theology (not providing the answers that a covenant theologian would give in response). Moving on in chapter 3, the author gives a more thorough but still summary presentation of dispensational theology (with little to no space given pointing out its shortfalls).
His primary point in the book is to point out that "There Really Is a Difference" between coventant and dispensational theologies. The following excerpt from the end of chapter 5 is a good summary of some of his identified major points of difference:
Three factors are indispensable to Dispensational Theology. They clearly make Dispensational Theology distinct from Covenant Theology. Any system of theology which does not contain all three is not dispensational in the truest sense of the term.
The first factor is the recognition of the distinction between the nation of Israel and the Church. As noted earlier, Covenant Theology believes that the Church existed in Old Testament times and that Israel was a major part of the Church in the Old Testament. Thus, it is convinced that Israel and the Church are essentially the same. By contrast, Dispensational Theology believes that Israel and the Church are distinct entities. It is convinced that although both have had special relationships with God, they are not essentially the same. This distinction between Israel and the Church will be dealt with more in depth in a future chapter.
The second indispensable factor is the consistent use of a single hermeneutic (a single method of interpreting the Bible)--namely, the historical-grammatical method. In this method, words are given the common, ordinary meaning which they had in the culture and time in which the passage was written. As noted earlier, Covenant Theology employs a double hermeneutic--the historical-grammatical method for many passages but also the allegorical or spiritualizing method for a number of prophetic passages dealing with the future of Israel and the future Kingdom of God. By contrast, Dispensational Theology is convinced that the historical-grammatical method should be employed for all of Scripture, including those prophetic passages related to Israel and the Kingdom of God.
The third indispensable factor is the recognition that the ultimate purpose of history is the glory of God through the demonstration that He alone is the sovereign God. As noted earlier, Covenant Theology advocates that the ultimate purpose of history is the glory of God through the redemption of the elect. By contrast, although Dispensational Theology recognizes that the redemption of elect human beings is a very important part of God's purpose for history, it is convinced that it is only one part of that purpose. During the course of history God is working out many other programs in addition to the program of redeeming people. All of these programs must be contributing something to the ultimate purpose of history. Thus, the ultimate purpose of history has to be large enough to incorporate all of God's programs, not just one of them. Dispensational Theology proposes that the glory of God through the demonstration that He alone is the sovereign God is the only purpose capable of doing this. It also is convinced that the Scriptures indicate that this is the ultimate purpose of history.
Moving on from the descriptions of the two systems of theologies, he tests each's interpretation of some of the bibical accounts of stated covenants that God made with man (Abrahamic, Deuteronomic, Davidic, New Covenant). He then compares and contrasts the various views on the millenium, followed by observations and teaching on the kingdom of God and the consequences that holding to each theology bears on views of the Kingdom. Finally, he speaks of the nature of the church and the relationship between law and grace.
As the book moves along it becomes less and less an attempt at a neutral comparison of the systems and more and more an argument for the supremacy of dispensational theology.
Nevertheless, I have found this book to be helpful. It is written in simple language with the most important biblical reference quoted for ease and continuity of reading. It is a well thought out defense of dispensationalism. I wish that a more even handed attempt had been made at explaining covenantal theology. It appears some straw men were built and then handily knocked over.
To conclude I have copied the Table of Contents below so that the flow of the book can be easily discerned for those considering purchasing it:
1 What Is It All About?
2 An Examination of Covenant Theology
3 An Evaluation of Covenant Theology
4 An Introduction to Dispensational Theology
5 An Examination of Dispensational Theology
6 The Abrahamic Covenant
7 The Effects of the Abrahamic Covenant Upon Israel
8 The Palestinian or Deuteronomic Covenant
9 The Davidic Covenant
10 The New Covenant
11 A Description and Early History of Millennial Views
12 The Rejection of Premillennialism and Development of Amillennialism and Postmillennialism
13 The Revival of Millennial Views
14 The Kingdom of God Concept in the Scriptures
15 The Beginning and Nature of the Church
16 The Relationship of the Christian to Law and Grace
17 The Grace Administration of God's Moral Absolutes
18 Conclusion
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
65 of 79 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Disappointed!, January 3, 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: There Really Is a Difference!: A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology (Paperback)
I read this book because I wanted to learn more about the covenant theology position. I was already very familiar with dispensationalism so I thought that this book would be a good one to explain the covenant theology position and then give a comparison of the two systems (like the book claims to do). I wanted to understand each system so I could decide for myself what I believe is right. Renald Showers' book is extremely disappointing in light of its stated objective. The title claims to be a comparison of covenant theology and dispensationalism, but a comparison it is certainly NOT! The book has 208 pages of text. Of that 208 pages, Showers uses the first six pages to lay a foundation for the Biblical Philosophy of History. Then, he takes the next 19 pages to discuss covenant theology. Showers then devotes the remainng 183 pages to expound classic dispensationalism!!!
I am finishing my senior year at a conservative southern baptist seminary, and from that perspective I offer the following concerns with this book. 1) Showers does a miserable job of accomplishing his stated purpose of comparing the two systems. 2) Showers engages in the scholarly "no-no" of proof-texting -- meaning that showers will make a statement and then list a series of scripture references that "supposedly" support his statement. Showers does not explain any of these supporting verses, nor does he show HOW they support him. 3) Showers does very little exegesis. Exegesis means to read meaning "out of" a scripture, i.e. to bring out the intended meaning of a scripture. This is the process where the Bible is allowed to speak for itself (as opposed to eisegesis where one reads meaning "into" a scripture). Showers makes statements of interpretation and then uses prooftexting for support. Instead, Showers should take whatever passage he believes supports his ideas and exegete it, i.e. bring out the intended meaning of the passage and let it speak for itself to show that it supports his ideas. 4) Showers is blatantly biased in his scholarship. It is fine for a scholar to have his own opinions and to expound them in a book. However, Showers is not able to overcome his bias toward dispensationalism long enough to give a fair treatment of the opposing view. If Showers had given as much detail to covenant theology as he did to his "pet view" of dispensationalism then the book would have been twice as long. I would rather read a 300 page book done well than a 200 page book with biased scholarship. If Renald Showers wanted to write a book about classic dispensationalism he should have done so from the start! Given these discrepancies in Showers' scholarship I hold his writing as highly suspect and I doubt that I will read any of his writings in the future.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
77 of 110 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
terrible, January 4, 2005
This review is from: There Really Is a Difference!: A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology (Paperback)
This is a terrible book. It isn't really a comparison of the two views, as it presents itself to be, primarily because it really only presents one view, that being the Dispensationalist view. The author gives a cursory reading of what he sees as the major points of Covenant Theology, but he mostly just uses it as a foil for his presentation of Dispensationalist Theology. Most of the book consists of arguments consisting of a brief reading of the Covenant view followed by a more thorough reading of the Dispensationalist view and then a discussion of how Scripture supports the Dispensationalist view.
The author does not present the two views in a fair-minded way. He does not use first-class sources for the Covenant view. He often uses scripture out of context, and fills words with dubious meanings without justification or argument. There is no bibliography per se, just a list of references in the end notes, so the book doesn't even really serve as a jumping-off point for a more thorough study of the questions it covers.
This is not a scholarly book. It isn't a good book. This is a book for people who are already solidly on the Dispensationalist side of the fence and want their current position supported. I recommend running away from this book with all possible speed.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
