Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. And their message will spread like cancer. Hymanaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some. 2 Timothy 2:15-18

As this book and its author have been pivotal points in my young Christian life, I must ask the reader's indulgence as I start this review on a personal note. I remember my reaction the first time that I heard of the preterist position of eschatology. It went something like this... "Are you completely nuts?!" How could the events described in the Olivet Discourse and most of Revelation have happened in the first century? But then again, I was finding it intellectually difficult to make "soon" and "this generation shall not pass away" stretch out into two thousand years plus.

So, as I investigated this idea, I soon encountered the large body of work produced by the hyper-preterists (hereinafter pantelists). They argued that not only was the Great Tribulation completely fulfilled in 70AD, if one were to be CONSISTENT then ALL prophecy was fulfilled in 70AD, including the Final Advent of Christ, the resurrection, and the Final Judgment. As good ole Bugs would say, "That's All Folks!" Well, ideas have consequences, and as I struggled with this idea, I went through the blackest moments in my Christian faith. I praise God for the Christian compassion of the author who spent a great deal of time with me on this issue many months before this book came out.

Now to the meat of the matter. There are so very few works refuting pantelism (this being the only book-length treatment of the subject that I am aware of), and each that I have seen bases its argumentation heavily on the pantelists' departure from the historic Christian creeds. However, the pantelists play the "Sola Scriptura" card to their favor, and as R.C. Sproul, Jr. so aptly stated in his introduction to this book, when the pantelists are confronted with the creeds, they "just yawn and remind us that we ourselves confess that confessions can err." This book of 208 pages spends the last 10 pages on the creeds and their proper place, devoting the rest to a biblically based argument against pantelism.

The author develops an excellent case for the orthodox Christian belief in the future bodily resurrection of all believers and the future bodily resurrection of the damned. He points out multiple Scriptures that cannot be understood in any other light without exegetical (and contextual) gymnastics. In so doing, he engages many of the arguments of the pantelists. Also specifically addressed are the arguments of pantelists King, Harden, and Noe about the nature of the resurrection body. Of course, intrinsically tied into this issue, would be the Final Judgment. If the pantelist is correct, then Satan and his angels have been completely judged. If the pantelist is correct, then physical death will always be present, and Christ will not have completely redeemed us and this world from the loss caused by the first Adam. The consequences of this idea do not leave one area of faith unaffected. (For example, if Christ has done all the "coming" that He is ever going to do, then do we still take Communion?)

Additionally, it is shown how a particularly thorny issue for the pantelist is the reign of Christ. If Revelation 20 and 1 Corinthians 15 are taken together, the pantelist would appear to have no choice but to reduce Christ's reign to 40 years. Pantelists and orthodox preterists alike point out that God can tell time and "soon means soon." However, the pantelists in a desire to be "consistent" can somehow make 1,000 years into 40. Who is being consistent here? While the number 1,000 may very well, and most likely is, symbolic; it certainly is not be symbolic of a short period of time (despite pantelist assertions). What would be the point? If that is so, we may have cause to worry because God keeps His promises to a thousand generations. If that can be forty, our time may be running out! (Of course, I am somewhat kidding.) The author ironically points out that the pantelists have made the same error as they believe the dispensationalists have, only in reverse. While most of the church today seems to ignore the short term statements in Scripture to save the future, the pantelist sacrifices the future to save the short term statements.

Other issues dealt with include the implausibility that the church could be in such grave error for 2,000 years, ( especially if the pantelist is right since the promises in Ephesians 4:11-13 would have fulfilled as well!) and the mixing of short-term and long-term prophecies in the OT. I particularly enjoyed the fact that this book sticks with and deals with the topic at hand without unnecessary digression and elementary discussion. As such, however, it is not a work for persons unfamiliar with the basics of the topic as it does not provide such groundwork, assuming the reader already has familiarity with same. Also, this book is not going to nor does it claim to, answer every argument that is currently put forward by the pantelists; but it lays a great foundation from which to answer those arguments.

Now back to a personal note. This journey exploring preterism has been a rocky road for me, and I suspect for many others as well. I really enjoyed how the author pointed out, however, that all Christians are preterists to a point. We all believe that the First Advent has happened! Although, I cannot claim at this point to be a convinced preterist (as in "the Olivet Discourse and most of Revelation is fulfilled" sense of the word), it is nice to know that one does not have to abandon orthodoxy in order to hold to this view. My study continues...

ADDENDUM (February 2002): Well almost two years have passed since I initially authored this review during which I have extensively studied and considered the subject. I have come to conclusion, as has our esteemed JP Holding, that the orthodox (read non-heretical) preterist scheme of eschatology is indeed correct. This has been and continues to be somewhat of a rocky road....