Customer Reviews

Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

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.

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.

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.

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

There are a number of books available explaining the differences in the various millennial positions. This book stands with Grenz's "The Millennial Maze" as one of the better volumes.

Bock's concluding essay on the way in which our presuppositions affect our exegesis is outstanding.

The only weakness is the fact that the authors are not allowed to respond to the other authors' criticisms. One Zondervan Counterpoint volume allowed this, and it was very helpful. This format should be incorporated into all of the Counterpoint volumes.

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.

Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond is a beneficial read for those unfamiliar with eschatology and/or someone seeking to expand their understanding of the three millinnial theories. Somewhat more attention seems to be give to Premilliannialism as it given a longer and more comprehension evaluation. The Premillennail argument does seem to prevail within the confines of this particular book, however, as stated above it is given more attention and the general editor is premillennial as well. The book contains a great article on Amillennialism by a well qualified and very gifted theologian and most of his points are not satisfactorally refuted by either of the other writers. The Postmillenial position seems to be the weakest within this particular volume. However, the reader will receive a detailed comprehensive explanation of all three view points that is beneficial. The book successfully accomplishes its goal of presenting all three millennial views and allowing limited room for discussion amongst the writers of each school of thought.

I read this book in hopes that it would give me quick and concise - yet thorough - understandings of the various Millennial positions. I was in the midst of writing a research/position paper, and eschatology was something that I had never studied before.

This turned out to be just a big waste of time.

It wasn't that the book didn't give the positions, or explain them, it's just that there are four chapters, written by totally different authors, so when you get through one chapter, you have to start all over again, as far as getting used to the writing style of the book. It's just not helpful, especially for someone trying to do research. I understand the principle behind it and I commend the authors for it. And I understand that it probably has something to do with time restraint as well.

So I think that this book is helpful depending on the time restraints that you have, and if you've studied the subject before. If your able to take your time and work through the various positions and their counter arguments in one book, then go for it. But for people who have never studied this subject before, there are probably more helpful resources out there. I think the main thing this would be helpful for is to poke holes in your view, which ever one you have, so that you can continue to refine your eschatology.

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.

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.