Most Helpful Customer Reviews
16 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Biblical Chemotherapy, March 30, 2000
By A Customer
This review is from: The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future (Paperback)
As this book and its author have been pivotal points in my young Christian life, I must ask the reader's indulgence as I start this review on a personal note. I remember my reaction the first time that I heard of the preterist position of eschatology. It went something like this... "Are you completely nuts! " How could the events described in the Olivet Discourse and most of Revelation have happened in the first century? But then again, I was finding it intellectually difficult to make "soon" and "this generation shall not pass away" stretch out into two thousand years plus. So, as I investigated this idea, I soon encountered the large body of work produced by the hyper-preterists (hereinafter pantelists). They argued that not only was the Great Tribulation completely fulfilled in 70AD, if one were to be CONSISTENT then ALL prophecy was fulfilled in 70AD, including the Final Advent of Christ, the resurrection, and the Final Judgment. As good ole Bugs would say, "That's All Folks!" Well, ideas have consequences, and as I struggled with this idea, I went through the blackest moments in my Christian faith and actual clinical depression. I praise God for the Christian compassion of the author who spent a great deal of time with me on this issue many months before this book came out. Now to the meat of the matter. There are so very few works refuting pantelism (this being the only book-length treatment of the subject that I am aware of), and each that I have seen bases its argumentation heavily on the pantelists' departure from the historic Christian creeds. However, the pantelists play the "Sola Scriptura" card to their favor, and as R.C. Sproul, Jr. so aptly stated in his introduction to this book, when the pantelists are confronted with the creeds, they "just yawn and remind us that we ourselves confess that confessions can err." This book of 208 pages spends the last 10 pages on the creeds and their proper place, devoting the rest to a biblically based argument against pantelism. The author develops an excellent case for the orthodox Christian belief in the future bodily resurrection of all believers and the future bodily resurrection of the damned. He points out multiple Scriptures that cannot be understood in any other light without exegetical (and tortuous contextual) gymnastics. In so doing, he engages many of the arguments of the pantelists. Also specifically addressed are the arguments of pantelists King, Harden, and Noe about the nature of the resurrection body. Of course, intrinsically tied into this issue, would be the Final Judgment. If the pantelist is correct, then Satan and his angels have been completely judged and in the Lake of Fire. If the pantelist is correct, then physical death will always be present, and Christ will not have completely redeemed us and this world from the loss caused by the first Adam. The consequences of this idea do not leave one area of faith unaffected. (For example, if Christ has done all the "coming" that He is ever going to do, then do we still take Communion?) Additionally, it is shown how a particularly thorny issue for the pantelist is the reign of Christ. If Revelation 20 and 1 Corinthians 15 are taken together, the pantelist would appear to have no choice but to reduce Christ's reign to 40 years. Pantelists and orthodox preterists alike point out that God can tell time and "soon means soon." However, the pantelists in a desire to be "consistent" can somehow make 1,000 years into 40. Who is being consistent here? While the number 1,000 may very well be, and most likely is, symbolic; it certainly is not symbolic of a short period of time (despite pantelist assertions). What would be the point? To turn their question back on them... if God had wanted to symbolically indicate a long period of time, how could He have made it any clearer? According to pantelism, God has no problems expressing nearness and short periods of time in no uncertain terms, why the ambiguity here? And if their assertions are correct, we may have cause to worry because God keeps His promises to a thousand generations. If that can be forty, our time may be running out! (Of course, I am somewhat kidding.) The author ironically points out that the pantelists have made the same error as they believe the dispensationalists have, only in reverse. While most of the church today seems to ignore the short term statements in Scripture to save the future, the pantelist sacrifices the future to save the short term statements. Other issues dealt with include the implausibility that the church could be in such grave error for 2,000 years, ( especially if the pantelist is right since the promises in Ephesians 4:11-13 would have fulfilled as well!) and the mixing of short-term and long-term prophecies in the OT. I particularly enjoyed the fact that this book sticks with and deals with the topic at hand without unnecessary digression and elementary discussion. As such, however, it is not a work for persons unfamiliar with the basics of the topic as it does not provide such groundwork, assuming the reader already has familiarity with same. Also, this book is not going to nor does it claim to, answer every argument that is currently put forward by the pantelists; but it lays a great foundation from which to answer those arguments. Now back to a personal note. This journey exploring preterism has been a rocky road for me, and I suspect for many others as well. I really enjoyed how the author pointed out, however, that all Christians are preterists to a point. We all believe that the First Advent has happened! Although, I cannot claim at this point to be a convinced preterist (as in "the Olivet Discourse and most of Revelation is fulfilled" sense of the word), it is nice to know that one does not have to abandon orthodoxy in order to hold to this view. I pray from the depths of my heart that this book will help others from being totally blindsided and almost shipwrecked, as I almost was, by the poisonous heresy of pantelism. Praise God for His mercy towards me.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
15 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Important book, May 3, 2004
This review is from: The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future (Paperback)
Seriaiah has performed an important service to the evangelical theological world. He has provided a succinct and insightful introduction and critique of an alarming aberrant theology. He calls it "pantelism" ("all things-ism") whereas others call in "Hyper-Preterism" (see espcially Keith Mathison's equally helpful expose, When Shall These Things Be?"). This book provides a well-reasoned critique of several of the leading errors of this new, innovative movement. The Pantelists believe that ALL of biblical prophecy has been fulfilled. That Jesus's Second Coming occurred in AD 70, and that the Last Day and the resurrection all occurred then. The "last day" is in their view "the last day of Israel." I highly commend this book as an important tool in witnessing to members of this faulty theological movement. There may not be many Pantelists around, but when just one of them shows up, you will know it! They are determined to debate the topic at the drop of a hat. (In this regard see some of the strange reviews by them of Keith Mathison's "When Shall These Things Be?"
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Brilliant, May 7, 2007
This review is from: The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future (Paperback)
I once was a pantelist (hyper-preterist). I was committed. I was writing a book on the topic. And then. And then I read Mathison's "When Shall These Things Be." I read it to refute it. I still have my half-finished refutation in my computer. I couldn't make it through three chapters of that book. I was convinced. Hyper-preterism is wrong. Flat out wrong. I threw out my book manuscript. Then I got this book, out of interest. It nailed shut the coffin lid. I was done with pantelism. Forever. I compared what Mathison and Seraiah were saying with the hyper-preterist response. The hyper-preterists were stretching, reaching for answers that were not readily forthcoming. They weren't in the same league.
Seraiah's book is a direct theological response to hyper-preterism, and it does its job well. It has helped a number of my friends escape pantelism as well, and so I am personally thankful for its paraousia.
Occasionally I return to those websites that I used to haunt as a hyper-preterist. So far I have not found one response to this book or to Mathison's, that is anywhere near the same league, in terms of theology and scholarship.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
