The Great Tribulation Past or Future?: Two Evangelicals Debate the Question

Rating:
Summary: A Much-Needed Comparison
Review: Evangelical Christianity's fascination with eschatology shows no signs of waning in the near future. Major political and social events continue to fuel the interest in "end-times" speculation, whether the Persian Gulf War, 9/11, or the war in Iraq. A significant indicator of evangelicalism's interest in eschatology is the infamous "Left Behind" series of books by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. This series of books has become something of a phenomenon in the publishing industry, and their popularity has not been limited to the evangelical world.

Through this series LaHaye and Jenkins have helped popularize an interpretive theological system known as Dispensational, and an eschatology of Pretribulationism. This eschatological framework undergirds the fictional story of the books, and may represent the "end-times" views of a majority of conservative evangelicals. Indeed, many of them have never heard of any other option, and those that have may likely consider other eschatological options as heresy!

_The Tribulation: Past or Future?_ provides a helpful introduction to another view of eschatology known as preterism or moderate preterism. Kenneth Gentry presents and defends the view that the events described by Christ in Matthew 24 are an example of fulfilled prophecy through the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Gentry looks carefully at the internal evidence of this text (and others) in an attempt to practice genuine hermeneutics rather than forcing a particular interpretive scheme upon the text. Ice presents and defends the futurist view, particularly Dispensational Pretribulationism, arguing that the events described in the Olivet Discourse are yet future and unfulfilled. The format of the book is a back and forth presentation and response by the authors that allows them to both build the strongest case for their views, and to respond to common criticisms.

Written on a popular level, the reader need not have any formal theological training prior to engaging the text. Even so, this book can also serve as an introductory textbook in systematic theology at Bible colleges. Readers will find this book a helpful resource that provides food for thought in today's popular "end-times" speculation. Those who enjoy this volume will also benefit from a review of Gary DeMar's _Last Day's Madness_ (American Vision, 1997), as well as R.C. Sproul's _The Last Days According to Jesus_ (Baker, 1998).

Rating:
Summary: If the second coming is future so is the tribulation
Review: Is the second coming in the future? YES. So the tribulation is future also. It is clear from (matthew 24) (revelation) and (daniel) and (pauls writings like 2 thess 2) that a tribulation is BEFORE the second coming. THE TRIBULATION IS CLIMAXED BY THE SECOND COMING. So if the second coming is future so is the tribulation. Is the antichrist in the future? Is the resurrection in the future ( 1 corinthians 15) Is the rapture future ( 1 thes 4:17) ( 1 corinthians 15:51) YES to all!!! So the tribulation before the second coming is future also. I believe in pretrib as well. Ice is right, cool.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent presentation of the subject
Review: Regardless of your current thoughts on the subject, this book will help you tie together any loose ends. It represents a very clear and easily-readable presentation of two opposite views of eschatology: futurism (dispensationalism) and preterism.

Like most evangelical Christians today, I grew up learning and teaching dispensationalism. Many studies in Daniel meant I had the images and calculations down pat. However, there was a nagging doubt involved in stretching the 70th week out for over two thousand years. Suddenly -- and recently -- everything is falling into place.

If you are unfamiliar with any other view of the end times, do yourself a favour and get a copy of this book. Both sides are very clearly presented. Read them and make up your own mind.

Rating:
Summary: Great Book for interested readers.
Review: The recent flurry of books containing debates in print is welcome, and refreshing. Nothing gives the reader a better introduction to a controversial subject than two scholars hashing it out under one cover. With the phenomenal success of the Jerry Jenkins/ Tim LaHaye prophecy novels, a layman-friendly defense of preterism is long overdue. (Preterism is the belief that much--NOT ALL--of Matthew 24 and the book of Revelation was fulfilled in AD 70.) Dr. Kenneth Gentry is one of the most eloquent and intelligent proponents of preterism currently publishing. Dr. Tommy Ice is a well-known dispensational author and speaker. Dr. Gentry carefully and persuasively makes a water tight case for preterism, leaving Dr. Ice to melt in a puddle of twisted Scripture, illogic, and unfounded supposition. Dispensational theology, with its harmful hermenutic and execrable eschatology, has dominated the thinking of the church for far too long. If you want to see why Hal Lindsey and company are constantly scrambling for credibility, read the first half of this book (Dr. Gentry's contribution.) If you still aren't convinced that LaHaye and Jenkins are publishing gross error, you weren't paying attention.

Rating:
Summary: Ice should have stayed home that day!
Review: This was a very insightful book. Thomas Ice and Kenneth Gentry debate the question: "Was the Great Tribulation in the first century? Or is it still in our future?"

Gentry argues that Jesus said it would be in "this generation" in which he lived (Matt. 24:34). Ice argues (somehow) that Jesus was saying: "It will occur in the future and that Jesus' statement 'this generation' really refers to a generation 2000 or more years away."

I really believe Thomas Ice should have stayed in bed the day he engaged this debate. Gentry points out numerous problems with Ice's wandering approach to Scripture. He notes that Ice deals very little with the text which actually has the phrase "the great tribulation" in it! Why does he wander off into other texts rather than focus on Matthew 24?

Gentry keeps a keen focus on Matthew 24, noting its historical setting in the first century (while the temple and Jerusalem were still standing) and its literary setting in Matthew itself (Matthew frequently warns about coming judgment on the first century people who reject and crucify Christ). There is no reason to project this prophecy way into the future (Matt. 23:36 and 24:34).

Gentry wins the debate hands down.