|
The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views | 
 enlarge | Author: Anthony A. Hoekema
Creators: George Eldon Ladd, Robert G. Clouse
Publisher: InterVarsity Press
Category: Book
List Price: $17.00
Buy New: $11.56
You Save: $5.44 (32%)
New (23) Used (57) from $1.50
Rating:  15 reviews
Sales Rank: 29084
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 223
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.7
Dimensions (in): 8.2 x 5.5 x 0.7
ISBN: 0877847940
Dewey Decimal Number: 236.3
EAN: 9780877847946
ASIN: 0877847940
Publication Date: June 1977
Shipping: Eligible for Super Saver Shipping
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Christ is coming again.Since the first century, Christians have agreed that Christ will return. But since that time there have also been many disagreements. How will Christ return? When will he return? What sort of kingdom will he establish? What is the meaning of the millennium? These questions persist today.Four major views on the millennium have had both a long history and a host of Christian adherents. In this book Robert G. Clouse brings together proponents of each view: George Eldon Ladd on historic premillenniallism, Herman A. Hoyt on dispensational premillennialism, Loraine Boettner on post-millennialism and Anthony A. Hoekema on amillennialism.After each view is presented, proponents of the three competing views respond from their own perspectives. Here you'll encounter a lively and productive debate among respected Christian scholars that will help you gain clearer and deeper understanding of the different ways the church approaches the meaning of the millennium.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 10 more reviews...
 Nice Introduction, Yet Certain Views Are Less Consistent July 25, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Other solid reviews have been written, but I would like to briefly reiterate what I felt were the strengthens and weaknesses of this book.
The strongest parts of the book: 1) The dialogues between Amillennialism (Hoekema) and 'Historic' Premillennialism (Ladd). These presentations were the most balanced and consistent to their interpretations. Hoekema holds to a classic view of Amillennialism (like that of Augustine, yet somewhat nuanced) and Ladd espouses a solid Premil essay. Their interjections with one another seem more honest from their historic positions. 2) I enjoyed Clouse's introductionary essay to the subject and felt that it was solid and even-handed as the book's presentation.
The weakest parts of the book: Though they have already been touched on, I will reiterate since they give less balance and weaken the overall work of the much stronger presentations of Amil and Premil. 1) Postmillenialism (Boettner) was devoid of almost any scriptural basis. It practically sounded like a social humanist writing about the optimistic future of humanity. I do not mean to discredit a wonderful scholar like Dr. Boettner here (he's written other solid work), but this essay here was supremely lacking in biblical substance as he attempted to portray events in human history as supporting Postmillennialism and largely left Rev. 20 undiscussed. That was highly problematic and would probably leave most readers unconvinced.
2) Dispensational Premillennialism (Hoyt) was thoroughly disappointing in this work. Hoyt stated points that sounded more like George Ladd in places than most Dispensationalists would agree with. Also, a solid explanation of the Jewish character of the Millennial Kingdom was practically nonexistent from his essay. This point is of extreme significance to the Disp. Premil position and yet I find practically nothing on this in his essay. This perplexed me as I knew Dr. Hoyt was from Grace Theological Seminary and studied beside Dr. J. Alva McClain, one of the most well-known Dispensational teachers outside of Dallas Theological Seminary. A much more honest account of the traditional (yet somewhat revised) Dispensational viewpoint can be found in his 'The Greatness of the Kingdom', a superb work from this interpretation. Overall, Hoyt clearly lacked in his presentation on the distinctiveness of the Jewish Nation in the Millennial Kingdom. Other areas, such as Rev. 20, Isa. 65, were more solid, but the distinctive Jewishness was missing. This was unfortunate.
3) Lastly, Clouse seems to slant the opinion against Premillennialism in his Postscript essay. I'm not sure why he stated points that were clear sweeping misrepresentations of Premils (that they lack in social concerns, are extremely pessimistic, etc.). This seems to leave the reader more convinced by the Postscript than by the arguments of the four scholars who wrote the essays. Though this is minor, the editor should allow the essays to convince the reader, not his/her Introductionary and/or Postscript essays.
Overall, this book is a solid introduction to the differences in interpretations over the Millennial Kingdom. I found it enjoyable to read, not extremely difficult, and the authors engaged with one another in an irenic spirit. Though some background reading needs to be done prior to this book, I highly recommend this book as an entrance into the deeper arguments concerning the Millennial Kingdom.
 Good Debate on Eschatology March 22, 2008
This is a fairly compact book (212 pages), given the topic, but it still covers the ground of eschatology very well.
In the Christian church today, there are four main views of how Christ will return to earth: historic premillenialism, dispensational premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillenialism.
The book is broken down into four sections. Each section begins with a proponent of one of the four eschatological positions defending their position, and then the proponents of the other three positions critique that essay.
If you were raised, as most American Christians are, believing in dispensational premillennialism, this is a great study. You might end up changing your mind, or, if not, you will at least have heard the arguments for the other views.
Good introduction to the millenium May 13, 2006
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
Clouse does a good job on this book. The format is well thought out. In the introduction he gives a little bit of a history on each of the positions. He lets advocates of the 4 views of the millennium each present their best case for their position. Then he lets the others offer a rebuttal. He wraps the book up at the end explaining the implications for the Christian of the four views.
The only downside to this book is that some of the contributors were very good rebutting the other's arguments, but didn't do quite as well presenting their own position.
The average reader could finish this book easily in a weekend. After having read the book, you'll probably want to do more research on your own. Now that I know a little more about the historic and dispensational premillinialism, post premillinialism, and amillinialism camps I'll be able to discuss end times eschatology a little bit more intelligently and know where to go next for some more thorough research. This book is well worth reading.
Helpful in some ways January 31, 2006
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
If you know little about the different millennial positions held by Christians, then this can be a helpful resource in getting a basic understanding of the views as well as the alleged weaknesses in each view as seen by the other perspectives. It was somewhat incomplete in my opinion because I found that it is impossible to have a true position on the millennium without knowing the implications of that on other eschatological elements that this book didn't go into by virtue of its focus. In other words, this is a good starting place in examining eschatological positions, but understand that further reading will be necessary on the topic in order to have a real handle on it.
Accessible, Well-Written Introduction May 17, 2004
7 out of 8 found this review helpful
This is an accessible, well-written introduction to four views relating to the millennium of Revelation 20. The book is written in a debate-like format, with each contributor giving a defense of his millennial view followed by a response from the each of the other contributors. All four contributors agree that one's millennial view follows from one's philosophy of biblical interpretation and each contributor defends their respective hermeneutic approach. In his defense of postmillennialism, Boettner succeeds primarily in showing that he does not even understand the interpretive principle at stake - no serious reader of the bible (even dispensational readers) question that the bible contains symbolic and figurative language. The hermeneutic debate is not a debate between a literal and a figurative interpretation of the Scriptures. Instead, the debate centers on whether Old Testament prophecies were and will be fulfilled literally, through national Israel, or rather, were and will be fulfilled spiritually, through the Church. In his defense of dispensational premillennialism, Hoyt argues that biblical interpretation should operate on the expectation that Old Testament prophecies will be literally fulfilled with national Israel as their object. His primary justification for this hermeneutic principle is his belief that a literal interpretation is the simplest to understand and that God would certainly proceed in the way that is most accessible and understandable to the common folk. Hoyt's argument is weak considering that the New Testament interprets and applies key Old Testament prophecies in understandable and clear language. In fact, the interpretive principles of Hoekema (Amillennialism) and Ladd (Historic Premillennialsm) follow along this line of argument: The New Testament provides the authoritative interpretation of Old Testament prophecies, largely arguing for a spiritual fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies through the Church. Hoekema and Ladd find much to agree upon and little to disagree upon. Their only difference relates to interpretation of Revelation 20:1-6. Both presentations are well written and convincing. It is unclear why Boettner even cares what interpretive principle is adopted. His defense of Postmillennialism is almost completely free of biblical exegesis. In fact, in response to Boettner's essay, Ladd comments, "There is so little appeal to Scripture that I have little to criticize." Boettner does pose a worthwhile question: Wouldn't it be great if the vast majority of humanity were saved? This is the evangelical version of the equally appropriate question: Wouldn't it be great if everyone were saved? Evangelicals, of which I am one, would do good to remember that God "is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (II Peter 3:9).
|
|
|
|
Powered by CBN AssociateStore
| |
