A Curator’s Guide — An Exploration into Revelation

1031 reads

There are 2 Comments

TylerR's picture

Two things:

  • Has anybody heard anything about the  "charts" series Wallace mentions? This seems interesting, but I'd never even heard of the series until now.
  • Robert Thomas' two-volume commentary is probably the best (and the only?) exegetical commentary out there from a dispensational perspective. I've preached through portions of Revelation, and my family recently went through the whole book for our family devotions. I think Thomas is the best place for a dispensationalist to start for sensible (not sensationalistic) exegesis. Walvoord's short commentary is always helpful, but he seems to go beyond the text in some cases.

Tyler Robbins is a pastor at Sleater-Kinney Road Baptist, in Olympia, WA, and an Investigations Manager with the State of Washington. He blogs as the Eccentric Fundamentalist

sfcorbin's picture

TylerR wrote:

Two things:

  • Has anybody heard anything about the  "charts" series Wallace mentions? This seems interesting, but I'd never even heard of the series until now.
  • Robert Thomas' two-volume commentary is probably the best (and the only?) exegetical commentary out there from a dispensational perspective. I've preached through portions of Revelation, and my family recently went through the whole book for our family devotions. I think Thomas is the best place for a dispensationalist to start for sensible (not sensationalistic) exegesis. Walvoord's short commentary is always helpful, but he seems to go beyond the text in some cases.

Hi, Tyler, I've been reading S/I for a long time, but only recently got my own login.  I've always appreciated your insights.

I'm preaching through Revelation now.  I preached most of it during our Wednesday evening service but recently transitioned to finishing it in our Sunday afternoon service.  I am almost finished with Revelation 21.

I've never heard of the chart resource Wallace references.

I mainly use Thomas' 2-volume commentary.  I have to agree that he is excellent.  I haven't agreed with every conclusion he's drawn, but I always have to take his conclusions seriously as I form my own.  I do occasionally refer to Walvoord's, but his discussions seem truncated at times.  As you say, he seems to go beyond the text, but not deep enough in his discussions.