Eschatology, Fundamentalism, Dispensationalism, Theology 

" ... 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!

... 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.

... 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". - Amazon review