Thursday Three - Three Favorite Books on the End Times

I thought I would make up my own Thursday Three this week to make it more in line with some of my own interests.

This week's Thursday Three will be:

My Three Favorite Books on the End Times:

1. The Meaning of the Millennium - ed. Clouse

I realize that this book has been panned by some because of the weak entries from Boettner on postmillennialism and Hoyt on dispensational premillennialism, but the strong entries from Ladd and Hoekema make up for it. Actually, I did enjoy Boettner's entry - even though I didn't end up agreeing with it, I did get a bit of an understanding of postmillennialism, which was worthwhile. The great thing about this is that it opened my eyes to the fact that, contrary to what I had been taught, people who didn't accept the dispensational premil view had good biblical grounds for rejecting it. I ended up coming down on the side of amillennialism

2. Last Days Madness - Gary DeMar

On my trek into reformed eschatology I stopped at amillennialism, I've just never been able to buy all of the arguments of postmillennialism. This one is a postmil book so, while I don't buy his all of what he affirms, I certainly agree with all that he denies. He gives a devastating critique of the foolishness of end times obsessions.

3. The End Times Made Simple - Samuel Waldron

Waldron is an amil, so naturally I gravitate to him. What I found best about this book is his explanation of the two ages of Biblical history - this age and the age to come. If there are two ages of Biblical history, then this rules out the existence of a third age, aka the millennium. For me, he puts the final nail in the coffin on premillennialism of any stripe.

I would love to hear from some of my more well read readers what some of your favorite end times books are.

Comments

[Randy McRoberts]

Have you considered the preterist view?

[Adrian Warnocks UK Evangelical Blog]

Have suggested my three over on my blog

[David Wayne]

Randy,

I have some affinities with the partial preterist position, particularly as expressed by R. T. France in his commentary on Matthew in the Tyndale series. If I remember correctly, France draws a line between verse 35 and 36 of Matthew 24 - i.e. all that happens before verse 35 refers to the events leading up to 70AD and what follows refers to the second coming. Still, I think there may be something to the idea that what happened in AD 70 may prefigure (in some way) events around the time of the second coming.

I've never gotten totally on board with the preterist understanding of Revelation, although I like it in many ways. It seems that the preterist understanding of Revelation puts so much weight in a pre-70AD authorship and I am not sure that this is a lock. So, I've been a little agnostic on the dating of Revelation. I will admit that I haven't read Gentry's book, I've read some articles by him, but not the book. I hear its pretty persuasive.

Thanks for commenting.
David