Customer Reviews

A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times

5 star:		(32)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Kim Riddlebarger has become part of an ever increasing chorus of scholars who are challenging much of the pop eschatology that has come to define much of service level evangelicalism. This book, I believe, is possibly the best defense of amillennialism since Hoekema and as such, is a book that all dissenters of amillennialism will have to reckon with.

This book attempts to build a comprehensive defense of amillennialism from the ground up. It is very systematic in its presentation and I found this to be a highly attractive approach to eschatology. He spends a good amount of time in the first two sections of the book laying much needed groundwork for meaningful eschatology by getting into issues of terminology as well as biblical theology. Folks looking for a popular level of treatment here might get bogged down and even bored, but I found Riddlebarger's discussion to be very stimulating and intellectually rigorous.

Riddlebarger's treatment of the already/not yet tension of the kingdom of God is outstanding (including his linear comparison of the 'this age/the age to come' dynamic of eschatology). It is clear that Riddlebarger has been greatly influenced by the likes of Vos and Ridderbos in his presentation of inaugurated eschatology, and is therefore in good company. In the process, he advances a decidedly covenantal theology. Riddlebarger clearly understands that amillennialism relies a great deal on the groundwork he erects in the first 2 parts of the book. As he repeatedly notes, if the inaugurated eschatology that is based on a covenantal hermeneutic is biblically sound, those who dissent from amillennialism are going to be left scrambling.

Riddlebarger then moves on to Part 3, which is an exposition of key Biblical texts such as Daniel 9, Matthew 24, Romans 9-11, and Revelation 19-21. The novice to eschatology might find some rough sledding in these sections, particularly the Daniel and Romans sections, but I have to say that Riddlebarger's exegesis is thorough, logical, and compelling. This is no surface level treatment of these texts, but is rather an in-depth and well thought out presentation that interacts with a variety of views and a variety of Biblical texts in the process. Very good section.

In the end, while I will note a few minor weaknesses below, this book is a 'must have' on eschatology, even if one dissents from amillennialism. This book provides a framework upon which all scholars who are interested in presenting a meaningful eschatology ought to follow. He builds a case from the ground floor, offers rigorous Biblical exegesis, takes on dissenting views, and arrives at well thought out conclusions. Riddlebarger's critique of Ladd's premillennialism is very good, and his argument in favor of a substantive role for ethnic Israel in the consummation of the Kingdom from an amillennial perspective is provocative. His critique of Robertson in particular represents, I think, where the future of amillennial scholarship is headed.

I will note some weaknesses of the book that, while regretable, do not detract from the otherwise outstanding presentation given here. First, his critique of dispensationalism was overstated. There is no question in my mind that the brand of dispensationalism championed by the Walvoord, LaHaye, and Ice wing of dispensationalism is thoroughly beaten to a pulp in here. And while this is certainly an exercise that has merit, the fact is that this brand of dispensationalism has been in steady retreat for the last 50 years because of the problems that have been exposed by other scholars that long predate Riddlebarger. Riddlebarger's book could have been better had he interacted more substantively with the progressive dispensational movement that is likely where the future of respectable dispensationalism is headed. He interacts with Blaising and Saucy a little bit, but not as much as I would have liked.

Second, Riddlebarger is occasionally guilty of employing the argument from silence to advance his points (actually to critique dissenting perspectives). While it's true that the argument from silence is not always a logical fallacy, it must be used very carefully and tightly in order to be a legitimate debate tactic. Unfortunately, Riddlebarger's use of it, though sparingly, struck me as getting too close for comfort to slipping into an informal fallacy. Lastly, as others have pointed out, the book cries out for a Scripture index and topical index that isn't there.

So while the book isn't perfect, it is predominately outstanding and is definitely a book that will have to be contended with by those who hold to postmillennialism and all forms of premillennialism. It's definitely not the last word on the subject, but it's one of the more thoughtful and rigorous resources to hit the field of eschatology in several years.

Having recently moved from the 'wishy-washy' theology of the faith/charismatic movement a correct, bible based eschatological view was important. Yes, of course up to reading this book I still held to 'Dispensationalism' although I was becoming aware that there were some large 'theological holes'.

What I really liked about Dr Riddlebarger's book was the comprehensive rebuttal of obvious and not so obvious objections that would come from the other positions.

As has been said before the issue of Satan being bound according to Amillennialism could seem problematic: however there is sufficient New Testament scripture to show that this 'binding' does not mean the cessation of all satanic activity - satan is unable to deceive the nations (Rev 20); he has also been made a public spectacle (Col 2v15)... for the Christian satan really is a toothless lion. Against the dispensational view of satan which suggests there is a 'dualistic' battle with satan being an enemy able to inflict losses on Christendom and by default inflict losses on Christ... the Amillennial view is the scriptural view.

I find more and more that our brothers and sisters who hold to 'faith/charismatic' theology and along with that 'Dispensational' theology tend not to be `thorough' or 'thoroughly honest' in terms of intellectually assessing theological positions. Mark Noll pointed out in his book 'The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind' that modern evangelicals are not known for their rigorous thinking, nor does popular evangelicalism tend to sustain the intellectual life. With hindsight I can see I was guilty of this attitude when first considering the Calvinist/Reformed position. I would therefore encourage all to read this compelling work and make an honest choice based on the position that gives the most compelling exegetical argument.

Final word... our eschatological position (like most positions) will not bar us from heaven however it is only in walking in the truth do we glorify God... so everything counts!

Other reviewers have given a very accurate and complete picture of what you will find in this book, so I'll keep my review short. I agree that I would have liked further treatment of Progressive Dispensationalism. I also found Riddlebarger's view on Romans 11 and Israel to be interesting, though I disagree with him as he notes many amillennialists would. This book is a must read for anyone wanting to understand the various views of eschatology (specifically the amillennialist treatment of those views).

This book was well timed for me. I'm a former dispensationalist turned amillenialist for similar reasons that Riddlebarger gives. Now, I find myself as a seminary student back in a very dispensationally bent school. Needless to say, I was not getting a clear treatment of amillenialism nor was I able to find much contemporary treatment of the subject until this book was released. I hope this book finds it way into seminary classrooms everywhere. Thank you Dr. Riddlebarger.

Dr. Riddlebarger does a masterful job of presenting the different millennial views held by most Christians. He is so thorough in his discussion of this topic that the Premil and Postmil reader will most assuredly reconsider their positions and the problems contained therein. The need for a book that clearly lays out the biblical support for the Amillennial position has been needed for sometime and I would have to say that this book fulfills that need. This is a book that every student of theology should read and carefully consider when dealing with the difficult subject of eschatology.

I have instinctively gravitated toward the amillennial position after years of Bible study, not because I completely understood amillennialism, but because pre-millennialism contradicted some fundamental doctrinal beliefs I held.

I read "A Case for Amillennialism" in an effort to reconcile my instinctual position with scriptural evidence. It turns out that many of Dr. Riddlebarger's arguments flow from the same points that led me to amillennialism in the first place.

This book IS NOT an in depth interpretation of prophecy. It is a defense and description of the amillennial hermeneutic, and Dr. Riddlebarger does an excellent job of explaining why one should interpret Revelation in light of other New Testament writings instead of forcing Revelation to be the last chapter of the Old Testament.

This book will help anyone understand the need for a proper approach to prophecy, and if your goal is to delve deeper into the subject, this book is an excellent springboard.

In saying that this is a new standard in amil apologetics I don't mean to imply that other books on the same topic are inferior. For instance I just read Waldron's book - The End Times Made Simple. It's a terrific book, but this book by Riddlebarger is far more comprehensive. Also, Hoekema's book - The Bible and the Future - has long been a standard amil textbook, but this one is more current. Here Riddlebarger is able to speak to more current issues like the Left Behind phenomena and postmillennialism. So, though those others are not inferior, this book moves to the top of my list simply because of its comprehensive and current nature.

What Riddlebarger does real well is to ground amillennialism in the promise-fulfillment structure of the Bible. The Old Testament deals with the promise of the coming kingdom and the new deals with the fulfillment. Of the four main millennial views, amillennialism does the best job of accounting for the New Testament emphasis on fulfillment.

One other reviewer mentioned that he wished Riddlebarger would have dealt more with the Progressive Dispensationalism than he does. This reviewer mentioned that the Lahaye/Walvoord school of dispensationalism has been thoroughly dismantled by other books. I agree with this, with a caveat. In academic circles it seems like the Walvoord school is losing ground or has just about been annihilated, but this is still the dominant view in the pews. I understand that Progressive Dispensationalism is making its way through the academic ranks but it hasn't made it to the streets yet. The man on the street gets his dispensationalism straight from Left Behind. So, as a pastor I appreciate Riddlebarger giving me one more tool to deal with in that regard.

I do hope that books like this will somehow find their way onto the shelves of Christian bookstores in our nation. Unfortunately I am not optimistic - books like this are not quick and easy reads. It is tightly argued and packed with Scripture (I might add that the Scripture is always understood in context). It also seeks to relate the doctrine of the end times to the whole of Scripture and the whole of theology. And frankly, this book and this view is not very sensational. Left Behind is a far easier and quicker way to get your eschatology. But, if Christians would take the time to read books like this alot of the end times confusion that plagues us would be ameliorated. And, we would all have our attention focused on worshipping Christ our redeemer, instead of trying to construct charts and timelines.

The strength of this book is its excellent use of the New Testament to support Amillennialism and to combat other views such as Preterism, Postmillennialism, Historic Premillennialism, and especially Dispensationalism, the latter being the primary target.

The problem with this book is that it overlooks HUGE amounts of data. I don't believe this was the author's intention, but it rather results from a New Testament (NT) emphasis which subordinates church tradition and the Messianic expectations of the Old Testament (OT).

If you operate under the assumptions of sola scriptura and NT primacy, you might like this book and find its arguments very convincing. But Catholics reject sola scriptura and Evangelicals value the OT highly, so the book unnecessarily limits its audience.

Of the church leaders before 400 AD, I count zero dispensationalists, zero postmillennialists, zero full preterists, 1 partial preterist, 2 amillennialists, and a majority 8 historic premillennialists. Papias and Irenaeus, from the school of John, were premillennialists. Now if disciples of John were premillennialists, does that not give us a strong indication that John was also? And if John, the author of Revelation, was himself a premillennialist, that settles it! But in the book, this enormous strength of historic premillennialism is only hinted at in one sentence on page 28, not spelled out as I have done here.

The book also misses key extra Biblical data in support of its view. Catholic arguments in favor of amillennialism based on church tradition are not mentioned in this book.

The lack of discussion on key Messianic passages of the Old Testament left me unsatisfied. For every scripture reference to the OT in this book, there must be five or six scripture references to the NT. The OT Christ not only suffers for our sins (Is. 53, Ps. 22), but also presides over a materialistically blessed earthly kingdom. This book limits discussion on scriptures like Ezekiel 37:18-28, Isaiah 9 & 11, and Zechariah 12-14 which bear this out. If the author interprets these passages metaphorically according to the "analogy of faith" then what precisely is the metaphorical interpretation of these passages? Figurative language still means something. These passages must be interpretted, not ignored.

The author assumes that evil in the millennium is a problem for premillennialism. But Zecariah 14:16-17 and Psalm 2 indicate that there will be rebellions against Christ after he returns, so the idea of evil in the millennium is actually very Biblically sound.

In this book's discussion of the Seventy Weeks, the congruence between Daniel 9:27 and Revelation 11:1-2 is not mentioned, thus ignoring one of the greatest arguments of the dispensationalists. Also, the book states that the "time times and half a time" is the entire church age, but does not call our attention to the fact that John also calls it "1260 days" and "forty two months" which is 3 and ½ years. Ignoring this contrary data only makes the dispensationalists dig in their heels.

As for me, I will remain an historic premillennialist, as were the Hebrew prophets and apostolic church leaders before me.

How refreshing it is to have a book written that claims a biblical case for a position and then actually delivers! Riddlebarger is both precise, intelligent, and most importantly, sound in his explanation of the Amillennial position. I find that it works on different levels of understanding as well. It's an excellent book for those who are new to the subject matter and also an invaluable resource for those who have studied the various positions for some time. If you're looking for a great definition and explanation of the often misunderstood amillennial position, this book is highly recommended!

A key strength of this book is its organization. Riddlebarger first defines the relevant terms, then lays out the nature of the controversy. He spends plenty of time on core hermeneutical issues, such as "should we read the NT through the lens of the OT" or vice versa. Chapters 3 ("How do we interpret bible prophecy"), 6 ("According to the prophets"), and 7 ("Christ and the fulfillment of prophecy") alone are worth the price of the book. Most eschatology books do not first lay out these key issues before diving into the relevant texts.

Comparing this work to others, I have read the works of postmillenialists like Ken Gentry and find Riddlebarger's approach to be more balanced and biblically faithful.

Part 3 ("Exposition of the Critical Texts") is very useful in that Riddlebarger essentially synthesizes the best commentators and amply quotes from their primary sources. For the Olivet Discourse he draws heavily on the work of Charles Cranfield. For Daniel 9 he draws heavily from scholars like Meredith Kline. For Revelation 20, he draws from people like Beale and Kline. This is useful for two reasons. First, one appreciates that his exposition of the texts is quite mainstream amongst excellent bible scholars, avoiding the pitfalls of "private interpretation" that has plagued eschatology for centuries. Second, he amply footnotes nearly everything that he says, making the book a great reference text for further reading.

The book is not "light" reading, and is probably most appreciated by those who have studied some eschatology before. But even if one hasn't, I don't think that there is a better book out there on the subject.

This book represents a definite "must read" for every serious student of Biblical end times prophecy. Drawing from sound Scriptural exegesis (something that is sorely lacking in much of today's "scholarly" Christian literature) and accurate historical precedent, Dr. Riddlebarger makes a virtually airtight case for the validity of the historic amillennial view of end time events. His reasoning is solidly Scriptural, minus the hype and hyperbole that accompanies much of today's "prophetic" writings. As any good teacher should do, Dr. Riddlebarger examines fairly all current popular views of last days events and demonstrates systematically that the amillennial interpretation is the most Scripturally sound and historically accurate position.

To those of a differing viewpoint: be prepared to be challenged and do not be surprised if, by the end of the book, you agree with Dr. Riddlebarger.