The Last Days According to Jesus

Rating:
Summary: 'The Last Days According to J. Stuart Russel'
Review: A strange book...I have never read anything like this. I have never read a book where the author fails to deliver his own argument. About half the book is quotations of other preterist scholars, and the other half is his commentary on their arguments.

If I weren't already a partial-preterist, this book would certainly not convince me of anything.

The first three chapters are a crawl to get through. I almost put it down. Things start to pick up in the middle, but the chapter called "What about the Destruction of Jerusalem?" was weak because Sproul based his entire argument on Josephus' account of the event, and Josephus was a known exagerrator. Trying to prove that the celestial and tectonic phenomenon spoken of by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse occured during the siege in A.D. 70 using the account of a biased historian is quiet a weak arguement.

Sproul's(or should I say Russel's?) arguement for the identification of Nero as the Antichrist was weak.

The last two chapters are bearable, and they form the "climax" of the book, if you want to call it that...

In conclusion, if you are looking for a commentary of J. Stuart Russel's Parousia, the opinion of every preterist scholar, or a light introduction to preterism, this is your book.

If you are looking for a serious explaination/exposition of preterism, look elseware.

Rating:
Summary: A good book ...
Review: but still too many inconsistencies.

Sproul's defense of partial-preterism is a very good book for two reasons; (1) it effectively defends the preterist interpretation of many prophetic verses in Scripture in an easily understandable way, and (2) Sproul remains tolerant of full-preterism.

I love Sproul's writing. He's easy to read and even easier to understand and retain. However this book falls just short of being a five-star book because Sproul, like all partial-preterists, fails to see his inconsistency in Matthew 16:27-28 and Danial 12:1-3. If, as Sproul suggests, Matthew 16:27-28 speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, than what of the "reward" spoken of there? Sproul never gives any conclusive reasons why I should believe that this "reward" is not the same as that spoken of in Revelation 22, and in fact all throughout the New Testament.. And if it is the same, then the partial-preterist fails in his efforts at consistency because he still puts all those other verses in our future.

In addition, Sproul never really addresses the relationship between Daniel 12:1-3 and the great tribulation of Matthew 24:21. If the great tribulation occured in the first century, than I need to know why I should understand that Daniel 12:1-3, including the resurrection, did not.

All this being said, Sproul's honest look at escatology is a breathe of fresh air in a church consumed with "Left Behind" science fiction. I only wish Sproul would have drawn his logical conclusions to their complete end.

Rating:
Summary: Escatology according to the Bible
Review: Give this book a read if you are interested in what the Bible says about escatlogical issues, instead of deciding your viewpoint first, and then looking for verses that support that position.

Rating:
Summary: Good Introduction to Preterism, but Unconvincing
Review: I enjoyed this book as a good, solid introduction to the preterist view. R.C. Sproul gives a fair and comprehensive look at the issues regarding end-times prophecy from a preterist perspective, explaining both the emotional reasons behind the rising popularity of the view (the desire to defend scriptural truth against attacks that first century prophecies were wrong) and make a thorough examination of the preterist view itself.

What I found curious about the book, however, is that even R.C. Sproul does not seem completely convinced of the preterist view, and yet he seems reluctant to address these limitations directly. It is these limitations, in fact, that prevent me from accepting this view myself. Holding to a preterist view -- in my opinion -- is like being pregnant. One is either pregnant or one is not pregnant. One cannot be "sort of" pregnant or "mostly" pregnant. Likewise, either one sees the Olivet Discourse as being completely fulfilled in the first century or one does not. One cannot see it being "mostly" fulfilled or "partially" fulfilled. And this is the very problem with preterism.

Preterism claims to take the scriptures literally -- and to be the only view to do so completely. And yet, in order to maintain preterism's brand of literalism, it must play loose with prophetic fulfillment. Prophetic fulfillment becomes like horseshoes. "Close" is good enough. For those who insist on prophecies being fulfilled precisely, preterism can only get in the ballpark. It cannot provide the kind of precise, literal fulfillment that scripture demands. If one demands, not just a literal fulfillment but a PRECISE fulfillment, the best the first century events can do is to provide a foreshadowing of events to come.

In Acts 1:9, for example, we are told that, when Jesus returns, it will be as He ascended -- in the clouds, in bodily form. Where, in preterism, do we find this? Nowhere but a vision of Josephus. Very unsatisfying. Likewise, the Great Tribulation -- not only did Jesus say there would be none like it, but there never would be again. The slaughter of one million Jews in the first century was horrific, but it pales in comparison to the six million under Hitler and the nine million under Stalin. How could a first-century slaughter fulfill this prophecy? And instead of an abomination inside the temple, as Jesus foretold, preterism substitutes eagles on the Roman standards outside the courtyard. As my mother would say, "It's close, but no banana."

As precise a theologian as Sproul is, his willingness to accept these "close but no banana" fulfillments is curious to me; and his own apparent discomfort with the apparent lack of precision in certain prophecies begs for direct address, and yet one never comes. I did sense that these things seemed to bother Sproul, as well they should. As such, as one of the foremost theologians of our times, I would have liked to have seen him address this problem head-on.

H. L. Nigro, author of Before God's Wrath: The Bible's Answer to the Timing of the Rapture

Rating:
Summary: Apologetics, not eschatology
Review: I've enjoyed what Sproul I've read over the years, but I was a bit disappointed in this offering. As others have said, I found it slightly helpful but generally mediocre.

Part of the problem is that the book is not what it is hyped as being. Rather than a systematic study of eschatology, this book is an attempt to refute Bertrand Russell's book Why I Am Not A Christian, specifically Russell's objection (shared by most liberal critics) that Christ promised he would return during the lifetime of the apostles. Sproul defends against Russell by arguing that Christ did return within their lifetime, but that it was a metaphorical return in the form of judgment (the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.) instead of a literal, visible return.

Because the book is structured as an argument with Bertrand Russell, rather than a defense of a particular eschatological position, it loses much of its persuasive strength. Those who are already preterists will cheer in agreement; those who are not will think little more than, "Hmm, interesting argument." I wouldn't expect this book to change many minds.

Rating:
Summary: The return of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem.
Review: In "The Last Days According To Jesus" R.C. Sproul gives a very fair and thorough treatment of the subject of the return of Christ with particular focus on the Olivet Discourse. Unlike the "literalist" who too often strains the plain meaning of the text(s), Sproul has allowed the Word of God to simply interpret itself.

Throughout "Last Days", Sproul interacts with the classic "full preterist" position as put forth in J. Stuart Russell's nineteenth century work "The Parousia." While agreeing with much of what Russell has to say, Sproul eventually must depart from Russell's theology else abandon his orthodoxy with respect to the doctrines of the bodily resurrection and the physical return of the Lord.

In sum, Sproul has put together the pieces of prophecy surrounding the coming of the Lord (relying much on the scholarship of Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.) by interpreting them in the light and context of their day. In doing so, Sproul announces to the evangelical world the significance of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem.

If anyone would like to be set free from the yoke of an unbiblical (even commercial) end times system of thought, and be able to take Jesus at His word when He stated that "this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place...", read R.C. Sproul's "The Last Days According To Jesus."

Rating:
Summary: Excellent introduction to the partial preterist view.
Review: In classic "Sproulian" style, this book probes the subject matter of Christ's Olivet Discourse. Are the events that our Lord describes to be understood as taking place in the distant future (even beyond 1999!) or are they to be understood as events that would take place in connection with Jerusalem's destruction in AD 70? While the former option seems more sensational, more exciting, Sproul methodically shows the reader that an honest read of Christ's words will inevitably lead to the latter conclusion. His discussion of the time frame references ("this generation") is excellent. Did Jesus mean what he said when he promised that the catastrophic events he described would be experienced by many of his orignal hearers? Sproul sees this as an essential question to be answered if we wish to defend the integrity and veracity of our Lord's words. As a pastor, I hope that other Christian teachers and leaders will read this book and be shaken from so much of the dogmatism that surrounds eschatology today. Even if one is not fully convinced by Sproul's argument, he should at least be convinced that maybe there are more options than the "Lahaye-I'm premil,pretrib and you must be too" approach that is so pervasive today! How refreshing to learn that godly men down through the ages have held differing views about the "last days." RC has done a great service for the church!

Rating:
Summary: Sproul brings preterism to the forefront of evangelicalism
Review: It is almost humorous to see "Last Days According to Jesus" in Christian bookstores next to other eschatological works by men like LaHaye and Hagee. While Sproul's book is nowhere near as exciting, it definitely a better grip on biblical exegesis. Even if one is a pre-trib dispensationalist, I would highly recommend reading this work. Sproul brings up the old end-times view of preterism, in which much of biblical prophecy is considered already fulfilled. If one wants to be well-read and up-to-date in the debate over end-times prophecy this book is a must-read.

Rating:
Summary: Important part of the prophecy discussion
Review: Regardless whether you agree with his conclusion, Sproul delivers important questions on Jesus statements in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. What did Jesus mean when he said the temple would be destroyed, Jerusalem sacked, and that He would return all before the generation to whom He was speaking would pass away? Sproul argues that we cannot play "linguistic gymnastics" with the meaning of words (i.e. was His predicted return referring to His transfiguration soon afterward or did "generation" mean Jews throughout history, not the ones who heard Jesus words at that time).

This book attempts to reintroduce the Biblical view of prophecy that Christians have believed for centuries, but has been forgotten in recent years; yet it doesn't spend time discussing the validity or problems with other equally Biblical views. Sproul targets his arguments primarily against the complaints of liberals who take Jesus's words at face value and believe was wrong (meaning, Jesus said he would return but hasn't). In doing so, he ends up "placing in doubt the conclusions of many contemporary evangelical prophecy enthusiasts," as Kenneth Gentry said.

In short, Sproul gives us a great introduction to a view call Partial Preterism, meaning that some, not all, of the prophecies in Scripture have been fulfilled, in part if not in full. A challenging, thoughtful book that must not be ignored.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent work
Review: Sproul has written a very insightful work showing that the populist eschatology of this day (dispensationalism) radically misunderstands an important NT theme: That of the coming judgment upon Jerusalem for rejecting the Messiah.

Sproul points out that Matt 24 and a few other prophetic passages speak of near term events, rather than the history ending Second Coming of Christ. He shows this is helpful for affirming Jesus' prophetic integrity, in that Christ prophesied the destruction of the Temple 40 years before it occurred (which happened in AD 70).

Sproul, of course, maintains his evangelical orthodoxy by not swallowing the hyperpreterist determination to make ALL NT prophecies come to fulfillment by AD 70 (such as the Second Advent and the resurrection of all men). He distances himself from this strange new movement, even while holding some positions similar to theirs.

Though this book is somewhat academic, it is very insightful and accessible to the knowledgeable evangelical Christian. His associate, Keith Mathison, has edited a companion volume (of sorts) that cautions the reader against abusing the prophetic insights by pressing them beyond their legitimate conclusions.