It's hard to have a constructive discussion between two opposing viewpoints. This is why Democrats and Republicans fight, Alabama fans and Auburn fans bicker, and Calvinists and Arminians blog against each other with the invective of an ISIS terrorist.

Vern Poythress sees the great divide between theologians who discuss eschatology. Writing from a covenantal perspective, in Understanding Dispensationalists he tries to lay the groundwork for constructive conversations between dispensationalists and various other camps. He writes, "I believe dialogue is possible in principle even between 'hardline' representatives of dispensational theology and equally 'hardline' representatives of its principal rival, covenant theology" (7). The tone of this book is pastoral, but it is not limp-wristed. "In the dispute between dispensationalism and covenant theology, both sides cannot be right" (7).

I find the most helpful section of this book to be Poythress' discussion of hermeneutical principles. He argues against the term "literal" interpretation because of its lack of finesse and accuracy in interpreting various genres, especially apocalyptic writings which are essential to any eschatological discussion. He writes, "In a sense nearly all the problems associated with the dispensationalist-nondispensationalist conflict are buried beneath the question of literal interpretation" (78). He notes that most people mean "first-thought interpretation" when they use the term literal interpretation. Instead, he argues for the use of "grammatical-historical interpretation." This methodology moves beyond a "flat interpretation" and attempts to read passages "as organic wholes and tries to understand what each passage expresses against the background of the original human author and the original situation" (84).

This book did much to help my understanding of both covenantal and dispensational frameworks. Poythress navigates the issues while maintaining the clarity of his convictions and a generous spirit. Books like this help foster dialogue where it is sorely lacking. ( )