ESSENTIAL books on eschatology

[potato sundae]

Hey all,

I plan on doing an in depth study on eschatology pretty soon, so I'm just wondering if any of you would know of some ESSENTIAL books for this subject...or just any good eschatology books in general.

Thanks guys,

potato sundae

[Solly]

From an Amillennial non-preterist view:

Geerhardus Vos: The Pauline Eschatology
Hermann Ridderbos: The Coming of the Kingdom
T L Frazier: A second look at the second coming
Kim Riddlebarger: A case for Amillennialism
David Engelsma: Christ's Spiritual Kingdom (The Reformed Doctrine of Amillennialism)

[dizzle]

From a orthodox preterst view:

Gary DeMar - Last Days Madness
David Chilton - Days of Vengeance (caution: Chilton apostasized in later years, but this book is sound)

not to like sell myself off as some great thinker, but i have scoured my many books to put togehter a concise commentary on Matthew 24 that I am working on here:

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12560

[potato sundae]

From an Amillennial non-preterist view:

Geerhardus Vos: The Pauline Eschatology
Hermann Ridderbos: The Coming of the Kingdom
T L Frazier: A second look at the second coming
Kim Riddlebarger: A case for Amillennialism
David Engelsma: Christ's Spiritual Kingdom (The Reformed Doctrine of Amillennialism)

Rocking, thanks for the recommendations. I have Riddlebarger's A Case for Amillenialism, but none of the others.

From a orthodox preterst view:

Gary DeMar - Last Days Madness
David Chilton - Days of Vengeance (caution: Chilton apostasized in later years, but this book is sound)Neat-o. I'll be sure to check these out seeing that I wasn't very impressed with Sproul's treatment of the subject in "Last Days According to Jesus"

[dizzle]

Sproul's book was not very good. Last Days Madness is the definitive treatment right now IMHO at least as far as the Discourse is concerned. For Revelation, though he gets too esoteric the Chilton book is where it is at. Gentry is coming out with a Revelation commentary that should be great, I have his taped lecture series on it.

[potato sundae]

Oops, forgot to say something about this


not to like sell myself off as some great thinker, but i have scoured my many books to put togehter a concise commentary on Matthew 24 that I am working on here:

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12560 (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12560)

I will definitely have a look at this; I can always benefit from someone who's done their research.


Sproul's book was not very good. Last Days Madness is the definitive treatment right now IMHO at least as far as the Discourse is concerned. For Revelation, though he gets too esoteric the Chilton book is where it is at. Gentry is coming out with a Revelation commentary that should be great, I have his taped lecture series on it.
Well then, sounds good! You wouldn't happen to know when the Gentry commentary is coming out would you?

[dizzle]

Unfortunately I do not. His site is kennethgentry.com there may be some information there

[Solly]

Rocking, thanks for the recommendations. I have Riddlebarger's A Case for Amillenialism, but none of the others.


Riddlebarger and Engelsma deal with the issue as such, whereas Vos and Ridderbos develop the Biblical Theology Salvation-historical model within which Eschatological views fit.

[potato sundae]

Riddlebarger and Engelsma deal with the issue as such, whereas Vos and Ridderbos develop the Biblical Theology Salvation-historical model within which Eschatological views fit.

Interesting, very interesting. Although I have no idea what the Biblical Theology Salvation-historical model is.heh heh

[studyhound]

Hey all,

I plan on doing an in depth study on eschatology pretty soon, so I'm just wondering if any of you would know of some ESSENTIAL books for this subject...or just any good eschatology books in general.

Thanks guys,

potato sundae

Revelation: Four Views : A Parallel Commentary (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)
by Steven Gregg

The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, New Updated Edition (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0913573868/qid=1087619186/sr=ka-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-6377364-0452131) -- by Flavius Josephus,

The Last Days According to Jesus (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/080106340X/qid=1087619746/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)
by R. C. Sproul
I disagree with Dee Dee here (GASP) I think it is a ok 101 level but nothing beyond that.

The Bible :duh: and a couple of solid commentaries (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10899) and lots of paper to take notes.

:studyhound:

[dizzle]

[size=-1]The Last Days According to Jesus (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/080106340X/qid=1087619746/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)
[font=verdana,arial,helvetica][size=-1]by R. C. Sproul
I disagree with Dee Dee here (GASP) I think it is a ok 101 level but nothing beyond that.


Ugh! It is bad on several levels, the most important one is that he profuselly quotes from a heretic (Russell) and never really warns his read that he is quoting from one. I almost without exception when I quote or recommend Chilton advise he apostasized even when the book I am recommending was before that time.

[mossrose]

John MacArthur's, "The Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ" is my favourite.

But most of the rest of you probably won't like it.

[dizzle]

John MacArthur's, "The Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ" is my favourite.

But most of the rest of you probably won't like it.

haha you are right. I think JOhn is particularly bad in eschatology though very good on other topics. The appendix on preterism was dismal.

[joelkaki]

John MacArthur's, "The Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ" is my favourite.

But most of the rest of you probably won't like it.

I've read MacArthur's book, and I personally thought it was pitiful. I really respect him, and have benefited from his teaching and books on a number of topics, but this is certainly not one of them. He doesn't really deal with the issues.


Joel

[dizzle]

That was my impression as well. And that of JPHolding IIRC

[mossrose]

haha you are right. I think JOhn is particularly bad in eschatology though very good on other topics. The appendix on preterism was dismal.




I've read MacArthur's book, and I personally thought it was pitiful. I really respect him, and have benefited from his teaching and books on a number of topics, but this is certainly not one of them. He doesn't really deal with the issues

I have found it very strange on Tweb that a lot of people like John as long as he agrees with their own mindset. But always there is ONE thing that he teaches that somebody doesn't like.

If he is so good on some topics, and some respect him a great deal, why is it that everything he teaches is not of the same quality and "rightness"?

I mean, one person likes him, except for his stand on eschatology, another likes him except for his stand on the charismatics, another likes him except for his stand on the pathetic state of our churches today.

How can he be "wrong" in all these areas and still be a creditable teacher?

I don't really want a debate, just was wondering, is all.

I guess it all has to do with a person's pre-determined beliefs on a certain subject.

:nsm:

[joelkaki]

I have found it very strange on Tweb that a lot of people like John as long as he agrees with their own mindset. But always there is ONE thing that he teaches that somebody doesn't like.

If he is so good on some topics, and some respect him a great deal, why is it that everything he teaches is not of the same quality and "rightness"?

I mean, one person likes him, except for his stand on eschatology, another likes him except for his stand on the charismatics, another likes him except for his stand on the pathetic state of our churches today.

How can he be "wrong" in all these areas and still be a creditable teacher?

I don't really want a debate, just was wondering, is all.

I guess it all has to do with a person's pre-determined beliefs on a certain subject.

:nsm:


Essentially, because man is fallible, and he can be right on one thing and not on another. Naturally yes, though, the things we have already determined to be right through study of Scripture, we will disagree with him on. However, I am opposed to the theology he takes--dispensationalism, and that undergirds most of the things that I oppose him on.
And honestly, I set out to read The Second Coming with a completely open mind (though that is not completely possible), and just take his arguments as they came and see if they held water, and they didn't.

Joel

[potato sundae]

(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)Revelation: Four Views : A Parallel Commentary (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)
by Steven Gregg

(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, New Updated Edition (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0913573868/qid=1087619186/sr=ka-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-6377364-0452131) -- by Flavius Josephus,

(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)The Last Days According to Jesus (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/080106340X/qid=1087619746/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)
by R. C. Sproul
I disagree with Dee Dee here (GASP) I think it is a ok 101 level but nothing beyond that.

The Bible :duh: and a couple of solid (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)commentaries (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10899) and lots of paper to take notes.

:studyhound:

(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1087618753/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6377364-0452131?v=glance&s=books)
Thanks for the recommendations! These are all added to my list now.

I'll get on that commentary and paper thing too,:wink:

[GhostontheNet]

To one picking up primary sources used by Preterists, I'd also obtain;
The Annals by Tacitus
The Histories by Tacitus
Ecclesiastical History by Eusebius
The Twelve Ceasars by Suetonius
Also, one Postmillenial work by Kenneth Gentry is He Shall Have Dominion
I forgot to mention, supposedly Ben Witherington's non-preterist work Jesus, Paul, and the End of the World is of high quality though I'll have to wait till tommorow to voice my own opinion of it.

P.S. What is this talk of a new commentary by Kenneth Gentry?

[studyhound]

To one picking up primary sources used by Preterists, I'd also obtain;
The Annals by Tacitus
The Histories by Tacitus
Ecclesiastical History by Eusebius
The Twelve Ceasars by Suetonius
Also, one Postmillenial work by Kenneth Gentry is He Shall Have Dominion

P.S. What is this talk of a new commentary by Kenneth Gentry?
I believe you can pick all these up online for free, ccel.org is a great source of FREE christian resources.

I'll snoop around and see what I can find....


:studyhound:

[potato sundae]

To one picking up primary sources used by Preterists, I'd also obtain;
The Annals by Tacitus
The Histories by Tacitus
Ecclesiastical History by Eusebius
The Twelve Ceasars by Suetonius
Also, one Postmillenial work by Kenneth Gentry is He Shall Have Dominion

P.S. What is this talk of a new commentary by Kenneth Gentry?

Ahh, back to the basics. :smile:

And the commentary talk, well I guess a new commentary by Gentry on Revelation is coming out. No idea when though. Dee Dee doesn't know either.

[studyhound]

The Annals (http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.html)by Tacitus
The Histories (http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/histories.html)by Tacitus
Ecclesiastical History (http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/TOC.htm) by Eusebius
The Twelve Ceasars (http://www.ukans.edu/history/index/europe/ancient_rome/E/Roman/Texts/Suetonius/12Caesars/home.html)by Suetonius
Also, one Postmillenial work by Kenneth Gentry is He Shall Have Dominion (http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/2202_47e.htm)

[GhostontheNet]

A good deal of these books are online in fact

Beast of Revelation by Kenneth Gentry http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2186_47e.htm
Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2206_47e.htm
Days of Vengeance by David Chilton http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2226_47e.htm
He Shall Have Dominion by Kenneth Gentry http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2202_47e.htm

As to the ancient sources, I prefer paperback copies to highlight the edges of relevant passages. Nevertheless:

The Twelve Ceasars by Suetonius http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/suetonius-index.html
The Annals by Tacitus http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.html
The Histories by Tacitus http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/histories.html
Antiquities of the Jews and The Jewish War by Josephus http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/josephus.html
Ecclesiastical History by Eusebius http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm

[potato sundae]

holy smokes, thanks for sharing this! That saves me a couple bucks:lol:

[GhostontheNet]

You're welcome. Also, take note of my above suggestion of Jesus, Paul, and the End of the World by Ben Witherington.

[dizzle]

Dang I will have to bookmark those links!

Also smeone asked about the new Gentry commentary I had heard for years he is getting one out on Revelation.

[John Reece]

Also someone asked about the new Gentry commentary I had heard for years he is getting one out on Revelation.

In the original (1989) edition of Before Jerusalem Fell there is this footnote:


Fuller discussion and elaboration of the identity of the Harlot as Jerusalem can be found in the following: Russell, Parousia, pp. 482ff. Vacher Burch, Anthropology and the Apocalypse (London: Macmillan, 1939), passim. Cornelius Vanderwaal, Search the Scriptures, trans. Theodore Plantiga, vol. 10: Hebrews - Revelation (St. Catharines, Ontario: Paideia, 1979), pp. 79ff. Desprez, Apocalypse Fulfilled, passim.. Cornelius Vanderwaal, Hal Lindsey and Biblical Prophecy (Ontario: Paideia, 1978), pp. 104-139. J. Massynberde Ford, Revelation, Anchor Bible (Garden City: Doubleday, 1975) pp. 277ff.; Chilton, Days of Vengeance, pp. 421ff. Also a forthcoming commentary by the present author: The Divorce of Israel: A Commentary on Revelation.

Years ago, in response to a question I asked him via a personal letter, Ken Gentry told me that he regretted having ever made that reference to "a forthcoming commentary" by him. The last time I communicated with him was via email after he had referred me to a list group for Revelation scholars (on which he and J. Massynberde Ford exchanged interesting comments). Gentry's last communication with me (via email) indicated he was not planning to publish his own commentary on Revelation, but was only contributing to a book presenting differing interpretations by multiple authors.

That's history, not current information. I'd be interested to know what Gentry is up to now re commentary on Revelation . But he's a busy man, and I'm not inclined to bug him anymore on the subject.

[Ted]

With all those books, I might suggest that at least one major view is being left out. The best large book of that view is Hans LaRondelle's How to Understand the End-time Prophecies of the Bible. It's out of print, but you should be able to find a copy at www.abebooks.com.

A second book (at the risk of a shameless commercial plug) is my own I Want to be Left Behind. It is endorsed by Simon Kistemaker, author of Baker's new Revelation Commentary. In it I present key elements of "street" Dispensationalism and compare them to scripture, developing the biblical end-time calendar (not dates but sequence) as shown in the Fall Festivals of Israel. I'm sure some will find something to argue with here, but you will not be bored.

The plan is futurist in that the parousia is seen as yet future (not AD70), but Preterist in that it sees much prophecy (including Daniel 9) as past. I call it Historical Covenant Eschatology, in that it uses what is good from Historicism while avoiding its over-reading of such discussions as the seven churches. Some may call is "partial-Preterism."

I would also add Simon Kistemaker and Gregory Beale's commentaries on Revelation. As a final note, if you can find a copy of Desmond Ford's Daniel it is pretty good. And you can visit my website.

But the best tool is, as has been suggested before, is a clean sheet of paper. You might do as I did. I made multiple columns across several pages to allow parallel notes from differing views. Then I applied a finely tuned BS detector.

Don't take my view or anyone else's as gospel. Let God guide you. That may sound simplistic, but if you begin with prayer and allow scripture to speak, you will find answers. And, scripture does interpret itself. When you come across a difficult expression, see how scripture uses it in other places. The definition will become clear.

My prayers will be with you.

Ted

[seer]

Hey all,

I plan on doing an in depth study on eschatology pretty soon, so I'm just wondering if any of you would know of some ESSENTIAL books for this subject...or just any good eschatology books in general.

Thanks guys,

potato sundae


Revelations: Fout Views, by Steve Gregg...

This book uses the book of Revelations to present the four major views on eschatology. Side by side. And he makes no personal claims but simply lays out the different positions objectively:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0840721285/qid=1088888423/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2274954-2148131?v=glance&s=books

This is,I believe,simply the best non-bias book on the subject ever written...

[dizzle]

John MacArthur's, "The Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ" is my favourite.

But most of the rest of you probably won't like it.


Here is a review:

http://theologyweb.com/article/MacArthur_review

[mossrose]

Thanks, Dee Dee. That's all nice and all, now how about a review that ISN'T "preterist-oriented"?

[dizzle]

Thanks, Dee Dee. That's all nice and all, now how about a review that ISN'T "preterist-oriented"?

Submit one if you like. Just because one agrees ultimately with a particular point of view doesn't mean everything written on it is wonderful. For instance I don't think The Last Days According to Jesus was good. DeMar's criticisms are valid, this was not a good attempt by MacArthur. Rather than simply saying oh well it is preterist oriented it can't be fair, dispute the claims. I posted the review to give specic reasons why the MacArthur book was not good rather than simply goikng, oh well it is a futurist oriented book so it is no good. There is a reason why I thought this book was so bad, and DeMar outlines them, primarily being the cheap debater's trick that MacArthur pulls in the book which DeMar has nailed. Rather than simply drawing "party lines" - dispute the claims.

[mossrose]

Rather than simply saying oh well it is preterist oriented it can't be fair, dispute the claims.


Until you posted this review by DeMar (who I have never heard of, BTW), I was not even thinking of this particular book by MacArthur. I was referring in my earlier post to another book he wrote taken from a tape series in 1981. I did not know he had written this other one, and have not read it, so I cannot make any further comments on it.


I posted the review to give specic reasons why the MacArthur book was not good rather than simply goikng, oh well it is a futurist oriented book so it is no good. There is a reason why I thought this book was so bad, and DeMar outlines them, primarily being the cheap debater's trick that MacArthur pulls in the book which DeMar has nailed. Rather than simply drawing "party lines" - dispute the claims.

Have you read the book then? Having read your reviews of the Left Behind series, and the ridicule and general contempt for them, I can imagine your response to even the older MacArthur book.

Now, don't get me wrong. I think the Left Behind series is horrible, and horribly done. However, you can't miss the gospel message in them, nor is the timetable for the end times too much out to lunch.

Unless you are a preterist.

And if you haven't read the book, then you are making presuppositions about it, according to DeMar's review.

Anyways, I am not going to comment further until such time as I have read the book.

[dizzle]

Yes and no I have read the book. No, in that I don't have a copy and I didn't sit down and thorougly read it. Yes, (it is short) I had time to kill and I read it at the Church bookstore. I thoroughly read where he allegedly refuted preterism and it is exactly as DeMar criticized. Gary DeMar is one of the leading preterist exponents. (and I just saw this review recently - it was not in my mind when I made my earlier criticisms)

Ridicule for Left Behind is hardly limited to preterists

Now, don't get me wrong. I think the Left Behind series is horrible, and horribly done. However, you can't miss the gospel message in them, nor is the timetable for the end times too much out to lunch.

Unless you are a preterist.

That was quite an exercise in question begging. The timetable is WAY out there and presents end times in a cartoonish manner that is IMHO embarrassing. And historicists would have just as big of an issue BTW - in fact it is only a very recent brand of futurism that would even hold to such a scheme - so to dismiss it as 'unless you are preterist" dismisses the majority of views held throughout Church history.

[dizzle]

BTW:

I do hope to return to my Revelation commentary in late summer. I have done a lot of work toward writing the commentary, but I have been interrupted by various other duties.

Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., M. Div., Th. M., Th. D.

[potato sundae]

BTW:

I do hope to return to my Revelation commentary in late summer. I have done a lot of work toward writing the commentary, but I have been interrupted by various other duties.

Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., M. Div., Th. M., Th. D.

:woohoo:

[Spiritus Naturae]

A good deal of these books are online in fact

Beast of Revelation by Kenneth Gentry http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2186_47e.htm
Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2206_47e.htm
Days of Vengeance by David Chilton http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2226_47e.htm
He Shall Have Dominion by Kenneth Gentry http://freebooks.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/2202_47e.htm

As to the ancient sources, I prefer paperback copies to highlight the edges of relevant passages. Nevertheless:

The Twelve Ceasars by Suetonius http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/suetonius-index.html
The Annals by Tacitus http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.html
The Histories by Tacitus http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/histories.html
Antiquities of the Jews and The Jewish War by Josephus http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/josephus.html
Ecclesiastical History by Eusebius http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm


Awesome! Very cool link, my friend. ;o)

[GhostontheNet]

Awesome! Very cool link, my friend. ;o)
You're welcome. I recall how happy I was to find the publishers had released several of those works for free online, I bookmarked the site on the spot on both computers.

[KelDragon]

Hey, guys. i think this thread is pretty old, but I wanted to put in my two cents.

I've read, at least a little, most of the preterist books that have been recommended here. I love the fact that the publisher released the books fore free. Unfortunately, I'm blind, and like to have things other than in PDF format. Adobe, sadly, screws these books up rather badly when converting them to text. Do any of you know a way to fix this? might the publisher's be contacted? (I don't have contact details.)

Dragon

[doveofcreation]

"Triumph of the Lamb" by Dennis Johnson. From a pretty historicist/Amillenial perspective, I've only read the first chapter so far, but it looks really good! Straightforward and yet deeply Christ-centred and theological.

[doveofcreation]

Correction, call that an Idealist/Amillenial perspective (which is pretty much the same as what I believe, funnily enough!)