Overall, an excellent and brief introduction to Historic Premillennialism from the horse’s mouth, as it were. Also good to read another of the masters. While the I don’t agree with all the details, the broad strokes seem spot on to me.
Ladd pushes too strongly on NT as presenting a reinterpretation of the OT. The Apostolic witness may have been a reinterpretation of the prevailing interpretations of its time (some of this is even in question in current OT and Second Temple Lit studies) but according the Apostles themselves it was in fact not a reinterpretation but the re-presentation of the proper prophetic interpretation that already existed in the OT, however latent or veiled. One way he shows this this by discussing the separation of three “messianic” roles: the Davidic King, the Son of Man, and the Suffering Servant. Yet do not all three suffer, die, be raised or exalted, and reign. Rather than separate spheres these three are better an overlapping Venn Diagram with an essential core but varied sequence, emphasis, imagery, and location in the Canon.
I was amazed and delighted to a brief and helpful overview of the real Biblical view of the Intermediate State, ie almost nothing. While he may still bring more of this out in later chapters he did fall into the common trap among scholars to suggest that the OT has hardly the slightest sense of resurrection in its theology. This is patently wrong. Otherwise an excellent chapter.
Ladd mounts a convincing argument against the Dispensational division of Christ’s return. He surveys more than just the few classic verses and so makes a much more comprehensive case than I’ve previously heard.