Customer Reviews

Last Days according to Jesus, The

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(11)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

In classic "Sproulian" style, this book probes the subject matter of Christ's Olivet Discourse. Are the events that our Lord describes to be understood as taking place in the distant future (even beyond 1999!) or are they to be understood as events that would take place in connection with Jerusalem's destruction in AD 70? While the former option seems more sensational, more exciting, Sproul methodically shows the reader that an honest read of Christ's words will inevitably lead to the latter conclusion. His discussion of the time frame references ("this generation") is excellent. Did Jesus mean what he said when he promised that the catastrophic events he described would be experienced by many of his orignal hearers? Sproul sees this as an essential question to be answered if we wish to defend the integrity and veracity of our Lord's words. As a pastor, I hope that other Christian teachers and leaders will read this book and be shaken from so much of the dogmatism that surrounds eschatology today. Even if one is not fully convinced by Sproul's argument, he should at least be convinced that maybe there are more options than the "Lahaye-I'm premil,pretrib and you must be too" approach that is so pervasive today! How refreshing to learn that godly men down through the ages have held differing views about the "last days." RC has done a great service for the church!

I've enjoyed what Sproul I've read over the years, but I was a bit disappointed in this offering. As others have said, I found it slightly helpful but generally mediocre.

Part of the problem is that the book is not what it is hyped as being. Rather than a systematic study of eschatology, this book is an attempt to refute Bertrand Russell's book Why I Am Not A Christian, specifically Russell's objection (shared by most liberal critics) that Christ promised he would return during the lifetime of the apostles. Sproul defends against Russell by arguing that Christ did return within their lifetime, but that it was a metaphorical return in the form of judgment (the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.) instead of a literal, visible return.

Because the book is structured as an argument with Bertrand Russell, rather than a defense of a particular eschatological position, it loses much of its persuasive strength. Those who are already preterists will cheer in agreement; those who are not will think little more than, "Hmm, interesting argument." I wouldn't expect this book to change many minds.

I enjoyed this book as a good, solid introduction to the preterist view. R.C. Sproul gives a fair and comprehensive look at the issues regarding end-times prophecy from a preterist perspective, explaining both the emotional reasons behind the rising popularity of the view (the desire to defend scriptural truth against attacks that first century prophecies were wrong) and make a thorough examination of the preterist view itself.

What I found curious about the book, however, is that even R.C. Sproul does not seem completely convinced of the preterist view, and yet he seems reluctant to address these limitations directly. It is these limitations, in fact, that prevent me from accepting this view myself. Holding to a preterist view -- in my opinion -- is like being pregnant. One is either pregnant or one is not pregnant. One cannot be "sort of" pregnant or "mostly" pregnant. Likewise, either one sees the Olivet Discourse as being completely fulfilled in the first century or one does not. One cannot see it being "mostly" fulfilled or "partially" fulfilled. And this is the very problem with preterism.

Preterism claims to take the scriptures literally -- and to be the only view to do so completely. And yet, in order to maintain preterism's brand of literalism, it must play loose with prophetic fulfillment. Prophetic fulfillment becomes like horseshoes. "Close" is good enough. For those who insist on prophecies being fulfilled precisely, preterism can only get in the ballpark. It cannot provide the kind of precise, literal fulfillment that scripture demands. If one demands, not just a literal fulfillment but a PRECISE fulfillment, the best the first century events can do is to provide a foreshadowing of events to come.

In Acts 1:9, for example, we are told that, when Jesus returns, it will be as He ascended -- in the clouds, in bodily form. Where, in preterism, do we find this? Nowhere but a vision of Josephus. Very unsatisfying. Likewise, the Great Tribulation -- not only did Jesus say there would be none like it, but there never would be again. The slaughter of one million Jews in the first century was horrific, but it pales in comparison to the six million under Hitler and the nine million under Stalin. How could a first-century slaughter fulfill this prophecy? And instead of an abomination inside the temple, as Jesus foretold, preterism substitutes eagles on the Roman standards outside the courtyard. As my mother would say, "It's close, but no banana."

As precise a theologian as Sproul is, his willingness to accept these "close but no banana" fulfillments is curious to me; and his own apparent discomfort with the apparent lack of precision in certain prophecies begs for direct address, and yet one never comes. I did sense that these things seemed to bother Sproul, as well they should. As such, as one of the foremost theologians of our times, I would have liked to have seen him address this problem head-on.

H. L. Nigro, author of Before God's Wrath: The Bible's Answer to the Timing of the Rapture

In "The Last Days According To Jesus" R.C. Sproul gives a very fair and thorough treatment of the subject of the return of Christ with particular focus on the Olivet Discourse. Unlike the "literalist" who too often strains the plain meaning of the text(s), Sproul has allowed the Word of God to simply interpret itself.

Throughout "Last Days", Sproul interacts with the classic "full preterist" position as put forth in J. Stuart Russell's nineteenth century work "The Parousia." While agreeing with much of what Russell has to say, Sproul eventually must depart from Russell's theology else abandon his orthodoxy with respect to the doctrines of the bodily resurrection and the physical return of the Lord.

In sum, Sproul has put together the pieces of prophecy surrounding the coming of the Lord (relying much on the scholarship of Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.) by interpreting them in the light and context of their day. In doing so, Sproul announces to the evangelical world the significance of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem.

If anyone would like to be set free from the yoke of an unbiblical (even commercial) end times system of thought, and be able to take Jesus at His word when He stated that "this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place...", read R.C. Sproul's "The Last Days According To Jesus."

Dr. Sproul is a favorite theologian of this reviewer and so it was with some anticipation I waited for this book. I took some time to let it simmer in my mind before deciding to review it. Dr. Sproul seems a bit hesitant to come right out and admit that he believes in the preterist position and so that makes his points seem a little wishy-washy at times. One wonders if he is actually espousing a view or simply reciting a litany of interesting theories without providing much evidence for any. Not to imply that he does not cite some evidence for the preterist view - he does. It just seems that he is attempting to apologize all along to those who may disagree with him. While that approach is perhaps testament to his humility (which I have always admired) it also makes for a passive voice approach at times that lacks clarrity. His approach is probably ideal for conversation or classroom teaching where feedback and discussion provides the clarrity, it makes for difficult reading at times. The information is there, just not as clear as if he had stated his views plainly then proceeded to explain why he held those views. It is good to a point but not quite the groundbreaker I had hoped it would be.

As a Pastor of the Eternal Grace Baptist Church, it is quite refreshing to read a book in our time, when sensationalism seems to sell, like "The Last Days According To Jesus" that offers a biblical perspective rather than the rehashed blind fanciful predictions of "Prophets for Profit." This is not a definitive answer to the swirling controversy regarding Christ's return, but it is a definite response from a "Mainline theologian" sure to stimulate the earnest believer to diligently search the Scriptures.

What Sproul does is exposes the major flaws of various commentators in their defense of the preterist or futurist position, while buttressing the validity of preterism. By raising the questions that naturally surface when the preterist view is held, Sproul enables honest seekers to examine the evidence in an atmosphere conducive to sane, consistent, Biblical meditation.

It has been stated that a stimulating book must have a catchy title, an intriguing cover, and provocative content. "The Last Days According To Jesus" manages to achieve all three beginning with the provocative title. Upon the cover centrally located in the top of the book is the famous clock nearing the twelfth hour. Concerning the content, Mr. Sproul is perfectly correct when he asserts that part of the problem regarding prophecy is "the confession concerning biblical interpretation stems from contemporary usage of the term literal. ... " (p. 65). Lazy literalist miss the time frame references and thereby promote views from texts out of context which become a pretext, thus opening the flood gates for bizarre beliefs unattached to contextual Scriptural truth.

Sproul subtly raises and answers the objections sure to surface by futurists. Although it is primarily a book length review of the preterist position as presented by J. Struart Russell in his work, "The Parousia" and its shortcomings, nonetheless it serves the astute Christian student well in clearly stating the biblical position. Sproul's treatment is very charitable, to say he least, with those holding positions clearly questionable. It is federal reserve notes (commonly thought to be money) well spent.

Early on in this book, R.C. Sproul astutely observes that the recorded accounts of Jesus' discourse on the Mount of Olives in the three synoptic gospels can be the most persuasive proof of divinely-inspired fulfilled prophesy due to the amazingly accurate account of the destruction of Jerusalem. Yet at the same time, due to a passage in the Matthew account that alludes to Jesus physically appearing when these events occur, this Discourse opens up plenty of skepticism from unbelieving critics.

Unlike the dozen or so R. C. Sproul Sr. books that I've read, this book presents itself more as a research paper that points to observations by plenty of external sources rather than a lone commentary by Sproul himself. To his credit, he's not intolerably dogmatic nor takes a hard line about issues open to interpretation, except for ones that clearly conflict with creeds or scripture.


To give the best overview, Sproul writes the following in the final conclusion of the book:

"The purpose of The Last Days according to Jesus has been to examine and evaluate the various claims of preterism, both full and partial. The great service preterism performs is to focus attention on two major issues. The first is the time-frame references of the New Testament regarding eschatological prophecy. The preterist is a sentinel standing guard against frivolous and superficial attempts to downplay or explain away the force of these references.

The second major issue is the destruction of Jerusalem. This event certainly spelled the end of a crucial redemptive-historical epoch. It must be viewed as the end of some age. It also represents a significant visitation of the Lord in judgment and a vitally important "day of the Lord." Whether this was the only day of the Lord about which Scripture speaks remains a major point of controversy among preterists.

The great weakness of full preterism--and what I regard to be its fatal flaw--is its treatment of the final resurrection. If full preterism is to gain wide credibility in our time, it must overcome this obstacle.

With respect to partial preterism, Kenneth L. Gentry Jr. has done excellent work in forcing reconsideration of the date when the Book of Revelation was written. If he is correct in arguing for a date prior to A.D. 70, then sweeping revisions must be made in our understanding of this book's content and focus.

Debates over eschatology will probably continue until the Lord returns and we have the advantage of hindsight rather than the disadvantage of foresight. The divisions that exist within the Christian community are understandable, considering that both the subject matter and the literary genre of future prophecy are exceedingly difficult. This does not mean that we may push the Bible aside or neglect its eschatological sections. On the contrary the interpretative difficulties presented by eschatological matters simply call us to a greater diligence and persistence in seeking their solution."


The book doesn't address the entire Olivet Discourse verse by verse, but tackles the most difficult passages such as Matthew 24:34 where Jesus says, "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place" and the possible meaning of "the end of the age". For me on a personal level, this book revealed several fascinating insights to logical explanations of prophesies such as the appearance of heavenly apparitions during the destruction of Jerusalem (miraculous signs in the skies above such as "chariots of fire" as reported by historian Josephus), and the meaning of the Beast and the appearant meaning behind "666" in the Book of Revelation. For those fascinating insights alone is why I would strongly recommend this book. The other great feature of this book are the tables that show the main differences between the different types of preterism and the side by side passages of Matthew, Mark and Luke regarding the Olivet Discourse. It's far from comprehensive for eschatological studies of the Bible but it's definitely a great place to start.

While I believe that "The Last Days According to Jesus" falls short of correct exegesis of eschatological passages, it is a good introduction to realized eschatology, and it is a step in the right direction.

Should the majority of Christians today sit down and approach Dispensationalism and futurist eschatology with the clear and critical thinking that R.C. Sproul does, Christianity would be reformed overnight!

Sproul presents realized eschatology in a faily accurate light, clearly illustrating the shortcomings of the modern view of Dispensationalism. The reader will gain a new understanding of the scripture, and realize that it is a lot more likely that Christ's Second Coming already took place in AD 70, at the destruction of the Jewish Temple.

Any Christian that sees the "rapture" as an imminent event should read this book. It is a good antidote to "rapture fever", and the "Left Behind" garbage.

Sproul however does not go far enough in his exegesis, and still awaits a future return of Christ, despite the clear, biblical evidence brought forth by his own book.

A must read, but 4 stars for falling short of consistency.

I subscribed to Table Talk (Sproul's magazine) for 10 years. I have read most of his books. This is the only one of his I would not give 4 or 5-stars.

Its not so much that I disagree with his conversion to postmillenialism and moderate preterism (though I do). It is more the lack of balance. He is usually pretty fair to his opponents, but not here. He quotes a very strident postmillennialist for his description of all four views! Then he has a chart where he classified Calvin and Augustine as postmil.!! Nobody credible does that. Maybe he could make a case for this, but being that it is an extreme minority judgment, he should at least try to justify it.

Very sad. The ONLY book of Sproul's I would not recommend to others. His concerns seem to be apologetic -- how can we hold to the authority of Matt. 24 unless we say that Jesus DID return in some sense in 70AD? But in his zeal he seems to discard his usual precision and balance.

In "The Last Days According To Jesus" R.C. Sproul gives a very fair and thorough treatment of the subject of the return of Christ with particular focus on the Olivet Discourse. Unlike the "literalist" who too often strains the plain meaning of the text(s), Sproul has allowed the Word of God to simply interpret itself.

Throughout "Last Days", Sproul interacts with the classic "full preterist" position as put forth in J. Stuart Russell's nineteenth century work "The Parousia." While agreeing with much of what Russell has to say, Sproul eventually must depart from Russell's theology else abandon his orthodoxy with respect to the doctrines of the bodily resurrection and the physical return of the Lord.

In sum, Sproul has put together the pieces of prophecy surrounding the coming of the Lord (relying much on the scholarship of Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.) by interpreting them in the light and context of their day. In doing so, Sproul announces to the evangelical world the significance of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem.

If anyone would like to be set free from the yoke of an unbiblical (even commercial) end times system of thought, and be able to take Jesus at His word when He stated that "this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place...", read R.C. Sproul's "The Last Days According To Jesus."