What do you think?
Rate this book
The Bible and the Future
"Writing from the perspective that the coming of God's kingdom is both present and future, Hoekema covers the full range of eschatological topics in this comprehensive biblical exposition. The two major sections of the book deal with inaugurated eschatology (the "already") and future eschatology (the "not yet"). Detailed appendix, bibliography, and indexes."
350 pages, ebook
First published March 1, 1979
104 people are currently reading
817 people want to read
About the author
Anthony A. Hoekema
29 books39 followersAnthony A. Hoekema (1913-1988) was a Christian theologian of the Dutch Reformed tradition who served as professor of Systematic theology at Calvin Theological Seminary for twenty-one years.
Hoekema was born in the Netherlands but immigrated to the United States in 1923. He attended Calvin College (A.B.), the University of Michigan (M.A.), Calvin Theological Seminary (Th.B.) and Princeton Theological Seminary (Th.D., 1953). After pastoring several Christian Reformed churches (1944-56), he became Associate Professor of Bible at Calvin College (1956-58). From 1958 to 1979, when he retired, he was Professor of Systematic Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Hoekema was born in the Netherlands but immigrated to the United States in 1923. He attended Calvin College (A.B.), the University of Michigan (M.A.), Calvin Theological Seminary (Th.B.) and Princeton Theological Seminary (Th.D., 1953). After pastoring several Christian Reformed churches (1944-56), he became Associate Professor of Bible at Calvin College (1956-58). From 1958 to 1979, when he retired, he was Professor of Systematic Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 95 reviews
May 31, 2021
An excellent book on eschatology, drawing from the entire Bible. It's clear and logical. It presents amillennialism, and explains the strengths and weaknesses of postmillennialism, historic premillennialism, and dispensational premillennialism.
The book has 2 sections: 1) Inaugurated Eschatology, about present fulfillment of the Kingdom and blessings already enjoyed by believers, and 2) Future Eschatology, about the intermediate state, signs of the times, Second Coming, millennium, final resurrection, final judgment, new earth.
I've heard about this book from different sources for years, and I wish I'd read it years ago.
Notes
Part I. Inaugurated Eschatology
The Eschatological Outlook of the Old Testament
"Prophetic perspective" sees in a single vision events separated by thousands of years. This perspective is used frequently by OT prophets, and in some NT apocalyptic passages.
OT speaks of "the day of the Lord" as a day in near future when God will judge Israel's enemies, but the phrase is also used for the final day of judgment.
The Nature of New Testament Eschatology
NT writers say they're already living in last days (Acts 2:16-17; 1 Cor 10:11; Heb 9:26; 1 John 2:18.
NT takes OT concept of "last days" and breaks it into 1) present Messianic age (between Christ's 1st and 2nd coming) and 2) future age (after Christ's 2nd coming).
Future age (after Christ's 2nd coming) is described as "that age," "the coming age," "the age to come."
"The last day" refers to future age, usually day of judgment or resurrection.
Timeline
1. Creation
2. The past age
3. Christ's 1st coming
4. "This age," "the last days," "the end of the ages"
5. Christ's 2nd coming
6. "The age to come," "the last day," "the end of the age"
"The Christian hopes for far greater blessings in the future, not because he now has so little, but because he already has so much."
The Meaning of History
Although Christians recognize evil in world and sin in hearts, they're optimistic because God is on the throne and working out His purposes in history.
The Tension Between the Already and the Not Yet
Neither an exclusively preterist nor an exclusively futurist view does justice to Revelation, because neither of them takes into account the "already, not yet" tension in the book. Preterist view is that most of Rev had happened by time book was written, or shortly after. Futurist view is that most of Rev is still future today.
Rev references Christ's 1st coming (1:18; 5:5-7, 9-10; 12:1-5, 11) and 2nd coming (1:7; 19:11-16; 22:7, 12, 20).
"Signs of the times" point back to 1st coming and ahead to 2nd coming. They don't happen exclusively at end (just prior to 2nd coming); they occur throughout time between 1st and 2nd coming, though there's room for a climactic fulfillment just before 2nd coming.
Part II. Future Eschatology
Physical Death
"in the day that you eat of it" (Gen 2:17) is a Hebrew idiom meaning "as surely as you eat of it" (see 1 Kings 2:37; Ex 10:28); it doesn't mean "on the particular day that you eat this fruit you shall die." When Adam and Eve at the fruit, they immediately died spiritually (they became subject to eternal death), and physical death became inevitable.
The Intermediate State
Rev 6:9 and 20:4 use "souls" to refer to aspect of martyrs that exists after the death of their bodies.
"Sheol" is OT way of asserting that humans exist after death.
"Sheol" may refer to state of death or grave (but probably not to hell).
NT teaches that humans exist after death in place of happy blessedness ("Paradise" or "Abraham's bosom") or "Hades" (the Septuagint translation of "Sheol," though the meaning isn't identical to OT "Sheol"), referring to the realm of the dead. In Luke 16:19-31 "Hades" refers to place of torment in intermediate state.
NT uses "Gehenna" for place of punishment in final state (after 2nd Coming).
The Expectation of the Second Coming
Passages which speak of Christ's return within a generation (Mk 9:1 [cf. Mt 16:28; Lk 9:27]; Mk 13:30 [cf. Mt 24:34; Lk 21:32]; Mt 10:23) can't require 2nd Coming within generation of Jesus' contemporaries, because He said he didn't know the time (Mk 13:32).
When Jesus spoke of the coming of His kingdom (Mk 9:1; Mt 16:28), He spoke with prophetic foreshortening about His resurrection and final return together. Many who were alive when He said those words witnessed His resurrection.
"All these things" in Mk 13:30 (cf. Mt 24:34; Lk 21:32) refers to events He just described, including final return.
Word "generation" may have qualitative meaning, not just temporal one. In these passages, it refers to rebellious, apostate Jews who reject Christ between his 1st and 2nd coming.
Mt 10:23 teaches that church must keep bringing gospel to Jews until 2nd Coming.
The Signs of the Times
"'Signs of the times' refer primarily not to what is still future but to what God has done in the past and is revealing in the present" (see Mt 16:3).
Olivet Discourse (Mt 24; Mk 13; Lk 21) was in response to disciples asking 2 questions: 1) when will these things be? and 2) what will be sign of 2nd coming? Discourse uses prophetic foreshortening; signs had initial fulfillment at destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, but will have further fulfillment at 2nd Coming, and are present between 1st and 2nd coming.
Signs aren't spectacular, unmistakable alerts that 2nd Coming is imminent; that would nullify need to be watchful (Lk 17:20-21). Spectacular signs are associated with Satan's kingdom (2 Thess 2:9; Rev 13:13-14).
Signs reveal central meaning of history: God rules, and is working out His purposes.
Signs don't tell us exact time of 2nd Coming, but assure us that it's certain.
Signs are present between 1st and 2nd coming, but will be more intense before 2nd coming.
The Signs in Particular
Gospel must be preached to all nations before 2nd Coming, but we don't know the extent that preaching must reach.
"All Israel will be saved" (Rom 11:25-26) refers to salvation of elect Jews throughout history.
OT uses prophetic foreshortening. Joel added to his prophecy of outpouring of Spirit details about signs in heavens at 2nd Coming. Isaiah saw destruction of Babylon and final day of the Lord as if they were one. Zephaniah's description of day of the Lord refers to judgment for Judah in immediate future and a final catastrophe.
In Olivet Discourse, Jesus described future events in terms of local ethnicity and geography, but that doesn't mean predictions are restricted to Palestine.
Since Mt 24:14 speaks of preaching which continues until the end, tribulation of Mt 24:9-10 isn't limited to time just before 2nd Coming.
Jesus spoke of tribulation as a continuing reality (Mt 5:10-12; 15:20; 16:33) and final tribulation (Mt 24:21-22). "No, and never will be" refers to a tribulation greater than any previous. Mt 24:29-30 says great tribulation will immediately precede 2nd Coming.
2 Thess 2 speaks of events that must occur before 2nd Coming: great apostasy, man of lawlessness.
In Olivet Discourse, Jesus spoke of a future (2nd) fulfillment of Daniel's prediction of "abomination of desolation" (Mt 24:15-16). This happened in 70 AD. Because Olivet Discourse also addresses end of time, we can expect a 3rd "abomination of desolation" at end of time.
1 John 2:18 speaks of a personal antichrist who is still coming, though antichrists were already present.
Most commentators identify "man of lawlessness" (2 Thess 2) with antichrist (1 John 2).
Man of lawlessness (2 Thess 2)
• Will come out of great apostasy
• Will be a person (description is of an individual)
• Will demand to be worshiped, and will persecute Christians who refuse, leading to great tribulation
• Will do deceptive miracles
Signs in Olivet Discourse aren't strictly signs of the end; Jesus says, "the end is not yet" (Mt 25:6). The signs occur during entire period between 1st and 2nd Coming.
Major Millennial Views
Amillennialism
• Millennium (Rev 20:4-6) is present reign of souls of deceased believers with Christ in heaven.
• Binding of Satan is in effect from 1st Coming to shortly before 2nd Coming.
• 2nd Coming will occur after heavenly millennial reign.
• Kingdom of evil will exist alongside kingdom of God until end of world.
• Signs of the times occur from 1st Coming to 2nd, intensified just before 2nd.
• Tribulation and apostasy will intensify just before 2nd Coming.
• Personal antichrist will appear just before 2nd Coming.
Rev 20:1-6 doesn't support postmil; it describes reigning of souls of believers with Christ in heaven now.
Postmil expectation of golden age doesn't do justice to continuing tension between forces of evil and forces of God (Gen 3:15; Rev 16:13-16; 20: 7-9; Mt 13:36-43).
A Critique of Dispensational Premillennialism
Isa 65:20 ("… For the child shall die one hundred years old …") means people will live incalculably long lives. It can't mean there will be death on new earth, since v 19 says there will be no weeping, and Isa 25:8 says there will be no death. Isa 65:20 should say, "he who fails to reach a hundred," not "sinner."
The Millennium of Revelation 20
Rev contains progressive parallelism; its 7 sections run parallel to each other, each depicting time between 1st and 2nd Coming.
Rev 1-11 describes struggle on earth (world persecuting church). Rev 12-22 shows spiritual background of struggle (Satan and his forces persecuting church).
Rev 20:1 goes back to beginning of NT era (Satan's defeat began with 1st Coming).
"Lake of fire" is place of final punishment, so "bottomless pit" or "abyss" isn't; it's figurative description of curbing of Satan's activities during NT era.
Binding of Satan during NT era means he can't prevent spread of gospel and can't unite all enemies of Christ to attack church (Mt 12:28-29; 13:24-30, 47-50).
"I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" (Lk 10:17-18) means spread of gospel dealt Satan a crushing blow (Jn 12:31-32).
Throne scene (v 4) is in heaven; in Rev, all but 3 of 47 uses of "throne" are in heaven. "Sitting on thrones" shows dead believers are alive in heaven, reigning with Christ.
"The rest of the dead" (v 5) are unbelievers.
1st resurrection (v 5) is life in heaven after death. 2nd resurrection is bodily resurrection after 2nd Coming.
The Final Judgment
The greater the revelation of God's will one has received, the greater the responsibility to live by it (Mt 11:20-22; Lk 16:31). Those who never heard of Christianity will be judged by revelation of God in nature (Rom 1:18-21) and law written on their hearts (Rom 2:12, 14-16).
There will be degrees of suffering for lost (Lk 12:47-48).
Final judgment will be according to works (Mt 16:27; Rom 2:6; Rev 20:12; 22:12). Although salvation comes through faith in Christ, not works, works are evidence of true faith (Jas 2:18, 26; Gal 5:6; Mt 7:21).
Mt 25:34 shows believers are given heaven as inheritance (gift), not merited reward. Mt 25:37 shows that believers didn't do good works to merit eternal life, but to express devotion to Christ. Rewards aren't merited, but gifts of God's grace (Lk 17:10).
There will be degrees of reward for believers (Lk 19:12-19; 1 Cor 3:10-15). Loss in 1 Cor 3:15 isn't loss of salvation, but of reward.
As increasing experience gives a musician a greater capacity for enjoying music, so increased devotion to God increases capacity to enjoy blessings of His kingdom.
The New Earth
OT prophecies about wolves and lambs, mountains dropping sweet wine, etc., are figurative, not crassly literal, descriptions of new earth.
Universe will be renewed, not annihilated
• In 2 Pet 3:13 and Rev 21:1, word about newness of cosmos is "kainos" (new in nature or quality), not "neos" (new in time or origin).
• Rom 8:20-21 says this cosmos will be liberated from corruption, not that it will be a new cosmos.
• There's an analogy between resurrection bodies (renewed, not brand new) and future cosmos.
• If God had to annihilate cosmos, Satan would have won a great victory in corrupting it beyond saving.
Acts 3:19-21 speaks of restoration of all things after 2nd Coming.
Many biblical prophecies about earth and land refer to renewed creation (Ps 37:11; Mt 5:5; Rom 4:13; Rev 5:9-10).
That new earth has no sea (Rev 21:1) may be figurative; in Bible (especially Rev), sea represents interference of harmony.
Details like jeweled foundations, pearly gates, streets of gold are probably figurative.
Glorified saints will reign over new creation, in perfect dominion over nature.
The book has 2 sections: 1) Inaugurated Eschatology, about present fulfillment of the Kingdom and blessings already enjoyed by believers, and 2) Future Eschatology, about the intermediate state, signs of the times, Second Coming, millennium, final resurrection, final judgment, new earth.
I've heard about this book from different sources for years, and I wish I'd read it years ago.
Notes
Part I. Inaugurated Eschatology
The Eschatological Outlook of the Old Testament
"Prophetic perspective" sees in a single vision events separated by thousands of years. This perspective is used frequently by OT prophets, and in some NT apocalyptic passages.
OT speaks of "the day of the Lord" as a day in near future when God will judge Israel's enemies, but the phrase is also used for the final day of judgment.
The Nature of New Testament Eschatology
NT writers say they're already living in last days (Acts 2:16-17; 1 Cor 10:11; Heb 9:26; 1 John 2:18.
NT takes OT concept of "last days" and breaks it into 1) present Messianic age (between Christ's 1st and 2nd coming) and 2) future age (after Christ's 2nd coming).
Future age (after Christ's 2nd coming) is described as "that age," "the coming age," "the age to come."
"The last day" refers to future age, usually day of judgment or resurrection.
Timeline
1. Creation
2. The past age
3. Christ's 1st coming
4. "This age," "the last days," "the end of the ages"
5. Christ's 2nd coming
6. "The age to come," "the last day," "the end of the age"
"The Christian hopes for far greater blessings in the future, not because he now has so little, but because he already has so much."
The Meaning of History
Although Christians recognize evil in world and sin in hearts, they're optimistic because God is on the throne and working out His purposes in history.
The Tension Between the Already and the Not Yet
Neither an exclusively preterist nor an exclusively futurist view does justice to Revelation, because neither of them takes into account the "already, not yet" tension in the book. Preterist view is that most of Rev had happened by time book was written, or shortly after. Futurist view is that most of Rev is still future today.
Rev references Christ's 1st coming (1:18; 5:5-7, 9-10; 12:1-5, 11) and 2nd coming (1:7; 19:11-16; 22:7, 12, 20).
"Signs of the times" point back to 1st coming and ahead to 2nd coming. They don't happen exclusively at end (just prior to 2nd coming); they occur throughout time between 1st and 2nd coming, though there's room for a climactic fulfillment just before 2nd coming.
Part II. Future Eschatology
Physical Death
"in the day that you eat of it" (Gen 2:17) is a Hebrew idiom meaning "as surely as you eat of it" (see 1 Kings 2:37; Ex 10:28); it doesn't mean "on the particular day that you eat this fruit you shall die." When Adam and Eve at the fruit, they immediately died spiritually (they became subject to eternal death), and physical death became inevitable.
The Intermediate State
Rev 6:9 and 20:4 use "souls" to refer to aspect of martyrs that exists after the death of their bodies.
"Sheol" is OT way of asserting that humans exist after death.
"Sheol" may refer to state of death or grave (but probably not to hell).
NT teaches that humans exist after death in place of happy blessedness ("Paradise" or "Abraham's bosom") or "Hades" (the Septuagint translation of "Sheol," though the meaning isn't identical to OT "Sheol"), referring to the realm of the dead. In Luke 16:19-31 "Hades" refers to place of torment in intermediate state.
NT uses "Gehenna" for place of punishment in final state (after 2nd Coming).
The Expectation of the Second Coming
Passages which speak of Christ's return within a generation (Mk 9:1 [cf. Mt 16:28; Lk 9:27]; Mk 13:30 [cf. Mt 24:34; Lk 21:32]; Mt 10:23) can't require 2nd Coming within generation of Jesus' contemporaries, because He said he didn't know the time (Mk 13:32).
When Jesus spoke of the coming of His kingdom (Mk 9:1; Mt 16:28), He spoke with prophetic foreshortening about His resurrection and final return together. Many who were alive when He said those words witnessed His resurrection.
"All these things" in Mk 13:30 (cf. Mt 24:34; Lk 21:32) refers to events He just described, including final return.
Word "generation" may have qualitative meaning, not just temporal one. In these passages, it refers to rebellious, apostate Jews who reject Christ between his 1st and 2nd coming.
Mt 10:23 teaches that church must keep bringing gospel to Jews until 2nd Coming.
The Signs of the Times
"'Signs of the times' refer primarily not to what is still future but to what God has done in the past and is revealing in the present" (see Mt 16:3).
Olivet Discourse (Mt 24; Mk 13; Lk 21) was in response to disciples asking 2 questions: 1) when will these things be? and 2) what will be sign of 2nd coming? Discourse uses prophetic foreshortening; signs had initial fulfillment at destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, but will have further fulfillment at 2nd Coming, and are present between 1st and 2nd coming.
Signs aren't spectacular, unmistakable alerts that 2nd Coming is imminent; that would nullify need to be watchful (Lk 17:20-21). Spectacular signs are associated with Satan's kingdom (2 Thess 2:9; Rev 13:13-14).
Signs reveal central meaning of history: God rules, and is working out His purposes.
Signs don't tell us exact time of 2nd Coming, but assure us that it's certain.
Signs are present between 1st and 2nd coming, but will be more intense before 2nd coming.
The Signs in Particular
Gospel must be preached to all nations before 2nd Coming, but we don't know the extent that preaching must reach.
"All Israel will be saved" (Rom 11:25-26) refers to salvation of elect Jews throughout history.
OT uses prophetic foreshortening. Joel added to his prophecy of outpouring of Spirit details about signs in heavens at 2nd Coming. Isaiah saw destruction of Babylon and final day of the Lord as if they were one. Zephaniah's description of day of the Lord refers to judgment for Judah in immediate future and a final catastrophe.
In Olivet Discourse, Jesus described future events in terms of local ethnicity and geography, but that doesn't mean predictions are restricted to Palestine.
Since Mt 24:14 speaks of preaching which continues until the end, tribulation of Mt 24:9-10 isn't limited to time just before 2nd Coming.
Jesus spoke of tribulation as a continuing reality (Mt 5:10-12; 15:20; 16:33) and final tribulation (Mt 24:21-22). "No, and never will be" refers to a tribulation greater than any previous. Mt 24:29-30 says great tribulation will immediately precede 2nd Coming.
2 Thess 2 speaks of events that must occur before 2nd Coming: great apostasy, man of lawlessness.
In Olivet Discourse, Jesus spoke of a future (2nd) fulfillment of Daniel's prediction of "abomination of desolation" (Mt 24:15-16). This happened in 70 AD. Because Olivet Discourse also addresses end of time, we can expect a 3rd "abomination of desolation" at end of time.
1 John 2:18 speaks of a personal antichrist who is still coming, though antichrists were already present.
Most commentators identify "man of lawlessness" (2 Thess 2) with antichrist (1 John 2).
Man of lawlessness (2 Thess 2)
• Will come out of great apostasy
• Will be a person (description is of an individual)
• Will demand to be worshiped, and will persecute Christians who refuse, leading to great tribulation
• Will do deceptive miracles
Signs in Olivet Discourse aren't strictly signs of the end; Jesus says, "the end is not yet" (Mt 25:6). The signs occur during entire period between 1st and 2nd Coming.
Major Millennial Views
Amillennialism
• Millennium (Rev 20:4-6) is present reign of souls of deceased believers with Christ in heaven.
• Binding of Satan is in effect from 1st Coming to shortly before 2nd Coming.
• 2nd Coming will occur after heavenly millennial reign.
• Kingdom of evil will exist alongside kingdom of God until end of world.
• Signs of the times occur from 1st Coming to 2nd, intensified just before 2nd.
• Tribulation and apostasy will intensify just before 2nd Coming.
• Personal antichrist will appear just before 2nd Coming.
Rev 20:1-6 doesn't support postmil; it describes reigning of souls of believers with Christ in heaven now.
Postmil expectation of golden age doesn't do justice to continuing tension between forces of evil and forces of God (Gen 3:15; Rev 16:13-16; 20: 7-9; Mt 13:36-43).
A Critique of Dispensational Premillennialism
Isa 65:20 ("… For the child shall die one hundred years old …") means people will live incalculably long lives. It can't mean there will be death on new earth, since v 19 says there will be no weeping, and Isa 25:8 says there will be no death. Isa 65:20 should say, "he who fails to reach a hundred," not "sinner."
The Millennium of Revelation 20
Rev contains progressive parallelism; its 7 sections run parallel to each other, each depicting time between 1st and 2nd Coming.
Rev 1-11 describes struggle on earth (world persecuting church). Rev 12-22 shows spiritual background of struggle (Satan and his forces persecuting church).
Rev 20:1 goes back to beginning of NT era (Satan's defeat began with 1st Coming).
"Lake of fire" is place of final punishment, so "bottomless pit" or "abyss" isn't; it's figurative description of curbing of Satan's activities during NT era.
Binding of Satan during NT era means he can't prevent spread of gospel and can't unite all enemies of Christ to attack church (Mt 12:28-29; 13:24-30, 47-50).
"I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" (Lk 10:17-18) means spread of gospel dealt Satan a crushing blow (Jn 12:31-32).
Throne scene (v 4) is in heaven; in Rev, all but 3 of 47 uses of "throne" are in heaven. "Sitting on thrones" shows dead believers are alive in heaven, reigning with Christ.
"The rest of the dead" (v 5) are unbelievers.
1st resurrection (v 5) is life in heaven after death. 2nd resurrection is bodily resurrection after 2nd Coming.
The Final Judgment
The greater the revelation of God's will one has received, the greater the responsibility to live by it (Mt 11:20-22; Lk 16:31). Those who never heard of Christianity will be judged by revelation of God in nature (Rom 1:18-21) and law written on their hearts (Rom 2:12, 14-16).
There will be degrees of suffering for lost (Lk 12:47-48).
Final judgment will be according to works (Mt 16:27; Rom 2:6; Rev 20:12; 22:12). Although salvation comes through faith in Christ, not works, works are evidence of true faith (Jas 2:18, 26; Gal 5:6; Mt 7:21).
Mt 25:34 shows believers are given heaven as inheritance (gift), not merited reward. Mt 25:37 shows that believers didn't do good works to merit eternal life, but to express devotion to Christ. Rewards aren't merited, but gifts of God's grace (Lk 17:10).
There will be degrees of reward for believers (Lk 19:12-19; 1 Cor 3:10-15). Loss in 1 Cor 3:15 isn't loss of salvation, but of reward.
As increasing experience gives a musician a greater capacity for enjoying music, so increased devotion to God increases capacity to enjoy blessings of His kingdom.
The New Earth
OT prophecies about wolves and lambs, mountains dropping sweet wine, etc., are figurative, not crassly literal, descriptions of new earth.
Universe will be renewed, not annihilated
• In 2 Pet 3:13 and Rev 21:1, word about newness of cosmos is "kainos" (new in nature or quality), not "neos" (new in time or origin).
• Rom 8:20-21 says this cosmos will be liberated from corruption, not that it will be a new cosmos.
• There's an analogy between resurrection bodies (renewed, not brand new) and future cosmos.
• If God had to annihilate cosmos, Satan would have won a great victory in corrupting it beyond saving.
Acts 3:19-21 speaks of restoration of all things after 2nd Coming.
Many biblical prophecies about earth and land refer to renewed creation (Ps 37:11; Mt 5:5; Rom 4:13; Rev 5:9-10).
That new earth has no sea (Rev 21:1) may be figurative; in Bible (especially Rev), sea represents interference of harmony.
Details like jeweled foundations, pearly gates, streets of gold are probably figurative.
… it is encouraging to know that some day God will prepare a glorious new earth on which the ecological problems which now plague us will no longer exist. This does not imply that we need do nothing about these problems, but it does mean that we work for solutions to these problems, not with a feeling of despair, but in the confidence of hope. … we may not just write off the present earth as a total loss, or rejoice in its deterioration. We must indeed be working fora better world now. Our efforts to bring the kingdom of Christ into fuller manifestation are of eternal significance.Belgic Confession Article 37 speaks of Christ "burning this old world with fire and flame to cleanse it."
Glorified saints will reign over new creation, in perfect dominion over nature.
January 17, 2024
Hoekema addresses eschatology from the amillennial position. The book covers the entire scope of eschatology beginning with the Old Testament prophesies, and concluding with the new heaven and new earth. Hoekema also addresses the four eschatological interpretations of the millennium (amillennialism, premillennial dispensationalism, historic premillennialism, and postmillennialism). In my opinion, the intermediate state, eternal judgment, and the new heaven and earth are rarely addressed by pastors but Hoekema does an excellent job defining each state of existence for both the believer and unbeliever. What will the unbeliever experience after his death? What will the believer experience at his death? Hoekema answers these rarely approached topics with clarity, while also refuting heretical cults like Jehovah's Witnesses and the Unitarians.
July 6, 2024
“Live as though Christ died yesterday, arose this morning, and is coming again tomorrow.”
-Hoekema, page 136
-Hoekema, page 136
March 4, 2024
My rampage through eschatology and the Parousia continues. Highly recommend to any looking for a basic understanding of how Scripture talks and looks at Christs second coming. Very encouraging, very clear, and very glorifying to a glorified Savior that is to come again!
November 10, 2013
The beginning of the book was a nice survey of Ladd's contribution to modern eschatology.
Other Millennial Positions
"Gives an interesting critique of postmillennialism, though he does avoid a few of their stronger arguments. Secondly, I am not so sure his critique of Shepherd's exegesis of Revelation 20, with which so far I agree with Hoekema, doesn't actually backfire and challenge Hoekema's own position"
Hoekema’s exegesis of Revelation 20:
He argues that Revelation 20:1 takes us back to the beginning of the NT era (227). He makes the specific argument that the defeat of Satan began with the coming of Christ. He claims that Jesus’s parable of the strong man is the binding of Satan today (229). Concerning verse 4 he says that the referent to the “souls of those who have been beheaded” necessarily shifts the location to heaven (231).
Hoekema is adamant that there is no earthly reign, claiming that the scene in vv. 4-6 is in heaven (233). He sees further parallels in 6:9-11, with the beheaded souls in heaven at the altar. He claims that the two scenes are identical (235).
He specifically glosses esezan to read “the soul’s coming to life after death” (234). Admittedly, this is superior to the Augustinian gloss of “regeneration.”
Analysis and Critique
His section on the resurrection is pretty good and one is warmly encouraged by his use of passages showing that the Spirit is a downpayment, giving believers hope that they will be saved (something often missing from anchoretic treatments). I did find it interesting that he conceded that Paul never speaks of the resurrection of unbelievers. Contra to Hoekema's earlier argument, this fits in nicely with the premil. I hadn’t even thought of that.
He understands the challenge that Isaiah 65:20 poses to the amillennial scheme, even noting it’s a hard text. At the end, though, he simply says it is figurative language. This is anti-climactic, to say the least.
He asks the perceptive question (p. 283 n.17) as to what will the glorified saints be reigning over (ala Rev. 5). He says they will be reigning over the new creation. This response is unsatisfactory. Unless we are reigning over dogs and cats, the word reign is being used differently than in its normal sense. Some of the silliness of premil aside, their answers are more satisfactory. He is correct, though, that our “reigning” must always be tied in with our “resurrection.” If this is so, then it makes little sense, per his earlier arguments, to see the reigning in Revelation 20 as disembodied souls in heaven.
Does his exegesis of Revelation 20 work? It is certainly better than previous Augustinian and some postmillennial accounts. If the words “coming to life/resurrection” refer to regeneration, then we have the absurd results that the martyrs are regenerated after they are beheaded for their faith! Hoekema rightly avoids this oddity.
He struggles, though, to make the point that the reigning in ch.20 is merely spiritual and heavenly. As he notes elsewhere (p. 287) reigning is tied to resurrection, which is bodily. Further, his claim that the text nowhere says we are reigning on earth is simply false on at least two counts. Rev. 5:10 specifically says we will reign on earth. Further, the syntax of Rev. 20:1-3 presupposes that Rev. 19 is a sequential account of Christ’s return. Chap 19 specifically says Christ returned “to earth.” The words in chap 20, “then,” “no longer,” and “after that,” particularly the latter, necessarily demand the previous context be taken into account.
Hoekema’s recapitulatory reading, while occasionally interesting, simply breaks down at the end. Given that the chapter headings are a late addition to the text, and the overwhelming sequential terms in chs. 19-20, it simply is not true that chapter 20 begins a recapitulation. Certainly, we may hear echoes as in Rev. 6 and Rev. 20, but the two situations are entirely different. The martyred souls in Revelation 20 cannot be said to be reigning in heaven. If anything, they are pleading for vengeance, something rather odd for “ruling and reigning!”
Decent appendix dealing with modern eschatologies. The section on Moltmann needs to take Moltmann's later "Coming of God" into account. Further, one can't accuse Moltmann of not specifying the content of future eschatology when the bible itself really doesn't do that. Even more, when premillennialists like MOltmann do that with regard to OT prophecies, we are told we shouldn't take them literally, so Hoekema’s charge is quite unfair.
While I disagree with his amillennialism, Hoekema’s text is to be welcomed. It’s exegesis is far superior to previous amillennial accounts. Further, it lacks the gnostic despair that characterized much of institutional amillennialism in the 20th century.
ANother odd problem is that while he gave a fantastic account of death and the intermediate state, he totally avoided any discussion of Roman Catholic claims about Purgatory. Such an omission is mind-boggling.
Other Millennial Positions
"Gives an interesting critique of postmillennialism, though he does avoid a few of their stronger arguments. Secondly, I am not so sure his critique of Shepherd's exegesis of Revelation 20, with which so far I agree with Hoekema, doesn't actually backfire and challenge Hoekema's own position"
Hoekema’s exegesis of Revelation 20:
He argues that Revelation 20:1 takes us back to the beginning of the NT era (227). He makes the specific argument that the defeat of Satan began with the coming of Christ. He claims that Jesus’s parable of the strong man is the binding of Satan today (229). Concerning verse 4 he says that the referent to the “souls of those who have been beheaded” necessarily shifts the location to heaven (231).
Hoekema is adamant that there is no earthly reign, claiming that the scene in vv. 4-6 is in heaven (233). He sees further parallels in 6:9-11, with the beheaded souls in heaven at the altar. He claims that the two scenes are identical (235).
He specifically glosses esezan to read “the soul’s coming to life after death” (234). Admittedly, this is superior to the Augustinian gloss of “regeneration.”
Analysis and Critique
His section on the resurrection is pretty good and one is warmly encouraged by his use of passages showing that the Spirit is a downpayment, giving believers hope that they will be saved (something often missing from anchoretic treatments). I did find it interesting that he conceded that Paul never speaks of the resurrection of unbelievers. Contra to Hoekema's earlier argument, this fits in nicely with the premil. I hadn’t even thought of that.
He understands the challenge that Isaiah 65:20 poses to the amillennial scheme, even noting it’s a hard text. At the end, though, he simply says it is figurative language. This is anti-climactic, to say the least.
He asks the perceptive question (p. 283 n.17) as to what will the glorified saints be reigning over (ala Rev. 5). He says they will be reigning over the new creation. This response is unsatisfactory. Unless we are reigning over dogs and cats, the word reign is being used differently than in its normal sense. Some of the silliness of premil aside, their answers are more satisfactory. He is correct, though, that our “reigning” must always be tied in with our “resurrection.” If this is so, then it makes little sense, per his earlier arguments, to see the reigning in Revelation 20 as disembodied souls in heaven.
Does his exegesis of Revelation 20 work? It is certainly better than previous Augustinian and some postmillennial accounts. If the words “coming to life/resurrection” refer to regeneration, then we have the absurd results that the martyrs are regenerated after they are beheaded for their faith! Hoekema rightly avoids this oddity.
He struggles, though, to make the point that the reigning in ch.20 is merely spiritual and heavenly. As he notes elsewhere (p. 287) reigning is tied to resurrection, which is bodily. Further, his claim that the text nowhere says we are reigning on earth is simply false on at least two counts. Rev. 5:10 specifically says we will reign on earth. Further, the syntax of Rev. 20:1-3 presupposes that Rev. 19 is a sequential account of Christ’s return. Chap 19 specifically says Christ returned “to earth.” The words in chap 20, “then,” “no longer,” and “after that,” particularly the latter, necessarily demand the previous context be taken into account.
Hoekema’s recapitulatory reading, while occasionally interesting, simply breaks down at the end. Given that the chapter headings are a late addition to the text, and the overwhelming sequential terms in chs. 19-20, it simply is not true that chapter 20 begins a recapitulation. Certainly, we may hear echoes as in Rev. 6 and Rev. 20, but the two situations are entirely different. The martyred souls in Revelation 20 cannot be said to be reigning in heaven. If anything, they are pleading for vengeance, something rather odd for “ruling and reigning!”
Decent appendix dealing with modern eschatologies. The section on Moltmann needs to take Moltmann's later "Coming of God" into account. Further, one can't accuse Moltmann of not specifying the content of future eschatology when the bible itself really doesn't do that. Even more, when premillennialists like MOltmann do that with regard to OT prophecies, we are told we shouldn't take them literally, so Hoekema’s charge is quite unfair.
While I disagree with his amillennialism, Hoekema’s text is to be welcomed. It’s exegesis is far superior to previous amillennial accounts. Further, it lacks the gnostic despair that characterized much of institutional amillennialism in the 20th century.
ANother odd problem is that while he gave a fantastic account of death and the intermediate state, he totally avoided any discussion of Roman Catholic claims about Purgatory. Such an omission is mind-boggling.
December 30, 2024
Wonderfully informative and beautiful.
Hoekema walks through the “already not yet” tension specific to the “inaugurated eschatology” amillenial stance - that we are currently within the “millenium” where God’s kingdom, his rule and reign, is very much present but also very much yet to fully come.
He parses through many helpful topics such as the intermediate state (after death but before the second coming), signs of the times, detailed exegesis of Revelation 20, resurrection of the body, and the eternal destiny of both the believing and unbelieving in a manner that is detailed but not unnecessarily dense.
While this book was incredibly informative, it was foremost beautiful. In Hoekema’s own words:
“At the beginning of history. God created the heavens and the Earth. At the end of history, we see the new heavens and the new Earth, which will far surpass in splendor all that we have seen before. At the center of history is the lamb that was slain... Someday we shall cast all our crowns before him, ‘lost in wonder, love, and praise.”
If you have any interest in the niche and inherently confusing topic of eschatology, you’d do well to visit this book.
Hoekema walks through the “already not yet” tension specific to the “inaugurated eschatology” amillenial stance - that we are currently within the “millenium” where God’s kingdom, his rule and reign, is very much present but also very much yet to fully come.
He parses through many helpful topics such as the intermediate state (after death but before the second coming), signs of the times, detailed exegesis of Revelation 20, resurrection of the body, and the eternal destiny of both the believing and unbelieving in a manner that is detailed but not unnecessarily dense.
While this book was incredibly informative, it was foremost beautiful. In Hoekema’s own words:
“At the beginning of history. God created the heavens and the Earth. At the end of history, we see the new heavens and the new Earth, which will far surpass in splendor all that we have seen before. At the center of history is the lamb that was slain... Someday we shall cast all our crowns before him, ‘lost in wonder, love, and praise.”
If you have any interest in the niche and inherently confusing topic of eschatology, you’d do well to visit this book.
December 22, 2023
Hoekema is a classic in the Reformed eschatological tradition, and for good reason. Drawing from historic Reformed and catholic understanding of Scripture as well as modern (to his day) seminal works on eschatology such as Ladd, Vos, and Ridderbos, Hoekema presents an understanding of the end times in broad and comprehensive overview. The book presents an Amillennial (inaugurated/realized eschatology) view while interacting critically with other traditions. My only quibble would be with his positive use of theological liberals like Hendrickus Berkhof.
August 14, 2021
One of my favorite books on eschatology. Hoekema is exceedingly clear and persuasive on many points. One area the book could be improved is by interacting more with postmillennial and preterist views. However, Hoekema’s coverage of these topics is understandable due to the date of the book (1979).
The final chapter on the new heavens and new earth is balm to the soul. “And so we shall be forever with the Lord, therefore comfort one another with these words.”
The final chapter on the new heavens and new earth is balm to the soul. “And so we shall be forever with the Lord, therefore comfort one another with these words.”
August 5, 2023
This trilogy by Hoekema has helped me process through a number of questions I’ve had for years. He does a great job of surveying different options, and not making “straw men” out of different arguments. And yet, he’s convictional about his perspectives which is helpful. In this one he gives a great overview of amillennialism (or in his words, “realized millenialism”).
July 16, 2023
This is the most comprehensive treatment of Biblical Eschatology. I highly recommend every Christian to read this, especially since Dispensationalism seems to dominate the current landscape. His critiques of pretribulational premill. are important but only make up a small portion of the book. It’s ruthlessly biblical, scholarly, and worshipful.
August 15, 2021
I just finished "The Bible and The Future," by Anthony A. Hoekema.
Some recent books Ive read on Amillennialism drew heavily from this work so when I saw this at the used bookstore (thank you whoever is doing the dissertation or thesis on eschatology at Wake Div) I grabbed it as fast as I could.
There are three eschatological positions: the Kingdom is already, not yet or already/not yet. This book takes the already/not yet position. With this in mind Hoekema has divided this inaugurated eschatology into an already section dealing with the Kingdom things that Jesus left us to do and then the not yet that are to come or future eschatology. I like this already.
Part 1
Inaugurated (realized) eschatology:
Both Old and New Testaments see eschatology integral to their respective messages. The Old in pointing to a coming redeemer and the New by pointing to Jesus as the redeemer. The prophets spoke about this time in the coming Kingdom as a second Exodus, so profound was its expected coming. What did the OT prophets miss?--that the fulfillment of crushing the serpents head, the establishment of the Kingdom, the New covenant, the restoration of Isreal, the outpouring of the Spirit, the day of the Lord and the new heavens and the new earth would occur in two stages: the incarnation and the Parousia, the first and second Cummings of Christ.
"The eschatological hope of the Old Testament always includes the earth," p 11 (put that in your Gnostic, Platonic pipe and smoke it).
The comingnof Jesus, the New Testament shows us, is the fulfillment of Old Testament eschatological prophecy. In Him resided the already/not yet, or this was the first of two trips on the way to making a new earth.
Hoekema makes a point to express the difference between the last days and the last day. The last days are where we currently are whike the last day deals with the resurrection and judgement.
A Theology of History:
Christian Theology must have a Theology of history, says Hoekema. The Greeks held a cyclical view which removed responsibility from the individual (I found this very pot/kettle) and history had no goal except repetition. God's view is a moving to a TELOS or a purpose/goal where the contents of the future consist of Divine prophetic promises made in the past where also redemption is involved, an unthinkable concept in the Hellenistic world.
For Hoekema a Christian theology of history has five points: 1. History is working out of God's purposes, 2. God is Lord of History, 3. Christ is the center of History, 4.The New Age has already been ushered in, 5. All of History is moving toward a Goal.
The Kingdom of God:
This is quite well written. He reminds us that some see the Kingdom as future and some as present while if we are to take scripture serious we have to see it as already/not yet. Then he digs in and supports this position. Big appreciation that he, a reformed theologian, specifically points to the sermon on the mount as evidence of the already part and adherence to it for entry into the future part. Excellent chapter pulling freely from Ladd's "The Presence of the Future," 21 books deep in my shortstack.
The Holy Spirit and Eschatology:
The Spirit represents an inbreaking of the future into the present; a place where the already and not yet are joined. She is the gift to the individual for use in the corporate which always points forward to the horizon, that time when the present reaches the future. The Spirit is the foretaste we have of the consummated Kingdom.
The Tension between the Already and the Not Yet:
"...suffering in the lives of belivers is a concrete manifestation of the not yet," p 72.
Part 2
Future Eschatology:
Physical death:
He eliminates death in general as a result of the fall and physical death too opting for a spiritual death as separation from God. Let's see if he limits this so as not to position sinfulness over God controlling what He can and can't do.
So he gets into original sin and skirts near the total depravity but doesn't establish where this "blockage" of sin resides. Me thinks it has to be totally in the sinner. We move away from the Holy God who is always--like Jesus--drawing towards us.
Immortality:
If there is an emphasis in this area is isn't for the immorality of the soul but the body. If we must make a statement here, says Hoekema, the man rather than man's soul is immortal. All talk about the immortality of the sould is straight Platonic.
The intermediate state (95 pp in and I wonder what the rest of the book will be):
He really lays on the "you've been thinking Platonism this whole time" while dealing with this issue. The intermediate state is "us" at an incomplete or deprived state. In a way we are like that now. But at the resurrection we will be glorified like Jesus was and that is the pinnacle of human existence. Good chapter.
The expectation of the second coming:
Interesting. Dealing with the synoptic verses which seem to indicate the sacking of Jerusalem in 70 Hoekema leans to a prophetic foreshortening of Christ's resurrection or ascension and his second coming. Seems clumsy.
Signs of the times:
He did well here not bashing dispensationalists but being blunt. The main take away from here is that "signs of the times" is used once in scripture speaking of what the Messiah had and was doing, not future occurrences. On top of that even Jesus said that the Son didn't know the time. A Theology that exerts its time on finding signs of the times borders on Gnostic.
Signs in particular:
This starts by figuring who the Jews (Rm 11) are and when the time will be that they are converted. It was stated that this being jealous of the Gentiles period happened while the conversion of thebGentiles was happening rather than at a later point in time (after the second coming). I barely covered this. It was very good.
The Nature of the Second Coming:
This section was basically devoted to kicking dispensationalism's view of the rapture off its place of fame. Using the etymology of the word and classical appearances along with other occurrences in the new Testament and the ramifications of it if "go away to a disembodied existence" is the correct way to define the word "rapture" Hoekema does well defending "us meaning Christ in the air and coming back to the new earth."
Other millennial views:
This section is almost good enough to stand alone in pamphlet form. He covers four millennial views--A, Post, Historical Pre and Dispy Pre--and does a bit of compare and contrast then defeat. But it's not done in the angry way one often sees this done.
A critique of Dispy Premill:
While Hoekema spends a couple of pages offering critique to Post- and Historical Premillennialism, he devotes a complete chapter to critique Dispy Premill. But im glad to say that he offers his criticism as a brother and without so much passion that a bystander would think it's a bar fight rather than an in-family discussion about doctrine which lays in the area of opinion. Hoekema does this as a brother and gentleman.
The Millennium in Rev 20:
This chapter seeks to present an Amillennialists view of Rev 20. This is going to take a bit because he has 4 different lines of thought to follow while steering the conversation closer to Amil (we are currently living in the "1000" year reign).
The resurrection body:
Great chapter. Hoekema points to Jesus as the prototokos, the first born from the dead, He lived what we shall live in regards to the resurrection in the new (still material) "spiritual body."
The judgement:
This is interesting. The reason for the judgement is to display God's glory, determine the degree of reward or punishment and to execute God's judgement for each person eternity. #s 2&3 have me paying attention in a purgatorial way. He does affirm a degree of reward or punishment but noy for the sake of reward but as a natural progression out of living the life of a disciple of Jesus.
Eternal punishment:
He begins by showing that universalism and annihilationism have to be wrong by appealing to the church fathers (patristics) but lists Origen as one who believed that "all shall be saved," which I see as a bit inconvenient for him since Origen was a church father. Personally, (and I don't often anymore) I believe we should, like Roger Olson said it on his Patheos blog, be hopeful universalists but live as if it's a lie. I am particularly drawn to annihilationism...really anything other than eternal conscience torment. My thought is he dropped the ball here and it's a shame because so much of the book is so good. "The Fire That Consumes," by Edward Fudge and "No Other Name," by John Sanders are good friends for this journey which I suggest reading.
The New Earth:
This is really good. Opposed to saying "heaven" Hoekema uses scriptural language of a new heavens and new earth which equals a new cosmos; this is the inheritance of the believer. Is it to be totally new or is it to be the old made new or revitalized?--Hoekema believes that the cosmos as God made it is how it should be forever but purified (new heavens and new earth).
Phenomenal book even if written with a Calvie bend.
#InnaugeratedEschatology #RealizedEschatology #FutureEschatology #Eschatology #Kingdom #AnthonyAHoekema #AnthonyHoekema #Hoekema #TheBibleAndTheFuture #Amillennialism #Amillennialist #WakeDiv (thanks for your thesis/dissertation cast-offs)
Some recent books Ive read on Amillennialism drew heavily from this work so when I saw this at the used bookstore (thank you whoever is doing the dissertation or thesis on eschatology at Wake Div) I grabbed it as fast as I could.
There are three eschatological positions: the Kingdom is already, not yet or already/not yet. This book takes the already/not yet position. With this in mind Hoekema has divided this inaugurated eschatology into an already section dealing with the Kingdom things that Jesus left us to do and then the not yet that are to come or future eschatology. I like this already.
Part 1
Inaugurated (realized) eschatology:
Both Old and New Testaments see eschatology integral to their respective messages. The Old in pointing to a coming redeemer and the New by pointing to Jesus as the redeemer. The prophets spoke about this time in the coming Kingdom as a second Exodus, so profound was its expected coming. What did the OT prophets miss?--that the fulfillment of crushing the serpents head, the establishment of the Kingdom, the New covenant, the restoration of Isreal, the outpouring of the Spirit, the day of the Lord and the new heavens and the new earth would occur in two stages: the incarnation and the Parousia, the first and second Cummings of Christ.
"The eschatological hope of the Old Testament always includes the earth," p 11 (put that in your Gnostic, Platonic pipe and smoke it).
The comingnof Jesus, the New Testament shows us, is the fulfillment of Old Testament eschatological prophecy. In Him resided the already/not yet, or this was the first of two trips on the way to making a new earth.
Hoekema makes a point to express the difference between the last days and the last day. The last days are where we currently are whike the last day deals with the resurrection and judgement.
A Theology of History:
Christian Theology must have a Theology of history, says Hoekema. The Greeks held a cyclical view which removed responsibility from the individual (I found this very pot/kettle) and history had no goal except repetition. God's view is a moving to a TELOS or a purpose/goal where the contents of the future consist of Divine prophetic promises made in the past where also redemption is involved, an unthinkable concept in the Hellenistic world.
For Hoekema a Christian theology of history has five points: 1. History is working out of God's purposes, 2. God is Lord of History, 3. Christ is the center of History, 4.The New Age has already been ushered in, 5. All of History is moving toward a Goal.
The Kingdom of God:
This is quite well written. He reminds us that some see the Kingdom as future and some as present while if we are to take scripture serious we have to see it as already/not yet. Then he digs in and supports this position. Big appreciation that he, a reformed theologian, specifically points to the sermon on the mount as evidence of the already part and adherence to it for entry into the future part. Excellent chapter pulling freely from Ladd's "The Presence of the Future," 21 books deep in my shortstack.
The Holy Spirit and Eschatology:
The Spirit represents an inbreaking of the future into the present; a place where the already and not yet are joined. She is the gift to the individual for use in the corporate which always points forward to the horizon, that time when the present reaches the future. The Spirit is the foretaste we have of the consummated Kingdom.
The Tension between the Already and the Not Yet:
"...suffering in the lives of belivers is a concrete manifestation of the not yet," p 72.
Part 2
Future Eschatology:
Physical death:
He eliminates death in general as a result of the fall and physical death too opting for a spiritual death as separation from God. Let's see if he limits this so as not to position sinfulness over God controlling what He can and can't do.
So he gets into original sin and skirts near the total depravity but doesn't establish where this "blockage" of sin resides. Me thinks it has to be totally in the sinner. We move away from the Holy God who is always--like Jesus--drawing towards us.
Immortality:
If there is an emphasis in this area is isn't for the immorality of the soul but the body. If we must make a statement here, says Hoekema, the man rather than man's soul is immortal. All talk about the immortality of the sould is straight Platonic.
The intermediate state (95 pp in and I wonder what the rest of the book will be):
He really lays on the "you've been thinking Platonism this whole time" while dealing with this issue. The intermediate state is "us" at an incomplete or deprived state. In a way we are like that now. But at the resurrection we will be glorified like Jesus was and that is the pinnacle of human existence. Good chapter.
The expectation of the second coming:
Interesting. Dealing with the synoptic verses which seem to indicate the sacking of Jerusalem in 70 Hoekema leans to a prophetic foreshortening of Christ's resurrection or ascension and his second coming. Seems clumsy.
Signs of the times:
He did well here not bashing dispensationalists but being blunt. The main take away from here is that "signs of the times" is used once in scripture speaking of what the Messiah had and was doing, not future occurrences. On top of that even Jesus said that the Son didn't know the time. A Theology that exerts its time on finding signs of the times borders on Gnostic.
Signs in particular:
This starts by figuring who the Jews (Rm 11) are and when the time will be that they are converted. It was stated that this being jealous of the Gentiles period happened while the conversion of thebGentiles was happening rather than at a later point in time (after the second coming). I barely covered this. It was very good.
The Nature of the Second Coming:
This section was basically devoted to kicking dispensationalism's view of the rapture off its place of fame. Using the etymology of the word and classical appearances along with other occurrences in the new Testament and the ramifications of it if "go away to a disembodied existence" is the correct way to define the word "rapture" Hoekema does well defending "us meaning Christ in the air and coming back to the new earth."
Other millennial views:
This section is almost good enough to stand alone in pamphlet form. He covers four millennial views--A, Post, Historical Pre and Dispy Pre--and does a bit of compare and contrast then defeat. But it's not done in the angry way one often sees this done.
A critique of Dispy Premill:
While Hoekema spends a couple of pages offering critique to Post- and Historical Premillennialism, he devotes a complete chapter to critique Dispy Premill. But im glad to say that he offers his criticism as a brother and without so much passion that a bystander would think it's a bar fight rather than an in-family discussion about doctrine which lays in the area of opinion. Hoekema does this as a brother and gentleman.
The Millennium in Rev 20:
This chapter seeks to present an Amillennialists view of Rev 20. This is going to take a bit because he has 4 different lines of thought to follow while steering the conversation closer to Amil (we are currently living in the "1000" year reign).
The resurrection body:
Great chapter. Hoekema points to Jesus as the prototokos, the first born from the dead, He lived what we shall live in regards to the resurrection in the new (still material) "spiritual body."
The judgement:
This is interesting. The reason for the judgement is to display God's glory, determine the degree of reward or punishment and to execute God's judgement for each person eternity. #s 2&3 have me paying attention in a purgatorial way. He does affirm a degree of reward or punishment but noy for the sake of reward but as a natural progression out of living the life of a disciple of Jesus.
Eternal punishment:
He begins by showing that universalism and annihilationism have to be wrong by appealing to the church fathers (patristics) but lists Origen as one who believed that "all shall be saved," which I see as a bit inconvenient for him since Origen was a church father. Personally, (and I don't often anymore) I believe we should, like Roger Olson said it on his Patheos blog, be hopeful universalists but live as if it's a lie. I am particularly drawn to annihilationism...really anything other than eternal conscience torment. My thought is he dropped the ball here and it's a shame because so much of the book is so good. "The Fire That Consumes," by Edward Fudge and "No Other Name," by John Sanders are good friends for this journey which I suggest reading.
The New Earth:
This is really good. Opposed to saying "heaven" Hoekema uses scriptural language of a new heavens and new earth which equals a new cosmos; this is the inheritance of the believer. Is it to be totally new or is it to be the old made new or revitalized?--Hoekema believes that the cosmos as God made it is how it should be forever but purified (new heavens and new earth).
Phenomenal book even if written with a Calvie bend.
#InnaugeratedEschatology #RealizedEschatology #FutureEschatology #Eschatology #Kingdom #AnthonyAHoekema #AnthonyHoekema #Hoekema #TheBibleAndTheFuture #Amillennialism #Amillennialist #WakeDiv (thanks for your thesis/dissertation cast-offs)
February 11, 2016
Anthony Hoekema's trilogy of theology books: Created in God's Image, Saved by Grace, and The Bible and the Future rank as some of the most important books I've ever read. Over the past three years I've slowly read all of them. In many respects they are not easy reads, I mean, it took me three years! However, Hoekema's depth of knowledge and even-mindedness is so enthralling that they are not "hard reads" either. They are life-changing books. And The Bible and the Future is no exception.
Hoekema's The Bible and the Future is broken into two main sections: Inaugurated Eschatology and Future Eschatology. In the former section Hoekema explains (most notably) the concepts of the Kingdom of God and the "here and not yet." Regardless of one's eschatological leanings, grasping these concepts is necessary for a proper understanding of the entire Bible. In the beginning of section two, Hoekema discusses more specific end-time subjects such as: death, immortality, the expectation of the second coming, the signs of the times. As Hoekema moves towards the latter third of the book, he then introduces the all-important discussion of differing millennial viewpoints. Hoekema is an amillennialist. He throughly explains this position and defends it against other positions (most notably against dispensational premillennialism). And it is this amillennial explanation and defense that comprises the last several chapters of the book.
Having read The Bible and the Future, I'm convinced that a balanced amillennialist viewpoint does more justice to the Biblical record than any other view. However, I also understand the underpinnings of the other millennial viewpoints more thoroughly than I used to. Disagree with Hoekema? Fine! But you should still read this book because it will make you a better (read more Biblical) premillennialist or postmillennialist. Finally, if you've ever doubted the reliability of many of the popular end-time books in your local Christian bookstore, then you should definitely check out the balanced exegesis of Anthony Hoekema.
Hoekema's The Bible and the Future is broken into two main sections: Inaugurated Eschatology and Future Eschatology. In the former section Hoekema explains (most notably) the concepts of the Kingdom of God and the "here and not yet." Regardless of one's eschatological leanings, grasping these concepts is necessary for a proper understanding of the entire Bible. In the beginning of section two, Hoekema discusses more specific end-time subjects such as: death, immortality, the expectation of the second coming, the signs of the times. As Hoekema moves towards the latter third of the book, he then introduces the all-important discussion of differing millennial viewpoints. Hoekema is an amillennialist. He throughly explains this position and defends it against other positions (most notably against dispensational premillennialism). And it is this amillennial explanation and defense that comprises the last several chapters of the book.
Having read The Bible and the Future, I'm convinced that a balanced amillennialist viewpoint does more justice to the Biblical record than any other view. However, I also understand the underpinnings of the other millennial viewpoints more thoroughly than I used to. Disagree with Hoekema? Fine! But you should still read this book because it will make you a better (read more Biblical) premillennialist or postmillennialist. Finally, if you've ever doubted the reliability of many of the popular end-time books in your local Christian bookstore, then you should definitely check out the balanced exegesis of Anthony Hoekema.
November 24, 2012
A great resource for a better, and scholarly, understanding of an amillenialist position. It is not too difficult to read, and Hoekema does a good job of trying to be biblical and sound in is exegesis and interpretation of Scripture.
I've been meaning to read up on amillenialism for the past year or so in order to have a better understanding and grasp of it. I still have more questions, but Hoekema's work does a great job at explaining and presenting an amillenial position, as well as showing how the dispensational hermeneutic and interpretation fails to do justice to what Scripture says.
I've been meaning to read up on amillenialism for the past year or so in order to have a better understanding and grasp of it. I still have more questions, but Hoekema's work does a great job at explaining and presenting an amillenial position, as well as showing how the dispensational hermeneutic and interpretation fails to do justice to what Scripture says.
August 13, 2020
Excellent resource that covers most eschatological studies. Hoekema is definitely in the line of Vos (except for some Kuyperianism, present in the chapter on the New Earth). The appendix is extremely helpful for understanding the development of eschatological study from the 19th century onward.
Overall, I would highly recommend this concise and accessible resource to anyone interested in amillennial and Vosian eschatology.
Overall, I would highly recommend this concise and accessible resource to anyone interested in amillennial and Vosian eschatology.
December 31, 2013
This is as good as it gets when it comes to end-times theology. Hoekema combines three things that are surprisingly rare in theology books: (1) A complete dependence on the Bible for everything he says, (2) a clarity that anyone could understand and (3) complete thoroughness on each topic he covers. So that means 5 stars!
May 16, 2014
This is an excellent book on eschatology, if only a little dated. It's primary boogieman is Dispensational Premillennialism, which is roundly defeats! The discussion is getting more and more dated all the time, and its arguments against Postmillennialism are paltry. However, I would still recommend this book for most people's needs.
May 10, 2013
A good place to begin a study of the Reformed Amillennial view
August 20, 2015
Outstanding defence of the amillennial position. Highly recommended. Both the critique of dispensationalism and the explanation of the inaugurated but yet to be consumated kingdom are strong.
November 11, 2024
I have not read much on eschatology in my life, so this was a big introduction to me. I think Hoekema did a phenomenal job presenting not only a defense of his own amillennialist view but also a clear presentation of other views. He was charitable in his critical arguments against the other views, both by not exaggerating their beliefs and by presenting good things they hold to.
Another great aspect of this book was its applications to lives of godliness. This book was not so heavenly-minded that it was of no earthly good; instead, it was so heavenly-minded that it could not help but be of earthly good. Hoekema argues so many times that the truth of these eternal realities should cause us to be watchful today, to be obedient, and to proclaim the gospel wherever we are. We are not to idly wait for the return of Christ, but precisely because we are in the last days, we should be vessels that help prepare others for his imminent return. I would love to return to this book when I have more time to read it outside of school, as it was very helpful in this brief read. I definitely recommend it to anyone seeking to further understand the future according to the Bible.
Another great aspect of this book was its applications to lives of godliness. This book was not so heavenly-minded that it was of no earthly good; instead, it was so heavenly-minded that it could not help but be of earthly good. Hoekema argues so many times that the truth of these eternal realities should cause us to be watchful today, to be obedient, and to proclaim the gospel wherever we are. We are not to idly wait for the return of Christ, but precisely because we are in the last days, we should be vessels that help prepare others for his imminent return. I would love to return to this book when I have more time to read it outside of school, as it was very helpful in this brief read. I definitely recommend it to anyone seeking to further understand the future according to the Bible.
May 21, 2021
Was introduced to this by a pre-mill professor. Finally able to complete it. Thankful he shared it. Excellent handling of biblical eschatology (and much more). It is shocking to me that amill is still represented by critics as not having a millennium, an intermediate kingdom, or denies OT prophecies.
November 13, 2025
Really good book explaining the amillenial view. Appreciated it a ton and I was almost convinced by it. Persecute me enough and I’ll probably change my opinion. Agreed with almost everything the book said, and thought it was funny how much it went against dispensationalists.
January 20, 2025
I didn't finish it, but it's still a great book! 😄 I would like to read it again and finish it one day. When eschatological inspiration hits again, this'll be the first book on the list!
February 24, 2025
Para quienes quieran aprender sobre la postura escatológica del Amilenialismo, este libro es perfecto. Además hace unas críticas muy contundentes al sistema dispensacional.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 17, 2020
I think that is the most detailed book about the future as the Bible describes it. I love that it covered all the possible questions one will have about the future.
June 23, 2012
I found this book helpful in fleshing out the amillennial perspective. It is not overly technical and does not get bogged down in detailed predictions (kind of a characteristic of amillennial theology in general I think). It engages other millennial views with respect and a best effort at fairness while attempting to refute them scripturally, but this isn't it's primary focus. It is not just a good about the millennium, it covers a broad range of future topics well, but briefly (see table of contents) and I found the treatment of a few of these like the intermediate state, the final judgement, and eternal punishment very helpful.
January 5, 2021
Top shelf! I can't think of a better way to get a study of eschatology started off on the right foot. Chapter 15 - A Critique of Dispensational Premillennialism is alone enough to make the book a great investment, as Hoekema dismantles that eschatological perspective in convincing fashion. Biblically sound and all anyone could want from the Amill perspective. Fair critiques and very informative of all of the major points of view.
May 15, 2016
This was an extremely well done and well thought out book concerning the end times. Yes, there are certain points of contention and question, but how can there not be when concerning this topic? What the reader is left with is a respect for the author's knowledge of the Bible and his concern to discuss what it says and not what he wished it said.
July 25, 2010
A survey perspective of a variety of eschatalogical perspectives - really helpful in trying to find a lens to look at Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Matthew 24, etc.
July 20, 2012
A much broader topic than you might think. Excellent!
October 20, 2013
A really good read. Dr Hoekema not only exposes the myth of Dispensational Premillennialism, but gives us a thorough view of Biblical Eschatology
Displaying 1 - 30 of 95 reviews