Most Helpful Customer Reviews
51 of 53 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent introduction to a re-emerging eschatology, October 10, 1999
By A Customer
I wouldn't dare be as eager as the previous reviewer, who labels the common eschatological view as "heresy." But what his actions demonstrate is the surprise that comes with learning that a great deal of censorship exists within the church, particularly between the Dispensationalists and the Reformed camps. I, too, was excitedly challenged by Gentry's book, a book that opened the door to an eschatology that is far more historic than the Dispensational dogma I was raised in and believed. Gee, there once was a time when I thought the only debate in eschatology was pretrib versus posttrib. Was I ever naive! Unfortunately, that naivety was ingrained into me, unawares, by teachers who censored all other views out of existence. Even in the old (correction, recent) pretrib versus posttrib battles, many churches draw hard lines of dogmatism. For example, the Calvary Chapel churches will not allow a premillenial posttrib Christian to become a pastor of a CC church, even though they really only disagree about the timing of an instantaneous event by a mere 7 years on the grand scale of eternity. It is the release from this kind of dogmatism that is so refreshing to me, and to the previous reviewer. So, a word of caution...don't go to the other extreme! Don't treat the popular school with the same dogmatism they held you in. Gentry enlightens the reader with significant evidence that the book of Revelation was written prior to 70 AD, rather than sometime in the 90's. His argument is not an attempt to twist facts to justify a silly and uncommon personal doctrinal preference, but rather it is an argument that has been historically held by many greats, down through the centuries. It is this evidence that first convinced Gentry. It is this evidence that has been summarily dismissed by dispensational groups, and hence never made known to the masses of followers. Gentry uses internal and external evidences about Revelation to present a strong case for pre-70 AD authorship. He deals with the 90 AD evidences, and finds them to be inconclusive, strained, and for the most part, weak. This includes the pivotal statement by Irenaeus (spelling?), and whether or not Irenaeus should be taken conclusively one way or another anyway. Ancient Christian literature is also surveyed, and the results are quite interesting. The reader must bear in mind that Gentry cannot prove his case either, but only show supporting evidence for it; evidence which is strong. But Gentry is honest in that he engages the arguments against his position. If only dispensationalism would expose its members to the pre-70 AD arguments!! (I do not intend to slam the dispies, for there are many fine Christians and churches of that persuasion! But if the truth be told, had I not opened my mind enough to look beyond the four walls of the old dispy box I was placed in, I would never have known the wonderful richness of various eschatological interpretation. This is not to say that many of Gentry's persuasion do not censor, but since the view is a minority today, they are usually forced to address the major views.) Gentry then takes the next logical step: if the book of Revelation was written before Jerusalem fell, and since the book warns of imminent dangers ("things which must shortly take place," "the time is near," "the beast...is about to come up out of the abyss," the judgment of the temple in chapter 11:1-2, etc...), then maybe the book is a warning about the impending Fall of Jerusalem! Gentry surveys that possibility, and the case is quite intriguing. Certainly, for ears unaccustomed to such an idea, it seems ludicrous and easy to dismiss without examination. That is naturally understandable. But please don't do yourself such an injustice! The newness and oddity will wear off as you read and ponder the information. If Gentry doesn't convince you to change your mind, fine. At least you have broken through the barrier of eschatological censorship. Just try not to jump out of one box and into another.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
35 of 38 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
History, prophecy and 70 A.D., September 5, 2002
Without a doubt, Dr. Kenneth Gentry's book, "Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation", is one of the most enlighting readings I have ever come upon. Intrigued by his review of R.C. Sproul's work, "The Last Days According to Jesus", I sought out BJF and read it with an open mind that had already dumped any pre-tribulation view after the Y2K "mess" and had starting thinking more about the nature of the Olivet Discourse. What I read astounded me. Dr. Gentry not only presents and defends his side with hard exegetical evidence, but also takes the time to present other views and then explains, using this same method, why they are not true. Digging through the pages of history of the early church fathers, citing excellent commentaries from the late 19th and early 20th century, and taking Scripture with the seriousness that any scholar should, Gentry gives overwhelming evidence that Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70 and also gives us answers into some of the mysteries such as Who is the Beast?
What is 666?
Is the tribulation past or still to come? as well as demonstrating that the majority of Revelation, all of the Olivet Discourse and the 70 weeks passage in Daniel was fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. Dr. Gentry shows that, as should always be the case, that prophecy is easier to understand after it has been fulfilled than before. If you are into any view that calls for a tribulation of any kind, should you decide to read this book, you will definitely be affected and challenge to make a change of such a view.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
61 of 70 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Dispensationalism Faw Down Go Boom!, July 12, 2000
With the unprecedented popularity of the "Left Behind" series, Tim LaHaye has re-energized the stumbling giant of dispensational premillenial eschatology. Christians who were disillusioned by the non-occurrence of the rapture in 1988, 1994, January 2000, and so on, have rallied around the latest attempt to reinvigorate their patently bogus interpretation of Revelation. If it could be shown that the book of Revelation was written prior to the fall of Jerusalem in AD70, it would cause serious problems to the futurist interpretation held by LaHaye. LaHaye's view of Revelation rests on his assumption that the book was written around AD93-96, and thus it can't be referring to the destruction of Jerusalem. But if it WAS written in AD69, and it IS a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, then LaHaye is left behind in his understanding of prophecy. Enter Ken Gentry. "Before Jerusalem Fell" is an outstanding presentation for the pre-AD70 dating of the book of Revelation. Gentry takes great pains to make his case from all available sources: extrabiblical documents, as well as Scripture itself. Profusely footnoted, exhaustively researched, and clearly written, BJF is a book that demands attention from all serious students of eschatology. Read it, and you may never want to touch another "Left Behind" novel again.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
