Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond

Rating:
Summary: Strong on "Post" and "A", Mediocre on "Pre"
Review: I have read a few comparison books on eschatology in general and the millennium in particular. This one is the best yet on the millennium. I would have given it five stars, except for the mediocrity of the premillennial presentation.

Gentry, as usual, expresses himself very well and is very convincing, both in his own essay as well as in his responses. Strimple, considering the limitations of this work, does a fine job of covering various Scriptures that address the amillennialist position. The worst essay of the three is penned by Blaising, who takes entirely too many pages to explain the premillennial stance. He gets bogged down in the history of premillennialism, and then is so technical in the actual presentation of his own view that he is very tough to follow. The reader comes away scratching his/her head wondering what in the world did Blaising actually say! Premillennialism, however, is so commonplace that it requires the least explanation of the three positions.

Bock provides a very cordial, conciliatory conclusion, touching upon points that are crucial to formulating one's own view of Revelation 20:1-6. I was rather surprised when he revealed his own position near the end of his essay, for I certainly did not detect it through his earlier remarks.

This book gives a great presentation of the postmillennial and amillennial views. The presentation for premillennialism pales in comparison, but other readers may find Blaising's essay more helpful than I did.

Overall, this work is a good investment for anyone wanting to compare the three basic millennial views.

Rating:
Summary: Strong on "Post" and "A", Mediocre on "Pre"
Review: I have read a few comparison books on eschatology in general and the millennium in particular. This one is the best yet on the millennium. I would have given it five stars, except for the mediocrity of the premillennial presentation.

Gentry, as usual, expresses himself very well and is very convincing, both in his own essay as well as in his responses. Strimple, considering the limitations of this work, does a fine job of covering various Scriptures that address the amillennialist position. The worst essay of the three is penned by Blaising, who takes entirely too many pages to explain the premillennial stance. He gets bogged down in the history of premillennialism, and then is so technical in the actual presentation of his own view that he is very tough to follow. The reader comes away scratching his/her head wondering what in the world did Blaising actually say! Premillennialism, however, is so commonplace that it requires the least explanation of the three positions.

Bock provides a very cordial, conciliatory conclusion, touching upon points that are crucial to formulating one's own view of Revelation 20:1-6. I was rather surprised when he revealed his own position near the end of his essay, for I certainly did not detect it through his earlier remarks.

This book gives a great presentation of the postmillennial and amillennial views. The presentation for premillennialism pales in comparison, but other readers may find Blaising's essay more helpful than I did.

Overall, this work is a good investment for anyone wanting to compare the three basic millennial views.

Rating:
Summary: Five Stars for Premillennialism
Review: I picked up this book almost immediately after it came in the store. I found it both enlightening and very educational, as I learned more about the pressupositional mindset that underlies the hermeutical methodology that all three viewpoints uses in approaching scripture.

Gentry - His presentation is very well done- I've read his works before. However, his rebuttal of the premill position was very poor in quality (all he did was restate his previous arguments...which are really only impressive to postmill and amill folks).

Strimple - spends most of his time attacking premillennialism, sadly. He does, however, present an accurate case for amillennialism. In fact, he confuses premillennialism and dispensationalism, treating them as synonyms. His rebuttals to the other positions aren't really too impressive and he and Gentry pretty much did the same thing (repeat their earlier arguments instead of really interacting with Blaising's presentation).

Blaising - does a wonderful job of exegetically presenting his case for premillennialism. Blaising's response to amillennialism and postmillennialism is pretty good.

Bock's essay - Bock's essay summed up the whole book well. This book won't really 'convince' anyone of either view if you already come to it holding certain viewpoints about what is 'proper' and 'fitting' in our understanding and application hermenutics to the text.

Overall- I'd recommend this book. I find it interesting that myself (I'm premill dispensational) and another reader (amill) both read the book and came to two different conclusions about who 'won' the debate.

I'm thinking of changing my view to pan-millennialist---- it'll all 'pan out' in the end *grin* I recommend the book to anyone who wants to take a good look at the differing millennial views. The one thing I do regret not seeing in the book is a presentation of the historic premill view, since it does differ from the dispensational (progressive or classic or revised) view.

Rating:
Summary: Counterpoint Series
Review: I'm going to apply this commentary for the entire Counterpoint Series published by Zondervan Publishing Company. My compliments to that company for creating this series. I initially purchased "Four Views on the Book of Revelation" but soon realized it was only one in a series. I got so much out of that volume, that I decided to purchase the entire set to study and keep for reference. My spiritual growth has been remarkable as a result. Seminary students and professionals would probably enjoy this series, which seems geared for them. But this series is also excellent for those college-educated laypeople who feel inclined to enhance their understanding of Christian theology. That is, with one caveat: Buy a decent theological dictionary to refer to at first. It probably won't get used much after about the third book you choose to read, but initially you will be need it to be confident of some of the terms used among advanced theologians. Then, the Counterpoint series will give you a full understanding of many different concepts and concerns of the Christian faith which have been applicable from early on until the present. I've learned a lot, and the only way I think I could do better is if I were enrolled in Seminary. A list of all the titles I am aware of from this series is:

Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?
Five Views on Law and Gospel
Five Views on Sanctification
Four Views on Hell
Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World
Four Views on the Book of Revelation
Three Views on Creation and Evolution
Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond
Three Views on the Rapture
Two Views on Women in Ministry

Rating:
Summary: Uneven presentation; OK discussion, but not concise
Review: In investigating the issue of the millennium, where should you start? Ultimately, I think this book makes the wrong choices in answering this question. While the discussion is interesting at times, I can't help but feel that Darrell Bock's summary essay should have been re-worked and presented at the beginning of the work. Basically, Bock writes that one's hermeneutical approach (the prism by which one interprets Scripture) largely determines what you believe the end times looks like. Bock notes how each passage deals with eschatological texts, and what questions each feels are key to understanding the nature of Jesus' return. If he had placed this at the beginning, I think it would be more helpful to the reader. Perhaps he could have then placed another essay "wrapping things up" at the end.

Kenneth Gentry Jr. contributes the postmillennial perspective, but does a much better job critiquing the positions of the others than advancing his own case. In his own essay, he really needed to a) explain his own hermeneutical approach in a coherent and distinctive fashion, rather than use generalities, and b) take the time to formulate a detailed explanation of how postmillennialism interprets Revelation 20 (the key text). As someone who considers himself sympathetic to postmillennialism's expectation that God's Kingdom is irrestibly advancing even in this current age, I really wanted Gentry to make a solid case. After all, Jonathan Edwards (arguably the greatest American mind ever) was post-mil, so surely it's a reasonable position. Alas.

Robert Strimple presents the amillennial position and does an excellent job presenting his overall hermeneutic and understanding of key passages. Of all the essays, his is probably the best. He boldly tackles Romans 11 to explain how amillennialism understands what is usually read as regarding a future conversion of Israel (although it seems Strimple only represents a portion of amil proponents who feel that Paul is not speaking 'prophetically' here).

Craig Blaising advances the premillennial position, and does a fair job with the exegesis portion, but I agree with the reviewer below who feels that premillennial positions come in basically two varities, and that each should have been allowed to speak for itself individually. Blaising spends too much on time on the history of thought regarding the nature of the eras beyond our own, and not enough time directly discussing the hermeneutics involved in how premillenialists arrive at the premillennial understanding of Revelation 20. In fairness, he is representing both the "George Ladd" premil folks (like me), and the much more strictly literal approach dispensationalist interpreters, so he's got to couch his argument in the shared understanding of the central text.

At any rate, I recommend Stanley Grenz's The Millennial Maze instead of this book. Grenz, although he is an amil guy, is extremely fair. Each position's history and hermeneutic is discussed in concise fashion, and followed with a targeted critique. I'm not finished reading it yet, but I actually thought that in presenting postmillennialism, he made a much better argument than Kenneth Gentry did in this book. In addition, I feel like I understand dispensationalism a WHOLE lot better than I ever did.



Rating:
Summary: Too particular
Review: There is much to be said for this book, and the counterpoint series by Zondervan.

The quality of each of the authors' arguments varied from good to so-so to just not very good at all...

I came to this book as a premillenialist, but my reason for reading it was to find out why so many people were amillienialists, and why there were more and more people defecting to postmillenial thinking.

Here is what I found:

Post-mil: The author does a very nice job of wresting texts out of their context and giving them a grand new meaning. I was also disappointed in the rebuttals from the two other viewpoints.

A-mil: The author spends more time attacking the Pre-mil view than he does proving his own view. As for his arguments which were for this exegetical approach, I'd say that the NT writers were inspired by God and fully qualified to interpret passages in the OT in a certain way. We are NOT qualified to do that.

Pre-mil: I agree with the rebuttals from the A-mil author - more time should be spent with the text itself. I think there is more than enough evidence there for this position. I also noticed that this position seemed to have many more pages devoted to it than the other positions.

The essay by Dr. Bock was most helpful, and reminds us to remember that we, too, come to every reading of the Book with presuppositions and preconceived ideas about what it says.

I will be reading through some of the books in the helpful bibliography to find some more reading on the a-mil position.

Overall, a nicely-written tome that could, with a bit of revision, become a really great tome!

My hats off to Zondervan and the authors & editors for doing what very few would dare to do: present opposing viewpoints of Theology within the same book.

Rating:
Summary: Five Stars for Premillennialism
Review: This book is a great place to start for those trying to understand the millennial kingdom issue in Christianity. I would recommend this book over the Clouse's book because it is more recent and updated (especially with the rise of hermeneutical and theological developments in evangelical circles in the past twenty years). I thought this book would question my premillennial approach to understanding eschatology, but having read the articles by Gentry (postmillennialist) and Strimple (amillennialist) I have a firmer standing on premillennialism. Here is an overview of the three essays:

1. Kenneth Gentry (Postmillennialism):

This is the worst essay by far of the three. Gentry's hermeneutical and exegetical method is flawed and absurd. I don't know how and why anyone would still want to be a postmillennialist after reading this essay. Trying to argue that the Edenic, Abrahamic, and New Covenants support some sort of postmillennial progressivism and reconstructionism of society is totally lacking in Biblical support. Also, his expositions of Psalm 2; Isaiah 2:2-4; Matthew 13; John 12:31-32; Matthew 28:19-20; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28; and Revelation 20 (especially this one) to support a gradual increase of Christ's reign on earth now is laughable. I don't see how the angel who binds Satan in Revelation 20:1 can refer to Christ, and how the "first resurrection" in verses 4-5 can refer to spiritual regeneration at conversion. Gentry pretty much shot down his own view with this one.

2. Robert Strimple (Amillennialism):

Good attempt, but doesn't meet the exegetical support. Trying to argue for an amillennial position using a Covenant Theology structure imposed on the text doesn't cut it (see his discussion on pp. 84-100 for a good overview of how Covenant Theologians interpret Old Testament promises). To argue that the Church has replaced Israel in the New Testament, that all the Israelite promises in the Old Testament refer to Christ, and that the New Testament should be given priority when interpreting the Old Testament is totally unnacceptable. This is typical Reformed interpretation of Scripture: as long as it fits with TULIP or the Covenant of Grace structure, it has to be true. Strimple's "Dutch" interpretation (a recent view) of Romans 11 is not convincing nor is his exegesis of Revelation 20 (he follows too much with Meredith Kline's double binary pattern to prove that the "first resurrection" is not a bodily resurrection). Of course, Reformed people say that if a new interpretation fits their system it must be Biblical, but if a new interpretation arises in another tradition it must be heretical. Typical of Reformed arrogance and myopism.

3. Craig Blaising (Premillennialism):

Very good essay. Proves his point well. The first section goes over the history and varieties of premillennialism. The only problem with this essay is that Blaising spends too much time on Revelation 20 (although a fine exposition) and too little time on salvation-history of premillennialism (especially dispensational premillennialism). He should have minimized his discussion of the history and varieties of premillennialism and focused on how God's program works in a premillennial scheme.

Overall, a good starter for those wanting a good understanding of the three millennial issues. I would also urge the reader to read Darrell Bock's summary essay. It is an excellent discussion on exegetical, hermeneutical, and presuppositional methods. How one comes to the Bible influences what kind of conclusions we come up with. Bock ends off his essay by arguing that the issue of the millennium is not merely an intellectual matter, it deals with how our position affects how we evangelize and work with our culture and society. This book should not disappoint anyone looking for a book on an important issue.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent summary of Millennial views
Review: This book is an excellent exploration into the varying millennial views. Each author presents myriads of Biblical and theological evidence in making his case. For those who are uncertain of the basis for differing millennial views, this volume will clear up the questions. The responses that each author presents to his colleagues' views are also very well thought out. The book is somewhat technical and assumes the reader's understanding of some basic theological terms; I found myself needing to take extensive notes on the book to adequately process the information presented. Nonetheless, Bock and company do a marvelously comprehensive job of highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the differing positions, allowing the reader to make a fully informed decision him- or herself.

Rating:
Summary: Vapid
Review: This debate had almost no life in it. I just don't see that much interaction between the three authors. Also, the fact that there were only three authors is problematic. Not having separate sections for Historic and Dispensational Premillenialism will certainly effect a work like this negatively. To have a Dispensationalist speak for an Historic Premillenialist ir vice versa will leave one of the views with poor representation because the presenter has no vested interst in that viewpoint (and is in fact an opponent, causing their presentation to intentionally be weak). This is certainly not the book that you want to use in a discipleship group or study. THe presentations are too weak. The way that each author approaches the discussion is far from forceful, which I feel it should be. I would suggest Meaning of the Millenium instead. But I could be wrong since there are people who've rated this work higher than the four-point. So check it out if you'd like.

Rating:
Summary: A Debate That Has Lasted About Two Millennia
Review: Three Views on the Millenium and Beyond is not a book that you should begin your studies in eschatology with. It is a rather difficult book but not impossible to work through. One needs to be at least minimally familiar with each of the positions and some of the arguments if the book is to be completely gratifying. For instance, if you are not familiar with Revelation 20, then you might as well put this book down until you have scanned it through a few times.

Nevertheless, the authors impressively articulate their positions and their reasons for believing what they do. This book will provide you with an intermediary starting place for being able to better understand each of the three positions (which are to be taken broadly since there are disagreements within each of the camps). I will not comment on who "won" the debate, partly because I am largely agnostic about it at this point (though I do favor one position). But each did provide thought-provoking arguments and responses that need to be more fully considered (at least for myself).

Darrell Bock's closing essay was helpful in pointing out both areas of agreement and disagreement. Despite his admonition of a possible bias towards premillenialism, I did not find that it was largely evident. I was also impressed to find that Robert Strimple admitted that he had changed his opinion on one section after reading another writer's argument in the book: certainly a rare case! Interestingly, the contributers would often respond with comments like, "that position is not necessarily indicative of the such and such view." Quite often, the writers agreed with eachother. But don't be fooled, for there are many disagreements as well.

Overall assessment: this book was very-well written, edifying, and educational in my eschatological studies. I recommend that others read a few books by Blaising (premil), Hendriksen or Hoekema (amil), or Gentry (postmil), prior to reading this book. That way, you will be more familiar with the terminology and the arguments. But if you are interested in the eschatology discussions, then you must read this book.