The Last Days according to Jesus

Last year, as I was preaching a series through the book of Matthew and nearing the Olivet Discourse (chapters 24-25), I was still frantically looking for any additional materials I could find on the subject. A pastor friend of mine recommended R. C. Sproul's The Last Days According to Jesus, so I bought a copy of it immediately (in fact, somehow I ended up buying two copies of the book, not realizing I'd already purchased it a few months prior).

Yet, with all this haste to snatch up the book(s), I never actually got around to reading it before I preached four messages through the Olivet Discourse in March and April of last year -- does that ever happen to anyone else, hurriedly buying a book that you're convinced you need to read immediately and then it gathers dust on your bookshelf for months? (I won't even ask about buying two copies of the same book, because I'm pretty sure that's not common).

Anyway, my procrastination and forgetfulness not withstanding, I finally did get around to reading The Last Days according to Jesus over the past month or so. And it is too bad I did not pick it up sooner, because it is certainly a worthwhile, thought-provoking eschatological study.

My Review

Let me say, first of all, that the most edifying discovery in the book was the fact that even R. C. Sproul is not completely sure of his eschatological position -- amil, premil, or postmil. It is encouraging to know I am not completely alone! (Big sigh of relief for all of you that are like me and R.C., and a big sigh of disappointment-mingled-with-disgust for those of you who already have it all figured out).

Since most Calvinistic preachers tend to hail from the amil camp, I assumed that Sproul was writing from the same perspective. However, his book is actually a careful review of the claims of preterism, admitting that he himself is a partial preterist (which could still fit into the schools of amillinialism, historic premillinialism, or postmillinialism).

At the conclusion of the book, Sproul writes:

The purpose of The Last Days according to Jesus has been to examine and evaluate the various claims of preterism, both full and partial. The great service preterism performs is to focus attention on two major issues. The first is the time-frame references of the New Testament regarding eschatological prophecy. The preterist is a sentinel standing guard against frivolous and superficial attempts to downplay or explain away the force of these references. The second major issue is the destruction of Jerusalem. this event certainly spelled the end of a crucial redemptive-historical epoch. It must be viewed as the end of some age. It also represents a significant visitation of the Lord in judgment and a vitally important "day of the Lord." Whether this is the only day of the Lord about which Scripture speaks remains a major point of controversy among preterists.

This sums up the major points and conclusions of the book better than I could do for him. While some readers might be disappointed to find Sproul unwilling to come down dogmatically on certain points of eschatology, I found it refreshing to have a variety of theological perspectives on the last days presented, without the fervor or subjectivity of an entrenched personal position on the part of the author.

But lest you think Sproul is downplaying the importance of eschatology, he also concludes:

Debates over eschatology will probably continue until the Lord returns and we have the advantage of hindsight rather than the disadvantage of foresight. The divisions that exist within the Christian community are understandable, considering that both the subject matter and the literary genre of future prophecy are exceedingly difficult. This does not mean that we may push the Bible aside or neglect its eschatological sections. On the contrary the interpretative difficulties presented by eschatological matters simply call us to a greater diligence and persistence in seeking their solution.

Is Sproul, in the end, however, merely laying out a number of options and encouraging the reader to pick any one that fits his or her fancy? No, he does have some specific goals in mind, of which he would like to convince his readers. The first, and most important, he expresses in this way:

As I have indicated throughout this book, one of my overarching concerns regarding the points in dispute is the authority of Scripture. As the inerrant Word of God, it precludes all efforts to ignore or downplay any aspect of its teaching. the evangelical world cannot afford to turn a deaf ear to the railing voices of skepticism that gut Scripture of its divine authority, that assault the credibility of the apostolic witness and even of Christ himself. We must take seriously the skeptics' critique of the time-frame references of New Testament prophecy, and we must answer them convincingly.

While he does tackle such intriguing and difficult questions as "Who is the antichrist? What generation will witness the end? When is the millennium?" this is not the thrust or purpose of his book. Sproul's chief concern is to provide an apologetic work, answering the skepticism of higher critics who claim discrepancy or ignorance or inaccuracy on the part of New Testament prophecies.

Sproul points out very effectively and forcefully that, while eschatology is an area of much disagreement among evangelical Christians, it is one of the most common criticisms used to question the inspiration of Scripture. For this reason, some points of commonality and uncompromise must be nailed down among all orthodox Christians.

While I must admit that I was made to seriously consider (and reconsider) some passages of Scriptural prophecy in a new way, Sproul's preterism is generally a very balanced and mild approach to the subject of eschatology. I dare say any premil or amil or postmil enthusiast would still enjoy and benefit from Sproul's careful analysis.

One criticism I might mention is that Sproul is a great deal more tolerant and benevolent toward radical (or "full") preterism than I would tend to be. While certainly not defending such a position, Sproul doesn't seem quite as alarmed or offended at the idea radical preterism as I am. Any eschatological viewpoint which leaves no room in New Testament prophecy for the return of Christ or the general resurrection is simply unorthodox, in my mind. Too much hope and truth hang upon those points.

However, I am in complete agreement with the partial-preterist view summarized in Sproul's chart on page 170 of his book:

It is the coming of Christ, the day of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture of the living, the (final) judgment, and the end of history that we all, as Christians, hope and live and wait for.

Resource: 'Finding Grace' Blog Categories: Finding Grace, Future Things

Tweet

However, I am in complete agreement with the partial-preterist view summarized in Sproul's chart on page 170 of his book:

It is the coming of Christ, the day of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture of the living, the (final) judgment, and the end of history that we all, as Christians, hope and live and wait for.

Resource: 'Finding Grace' Blog Categories: Finding Grace, Future Things

Tweet

AD 70

Still Future

A coming (parousia) of Christ

The coming (parousia) of Christ

A day of the Lord

The day of the Lord

The resurrection of the dead

The rapture of the living

A judgment

The (final) judgment

The end of the Jewish age

The end of history

It is the coming of Christ, the day of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture of the living, the (final) judgment, and the end of history that we all, as Christians, hope and live and wait for.