This is worth a listening to. I haven’t yet listened to the non-premil positions. I plan to listen to Beale’s. I’ve read so much of Gentry and Bahnsen I am really wondering if I should bother. I’m iffy on Listening to Preston’s. It’s just hard to get excited about listening to a heretical position.
Per the premil views:
Thomas: Classic Dispensationalism–I’ve been guilty in the past of not preparing for a message. I think we see this here. He makes a couple of distinctions between his view and the progressive view, but I am not entirely sure what his point was. He didn’t make an actual argument and he ran out of time. Even worse, I don’t think he even cared.
Blaising: Progressive Dispensationalism–this is pretty good, actually. It sounds very covenantal and he appropriates the insights made by Ladd and others, yet retains the emphasis on God’s promises. It was more of a distinction of his position vis-a-vis with dispensationalism and little critique of amillennialism.
Blomberg: Blomberg basically explains his interest in historic premillennialism, and it is interesting. He really doesn’t develop his position and he certainly doesn’t offer a critique of the others. Even worse, he wasn’t always speaking into the microphone.