What do you think?
Rate this book
Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative
The second coming of Christ is a matter of sharp disagreement amongst Christians. Many hold to premillennialism: that Christ's return will be followed by 1,000 years before the final judgement, a belief popularised in the popular Left Behind novels. However, premillennialism is not the only option for Christians. In this important new book, Sam Storms provides a biblical rationale for amillennialism; the belief that 1,000 years mentioned in the book of Revelation is symbolic with the emphasis being the King and his Kingdom.
752 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 1, 2013
227 people are currently reading
1040 people want to read
About the author
Sam Storms
79 books137 followers(Some early works written as C. Samuel Storms)
Sam has spent 39 years in ministry as a pastor, professor and author. He was visiting Associate Professor of Theology at Wheaton College from 2000-2004, and is currently Lead Pastor for Preaching and Vision at Bridgeway Church in Oklahoma City. He has authored 22 books and founded Enjoying God Ministries. He's a graduate of The University of Oklahoma (B.A.), Dallas Theological Seminary (Th.M) and The University of Texas (Ph.D.). He and his wife Ann have been married for 40 years and are the parents of two grown daughters and have four grandchildren. On a more personal level, Sam loves baseball, books, movies, and anything to do with the Oklahoma Sooners.
Sam has spent 39 years in ministry as a pastor, professor and author. He was visiting Associate Professor of Theology at Wheaton College from 2000-2004, and is currently Lead Pastor for Preaching and Vision at Bridgeway Church in Oklahoma City. He has authored 22 books and founded Enjoying God Ministries. He's a graduate of The University of Oklahoma (B.A.), Dallas Theological Seminary (Th.M) and The University of Texas (Ph.D.). He and his wife Ann have been married for 40 years and are the parents of two grown daughters and have four grandchildren. On a more personal level, Sam loves baseball, books, movies, and anything to do with the Oklahoma Sooners.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 107 reviews
December 30, 2013
Recently, the kind folks at Christian Focus Publications sent over a review copy of Sam Storms new book on amillennialism, Kingdom Come. While mainstream evangelical eschatology would likely be some form of premillennialism—be it dispensational, progressive dispensational, or possibly classical/historical premillennialism—Sam stands relatively alone among popular pastors/preachers with his belief in amillennialism. I remember watching a panel discussion hosted by John Piper, which included three men discussing various eschatological views. This was my first encounter with Sam, and I remember thinking that he did a good job explaining his views.
In any case, when I heard that Sam was publishing a book on amillennialism I was eager to get my hands on it. As one who holds to amillennialism, I was eager to see how this book would be received within the lager evangelical community. While it is far too early to gauge the influence of this book, I nevertheless wanted to offer some early observations on what I have read thus far.
The Audience
What I appreciate most about this work is that it is written for the laity. While terms like amillennialism and premillennialism may seem foreign or strange to some believers, Sam has done an excellent job at making these words and other relevant terms accessible for the reader. Eschatology is not an easy filed of theology to jump right into, and Sam has taken great care to make sure that the reader does not get lost.
The Critics
I would guess that most evangelicals in America are dispensational in their eschatology. Therefore, most of the readers who read this work would identify with the majority. Nevertheless, Sam is gracious towards dispensationalism, always trying to explain their viewpoints clearly and honestly. While I am sure that some would disagree with his critique of dispensationalism, Sam does come across as one who tries to fairly represent his opponents.
Some Observations
While there is much to commend, I still have a few areas I want to highlight. First, I noticed that some of the sources that he cites as support for his case are relatively old and somewhat dated. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I just was hoping for more engagement with modern works on the subject. Second, I did notice that on one occasion he makes an assertion but does not reference relevant data to support his claim:
My point is that “seventy years” is an approximate designation of length, such as we find in Jer 27.7 and Eze 4.6-8. In Mesopotamian culture, seventy years refers primarily to a certain period of desolation followed by the visitation of God.
Kingdom Come, 86 (emphasis mine).
I am not saying that Sam is incorrect in his claim regarding Mesopotamian culture—I would just like to see where his evidence for such a claim is based is all. Third, I found some parts to be a bit repetitious. For example, chapter four—Daniel’s Contribution to Biblical Eschatology—dragged on a bit too long and could have ended much earlier. Maybe because I am already convinced by most of his arguments that I felt this chapter repeated some of the main arguments, which in that case I may be too harsh with this criticism.
In the end, I commend Sam for writing a book that offers another perspetive (the right perspective!) on eschatology and the end times. When it comes to eschatology, I have found that instead of reading the works of those who hold another views, most people read a critique instead. Therefore, it is my hope that people who are interested in what amillennialism is will pick up Sam’s book and find out firsthand what amillennialism is from one who is himself an amillennialist.
In any case, when I heard that Sam was publishing a book on amillennialism I was eager to get my hands on it. As one who holds to amillennialism, I was eager to see how this book would be received within the lager evangelical community. While it is far too early to gauge the influence of this book, I nevertheless wanted to offer some early observations on what I have read thus far.
The Audience
What I appreciate most about this work is that it is written for the laity. While terms like amillennialism and premillennialism may seem foreign or strange to some believers, Sam has done an excellent job at making these words and other relevant terms accessible for the reader. Eschatology is not an easy filed of theology to jump right into, and Sam has taken great care to make sure that the reader does not get lost.
The Critics
I would guess that most evangelicals in America are dispensational in their eschatology. Therefore, most of the readers who read this work would identify with the majority. Nevertheless, Sam is gracious towards dispensationalism, always trying to explain their viewpoints clearly and honestly. While I am sure that some would disagree with his critique of dispensationalism, Sam does come across as one who tries to fairly represent his opponents.
Some Observations
While there is much to commend, I still have a few areas I want to highlight. First, I noticed that some of the sources that he cites as support for his case are relatively old and somewhat dated. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I just was hoping for more engagement with modern works on the subject. Second, I did notice that on one occasion he makes an assertion but does not reference relevant data to support his claim:
My point is that “seventy years” is an approximate designation of length, such as we find in Jer 27.7 and Eze 4.6-8. In Mesopotamian culture, seventy years refers primarily to a certain period of desolation followed by the visitation of God.
Kingdom Come, 86 (emphasis mine).
I am not saying that Sam is incorrect in his claim regarding Mesopotamian culture—I would just like to see where his evidence for such a claim is based is all. Third, I found some parts to be a bit repetitious. For example, chapter four—Daniel’s Contribution to Biblical Eschatology—dragged on a bit too long and could have ended much earlier. Maybe because I am already convinced by most of his arguments that I felt this chapter repeated some of the main arguments, which in that case I may be too harsh with this criticism.
In the end, I commend Sam for writing a book that offers another perspetive (the right perspective!) on eschatology and the end times. When it comes to eschatology, I have found that instead of reading the works of those who hold another views, most people read a critique instead. Therefore, it is my hope that people who are interested in what amillennialism is will pick up Sam’s book and find out firsthand what amillennialism is from one who is himself an amillennialist.
November 5, 2013
I reserve 5 stars for a book I've enjoyed as much any other book I've read. that said, I did think I might give this one the top rating, and if it was for the number of 'light bulb' moments, it would win prizes. This is a great read and one that will be revisited again in the future. I have yet to meet someone who has their eschatology completely watertight from all challenges, and after reading this book I don't either. I am however more convinced that amillenialism best makes sense of the text.
June 2, 2013
I have a smeared history with eschatology. I grew up in dispensational churches and honestly the topic of ends times never gave me much hope. I never had a longing for the end. I lived in fear and doubt. I was afraid of being left behind (ironically, that turn of phrase has made some authors a lot of money). After studying Scripture and finding myself reformed I knew I wasn’t dispensational anymore but I was so turned off the topic of eschatology it was until recently, I gave any attention to read anything excluding Scripture on the topic. It didn’t interest me because I had a bad taste in my mouth.
Sam Storms’s Kingdom Come provides hope, longing, and points to Jesus Christ as the hero of all the story (pp. 6-30 are superb). That’s what I took away most of all. The end times--all about Jesus. The OT promises--all about Jesus. Sam says,
Amillennialism best accounts for the many texts in which Israel’s Old Testament prophetic hope is portrayed as being fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ and the believing remnant, his body, the Church . . . . We found amillennialism to be a superior scheme for understanding redemptive history. (p. 549, 550)
That’s what sold me. Amillennialism isn’t without its difficulties (all eschatological positions have them) but as I’ve read it fits more squarely with my understanding of the unfolding gospel story found from Genesis to Revelation. It makes Jesus Christ the central emphasis of that story (p. 39). It emphasizes his unique reign and rule. It doesn’t minimize the significance of our adoption in Christ--which creates one family in God who receive one blessing, Christ himself. Sam says,
In sum, Jesus is himself the inspired interpreter of the Old Testament, His identity, life, and mission provide the framework within which we are to read and approach the Old Testament (p. 30).
A significant question which Sam brings up at the beginning of Kingdom Come and again at the end (p. 551) is “What does Scripture say happens after the second coming of Christ?” He systematically examines what all of Scripture says about the second coming of Christ and lays that at the table where the beast, false, prophet, death, the tribulation all eat. He rightly interprets Scripture by Scripture.
Significant for me and for many others, Sam Storms contrasts amillennialism with the other eschatological positions especially with dispensationalism. Significantly because dispensational is the most popular end time scheme among Christians today. As you would expect, Kingdom Come includes quite a bit of exegesis. Sam isn’t afraid to admit when there’s other possibilities or when he’s unsure of the position he present. He exudes a humility in tackling these issues but he does tackle them nonetheless.
If you’re serious about understanding all of Scripture, I would heartily recommend Kingdom Come. For a 600 page book, it’s immensely readable and approachable. For that length the best I’ve read. Even if you don’t intend to read all of it at once, you can read most chapters alone, although they certainly work together better as a whole.
Sam Storms’s Kingdom Come provides hope, longing, and points to Jesus Christ as the hero of all the story (pp. 6-30 are superb). That’s what I took away most of all. The end times--all about Jesus. The OT promises--all about Jesus. Sam says,
Amillennialism best accounts for the many texts in which Israel’s Old Testament prophetic hope is portrayed as being fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ and the believing remnant, his body, the Church . . . . We found amillennialism to be a superior scheme for understanding redemptive history. (p. 549, 550)
That’s what sold me. Amillennialism isn’t without its difficulties (all eschatological positions have them) but as I’ve read it fits more squarely with my understanding of the unfolding gospel story found from Genesis to Revelation. It makes Jesus Christ the central emphasis of that story (p. 39). It emphasizes his unique reign and rule. It doesn’t minimize the significance of our adoption in Christ--which creates one family in God who receive one blessing, Christ himself. Sam says,
In sum, Jesus is himself the inspired interpreter of the Old Testament, His identity, life, and mission provide the framework within which we are to read and approach the Old Testament (p. 30).
A significant question which Sam brings up at the beginning of Kingdom Come and again at the end (p. 551) is “What does Scripture say happens after the second coming of Christ?” He systematically examines what all of Scripture says about the second coming of Christ and lays that at the table where the beast, false, prophet, death, the tribulation all eat. He rightly interprets Scripture by Scripture.
Significant for me and for many others, Sam Storms contrasts amillennialism with the other eschatological positions especially with dispensationalism. Significantly because dispensational is the most popular end time scheme among Christians today. As you would expect, Kingdom Come includes quite a bit of exegesis. Sam isn’t afraid to admit when there’s other possibilities or when he’s unsure of the position he present. He exudes a humility in tackling these issues but he does tackle them nonetheless.
If you’re serious about understanding all of Scripture, I would heartily recommend Kingdom Come. For a 600 page book, it’s immensely readable and approachable. For that length the best I’ve read. Even if you don’t intend to read all of it at once, you can read most chapters alone, although they certainly work together better as a whole.
December 6, 2019
Storms offers a helpful machete to hack through the jungle of Revelation with this commentary. He drank the premillennialism dispensationalist Kool-Aid in seminary but eventually found it to be an insufficient framework for interpreting Revelation. In a charitable manner, Storms explains exegetically why he now interprets Revelation from an amillennial point of view. This book was very helpful to me in understanding what I believe and don’t believe about Revelation. Very thoughtful scholarship that is accessible and Biblically faithful.
December 14, 2024
Solid. Coming into this as an amillenial, I leave even more convinced. Storms tackles some of Scripture’s most difficult eschatological passages head-on, and he does so in a way that is relatively accessible. This will serve as an excellent resource to look back on.
The book overall is largely a response to dispensational premillennialism, which is helpful but also weakens the case for amillenialism to be true on its own merit. The chapters feel a bit scattered, and he tends to be overly repetitive, but overall a great read.
The book overall is largely a response to dispensational premillennialism, which is helpful but also weakens the case for amillenialism to be true on its own merit. The chapters feel a bit scattered, and he tends to be overly repetitive, but overall a great read.
September 30, 2013
Just excellent!
January 20, 2014
One of the topics I have always enjoyed is systematic theology but for many years I avoided eschatology (end times). I avoided it because I was confused. I didn’t, like many other Christians, think eschatology did not matter, I was just scared of it. In seminary I realized I had turn my attention to the subject and began to study it seriously. It is wrongheaded for a Christian to think that eschatology does not matter and just claim the mantra, “In the end Christ comes back and wins and that’s all that maters!” This was not the view of the writers of Scripture or Jesus and it should not be the view of any Christian who takes the Bible seriously. If we want to understand God, Christ, Scripture and our “so great salvation” more, we need to devote ourselves to the understanding of eschatology. The Bible is pointing not only to someone (Christ) but also somewhere – the future coming kingdom of Christ.
There are a lot of books defending the various end times positions. Most people hold to the eschatological view point they were taught by their parents, teachers or church when they were younger. Systems of belief are hard to change and when it comes to Christian theology, eschatology is among the hardest. But it does happen and it happened to well regarded pastor and author Sam Storms. In 1977 Storms graduated with his Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary which has been the flagship seminary for Premillennial Dispensational theology for decades. He was taught by some of the greatest Dispensational theologians such as Walvoord, Ryrie and Pentecost.
After graduation, having become enamored with all things eschatology, Storms read the highly influential book The Presence of the Future by George Eldon Ladd. For Storms, like many others before and after him who have read Ladd’s work, this book became the catalyst to setting him on a journey from Premillennial Dispensationalism to Amillennialism. After years of reading, writing and teaching on the subject, Storms has written his own contribution to the eschatological discussion in Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative which was published last year with Mentor.
This is not a complete critical review of the book as it is not warranted given Storms is not necessarily presenting a different case for amillennialism though he does present the case differently. Though Storms work will stand along side others who champion his view such as Anthony Hoekema’s The Bible and the Future or more recently Kim Riddlebarger’s A Case for Amillennialism, what sets Storms book apart from these and others is that he makes his case for Amillennialism along with presenting the Dispensational view and what he believes to be its weaknesses and failings. While others try to do this in their books to some extent, most of them do so from the outside looking into Dispensationalism and none to the extent of Storms. This does not mean they cannot do it sufficiently. However, Storms has the advantage of having been taught by some of Dispensationalism’s best. He can do so as someone who once was but now is not. Simply dismissing Storms’ change under the rubric of “he must have never really understood Dispensationalism or else he would not have changed,” will not do. It is simplistically dismissive and naive. Rather, contrary to the opinion of some, Storms unique contribution needs to be heard and taken seriously, even for die in the wool Dispensationalist’s who will not change.
Of particular interest to Dispensationalist’s will be chapter two Defining Dispensationalism and chapter five Problems with Dispensationalism in which Storms offers some devastating critiques of Dispensationalism which reveal weaknesses, that, some of which, cannot be overcome. For instance, regarding Dispensationalism’s interpretation of Ezekiel’s vision of the rebuilt temple, Storms says, “It wold be an egregious expression of the worst imaginable redemptive regression to suggest that God would ever sanction the rebuilding of the temple.” (21, emphasis author) Though admittedly a strongly worded statement, I was jarred when I read it and paused for awhile to mull it over. Or, in response to the Dispensational view that there are two people’s of God Storms states that
"Not one single ethnic Jew who believes in Jesus Christ as the Messiah has been ‘replaced’ or lost his/her inheritance in the blessings of the covenant. Rather, every single ethnic Gentile who believes in Jesus Christ as the Messiah has been ‘included’ in the commonwealth of Israel and grafted into the one olive tree. Thus, the true Israel, the true ‘seed’ of Abraham, which is to say, any and all who are ‘in Christ’ by faith, regardless of ethnicity, will together inherit the blessings of the covenant.” (207)
I myself was brought up under the same teaching as Storms regarding eschatology. On the highway of eschatological views I have exited onto Historic Premillennialism and I am not sure when, if ever, I will get off and move on. As such I am in agreement with a number of Storms interpretations, hermeneutical principles and Dispensational critiques, such as his understanding of Daniel 9, the relationship between Jesus and the OT prophecies, much of his understanding of the seal, trumpet and bowl judgments and the relationship between Israel and the Church. On the other hand, amidst several points of disagreement I have with Amillennialism the greatest that remains is its interpretation of Revelation 20 and the 1,000 years and its attending events. Storms wants to read the 1,000 years in light of the rest of preceding Scriptural understanding of eschatology instead of the other way around. He also points out the symbolic nature of numbers in the rest of Revelation as support for why the 1,000 years does not have to be taken “literalistically”. I am sympathetic to his concerns but I still cannot shake myself of a future millennial kingdom preceding eternity, rather than one that is coexistent with present history.
All in all, Kingdom Come is a worthy read for anyone interested in eschatology and I suspect it will be a go-to-book in defense of Amillennialism and in response to Premillennial Dispensationalism. The writing is clear and well organized. Storms critiques can come across strong and passionate at times but his tone should not distract one from the force of the arguments he advances. Eschatology can be daunting and confusing but Storms has brought some more clarity that will surely help many to come. This is a good book for those interested in eschatology in general and for those who want a contemporary defense of Amillennialism. This is as much a book for Dispensationalist’s who are looking to refine their position in the face of critique and for those who have doubts about their position and are looking for someone who can better articulate what they are thinking.
NOTE: I received this book for free from Christian Focus Publications in exchange for a review. I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review and the thoughts and words expressed are my own.
There are a lot of books defending the various end times positions. Most people hold to the eschatological view point they were taught by their parents, teachers or church when they were younger. Systems of belief are hard to change and when it comes to Christian theology, eschatology is among the hardest. But it does happen and it happened to well regarded pastor and author Sam Storms. In 1977 Storms graduated with his Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary which has been the flagship seminary for Premillennial Dispensational theology for decades. He was taught by some of the greatest Dispensational theologians such as Walvoord, Ryrie and Pentecost.
After graduation, having become enamored with all things eschatology, Storms read the highly influential book The Presence of the Future by George Eldon Ladd. For Storms, like many others before and after him who have read Ladd’s work, this book became the catalyst to setting him on a journey from Premillennial Dispensationalism to Amillennialism. After years of reading, writing and teaching on the subject, Storms has written his own contribution to the eschatological discussion in Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative which was published last year with Mentor.
This is not a complete critical review of the book as it is not warranted given Storms is not necessarily presenting a different case for amillennialism though he does present the case differently. Though Storms work will stand along side others who champion his view such as Anthony Hoekema’s The Bible and the Future or more recently Kim Riddlebarger’s A Case for Amillennialism, what sets Storms book apart from these and others is that he makes his case for Amillennialism along with presenting the Dispensational view and what he believes to be its weaknesses and failings. While others try to do this in their books to some extent, most of them do so from the outside looking into Dispensationalism and none to the extent of Storms. This does not mean they cannot do it sufficiently. However, Storms has the advantage of having been taught by some of Dispensationalism’s best. He can do so as someone who once was but now is not. Simply dismissing Storms’ change under the rubric of “he must have never really understood Dispensationalism or else he would not have changed,” will not do. It is simplistically dismissive and naive. Rather, contrary to the opinion of some, Storms unique contribution needs to be heard and taken seriously, even for die in the wool Dispensationalist’s who will not change.
Of particular interest to Dispensationalist’s will be chapter two Defining Dispensationalism and chapter five Problems with Dispensationalism in which Storms offers some devastating critiques of Dispensationalism which reveal weaknesses, that, some of which, cannot be overcome. For instance, regarding Dispensationalism’s interpretation of Ezekiel’s vision of the rebuilt temple, Storms says, “It wold be an egregious expression of the worst imaginable redemptive regression to suggest that God would ever sanction the rebuilding of the temple.” (21, emphasis author) Though admittedly a strongly worded statement, I was jarred when I read it and paused for awhile to mull it over. Or, in response to the Dispensational view that there are two people’s of God Storms states that
"Not one single ethnic Jew who believes in Jesus Christ as the Messiah has been ‘replaced’ or lost his/her inheritance in the blessings of the covenant. Rather, every single ethnic Gentile who believes in Jesus Christ as the Messiah has been ‘included’ in the commonwealth of Israel and grafted into the one olive tree. Thus, the true Israel, the true ‘seed’ of Abraham, which is to say, any and all who are ‘in Christ’ by faith, regardless of ethnicity, will together inherit the blessings of the covenant.” (207)
I myself was brought up under the same teaching as Storms regarding eschatology. On the highway of eschatological views I have exited onto Historic Premillennialism and I am not sure when, if ever, I will get off and move on. As such I am in agreement with a number of Storms interpretations, hermeneutical principles and Dispensational critiques, such as his understanding of Daniel 9, the relationship between Jesus and the OT prophecies, much of his understanding of the seal, trumpet and bowl judgments and the relationship between Israel and the Church. On the other hand, amidst several points of disagreement I have with Amillennialism the greatest that remains is its interpretation of Revelation 20 and the 1,000 years and its attending events. Storms wants to read the 1,000 years in light of the rest of preceding Scriptural understanding of eschatology instead of the other way around. He also points out the symbolic nature of numbers in the rest of Revelation as support for why the 1,000 years does not have to be taken “literalistically”. I am sympathetic to his concerns but I still cannot shake myself of a future millennial kingdom preceding eternity, rather than one that is coexistent with present history.
All in all, Kingdom Come is a worthy read for anyone interested in eschatology and I suspect it will be a go-to-book in defense of Amillennialism and in response to Premillennial Dispensationalism. The writing is clear and well organized. Storms critiques can come across strong and passionate at times but his tone should not distract one from the force of the arguments he advances. Eschatology can be daunting and confusing but Storms has brought some more clarity that will surely help many to come. This is a good book for those interested in eschatology in general and for those who want a contemporary defense of Amillennialism. This is as much a book for Dispensationalist’s who are looking to refine their position in the face of critique and for those who have doubts about their position and are looking for someone who can better articulate what they are thinking.
NOTE: I received this book for free from Christian Focus Publications in exchange for a review. I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review and the thoughts and words expressed are my own.
March 28, 2020
Storms's book is an eschatological tour de force. The amount of topics of and passages examined (in great detail) is incredible, yet all of the discussions are surprisingly accessible, requiring little to no scholarly background to follow them. While I did not find all of his exegesis convincing (e.g. some of his interpretations of Daniel, Revelation and the Olivet Discourse), I found myself agreeing with most of what he argues for (he's even caused me to rethink my view of Romans 11), and he presents what might just be the most devastating critique of dispensationalism I've read to date. Overall, Storms makes a powerful case for the amil view, and while I'm not quite ready to forgo my historic premillennialism just yet, he has definitely given me a lot to think about.
February 7, 2019
Sam Storms presents a thorough and logical defense of the Amillennial view of Eschatology. I always appreciate Sam's writing, his even-handed opinions, and Christocentric view of the Scriptures. This book is a quality work like those of his that I have read before. As someone who leans Dispensational, I have a greater understanding and appreciation of the Amillennial view although I still believe in a future coming Millennial Kingdom before the New Heavens and New Earth and reject that Rev 20 speaks of the Millennial Kingdom in heaven that is concurrent with the Church Age on Earth.
Sam Storms does a wonderful job covering all the major passages of Scriptures that speak to the issue in a clear, mostly fair discussion. I felt like he used his ! a few too many times, but he has probably been shouted at enough by Dispensationalists that he felt the need to throw out a bunch of ! to make his points.
If someone wants a thorough presentation of the Amillennial view, I would encourage them to read Sam Storm's book. I wish many Dispensationalist preachers and writers could handle the Word with the care of Sam, but he would say that care made him an amillennialist. Well written, engaging, could have been shorter and skipped a few of the weak arguments for dispensationalism that I saw more as straw men rather than genuine arguments.
Sam Storms does a wonderful job covering all the major passages of Scriptures that speak to the issue in a clear, mostly fair discussion. I felt like he used his ! a few too many times, but he has probably been shouted at enough by Dispensationalists that he felt the need to throw out a bunch of ! to make his points.
If someone wants a thorough presentation of the Amillennial view, I would encourage them to read Sam Storm's book. I wish many Dispensationalist preachers and writers could handle the Word with the care of Sam, but he would say that care made him an amillennialist. Well written, engaging, could have been shorter and skipped a few of the weak arguments for dispensationalism that I saw more as straw men rather than genuine arguments.
November 2, 2023
A very thorough defense of amillemialism including a thorough refutation of dispensationalism and premillennialism.
I particularly appreciated his irenic and accurate handling of both postmillennialism and partial preterism. I suspect Mr Storms is not far from this correct position!
I particularly appreciated his irenic and accurate handling of both postmillennialism and partial preterism. I suspect Mr Storms is not far from this correct position!
April 27, 2020
Incomparavelmente melhor que "A Bíblia e o futuro" de Hoekema.
May 10, 2022
Storms presents one of the most comprehensive treatments of amillennialism that I’ve ever encountered, and he explains dispensationalism fairly along the way - which is incredible in and of itself.
There are still some puzzle pieces that don’t fit well within an amillennial framework and it ends up feeling like eisegesis. In other words, “We know this to be true, so we’re just going to make this other passage malleable enough to fit into what we know to be true.”
Nevertheless, I gave it five stars for just how well he explains his view.
There are still some puzzle pieces that don’t fit well within an amillennial framework and it ends up feeling like eisegesis. In other words, “We know this to be true, so we’re just going to make this other passage malleable enough to fit into what we know to be true.”
Nevertheless, I gave it five stars for just how well he explains his view.
December 12, 2025
I have spent pretty much my whole life under dispensational premillennial teaching. All the little holes have been there for me for quite some time. I've stuck my fingers in them here and there. This book tears them open.
Let me first say how important I think it is that the body of Christ not lay down and die on this hill. Our God writes good stories and this one isn't yet finished from where we stand. There is a reason that we can't all agree on what it going to happen. "No eye has seen no ear has heard no mind has conceived what the Lord has prepared for those who love him." We aren't going to know the end of the story until the end of the story. It doesn't make sense for God to lay out his naked battle plans, and it isn't something a master Storyteller would do either. If all of the nation of Israel for thousands of years couldn't figure out what the coming of the Messiah would look like, if Jesus' own disciples didn't get it until after he died and rose again and ascended into heaven, it's likewise unlikely that we will ever fully understand God's future plans for us and the details of His second coming, until they come to pass.
The emphasis in Scripture is Being Ready. And no matter what we believe or what eventually happens, we can all agree that we can trust God, that His plans will prosper, the He is coming again, and that we need to be ready for Him.
That being said, this book is very convincing. It's not a perfect case being made, but it is a convicing alternative still shrouded in some inevitable mystery. It's Scripture-driven, clearly written, and covers just about all the bases. If you've ever been curious about the amillennial perspective, this is an extremely worthwhile read. Just because we can't know for sure, and just because eschatology shouldn't be an area of contention between Christians, doesn't mean that there isn't value in reading Scripture with new eyes. I want to know God as much as possible, and if I'm reading His words through a potentially skewed lens, I want to at least own another pair of glasses.
I also very much appreciate the tone with which Sam Storms right. He teaches from both sides of the aisle. One gets the sense that he is following the evidence where it leads. He comes across as fair-minded in a way that earns trust. For the most part, you don't have to wonder what the other side would say. And you don't have to wonder what the Bible says. This book is so reference-laden that I pretty much had my Bible open the entire time. It took me about a year to conquer it because I spent so much time in the actual word of God checking for myself.
I am not yet committed. But I also can't un-see this book.
Let me first say how important I think it is that the body of Christ not lay down and die on this hill. Our God writes good stories and this one isn't yet finished from where we stand. There is a reason that we can't all agree on what it going to happen. "No eye has seen no ear has heard no mind has conceived what the Lord has prepared for those who love him." We aren't going to know the end of the story until the end of the story. It doesn't make sense for God to lay out his naked battle plans, and it isn't something a master Storyteller would do either. If all of the nation of Israel for thousands of years couldn't figure out what the coming of the Messiah would look like, if Jesus' own disciples didn't get it until after he died and rose again and ascended into heaven, it's likewise unlikely that we will ever fully understand God's future plans for us and the details of His second coming, until they come to pass.
The emphasis in Scripture is Being Ready. And no matter what we believe or what eventually happens, we can all agree that we can trust God, that His plans will prosper, the He is coming again, and that we need to be ready for Him.
That being said, this book is very convincing. It's not a perfect case being made, but it is a convicing alternative still shrouded in some inevitable mystery. It's Scripture-driven, clearly written, and covers just about all the bases. If you've ever been curious about the amillennial perspective, this is an extremely worthwhile read. Just because we can't know for sure, and just because eschatology shouldn't be an area of contention between Christians, doesn't mean that there isn't value in reading Scripture with new eyes. I want to know God as much as possible, and if I'm reading His words through a potentially skewed lens, I want to at least own another pair of glasses.
I also very much appreciate the tone with which Sam Storms right. He teaches from both sides of the aisle. One gets the sense that he is following the evidence where it leads. He comes across as fair-minded in a way that earns trust. For the most part, you don't have to wonder what the other side would say. And you don't have to wonder what the Bible says. This book is so reference-laden that I pretty much had my Bible open the entire time. It took me about a year to conquer it because I spent so much time in the actual word of God checking for myself.
I am not yet committed. But I also can't un-see this book.
January 2, 2020
Like most books on eschatology, there is way too much critique and rehashing of dispensationalist beliefs. However, Storms made many good points and this book was certainly thorough. I still see myself as an Amillennialist because I believe it makes the most sense out of Revelation 20 (the only passage that explicitly mentions a millennium!), and the rest of scripture. Postmillennialism is wrong because it expects the church to accomplish in a sinful world what will only be realized in the new heavens and earth, and there are just way too many explicit statements in scripture that describe "the last days"(the entire age between the 2 advents) as also being marked by apostasy and persecution, not Christians being in control of everything. Dispensational Premillennialism is wrong because it is built upon wrong theology. Historic Premillennialism could be correct, but I am not convinced. I guess that's where I am still at. Storms' book didn't change much for me.
October 18, 2017
I have a feeling that for quite some time this will become the standard book for Amillenialism. Not only does Storms cover it well and in detail, but he also spends a great deal of time on premillenialism, his former belief, and why he made the move. If you're trying to understand the position better (for whatever reason), this book is a great start!
March 20, 2022
Defining Big Words
One thing you'll realize when you approach this topic is that there are a plethora of theories, teachings, and views on these subjects. In case you're unfamiliar with these big fancy eschatological terms (eschatology means the study of the "end times"), there are 3 basic eschatological views regarding the question of when the 1000 year reign of Christ will take place - also called the "Millennial Kingdom" as depicted in Revelation. These are premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism. The prefixes have to do with the timing of the millennial kingdom in relation to the Second Coming of Christ.
Premillennialism takes the chronology of Revelation literally, saying that the Second Coming of Christ happens BEFORE (pre-) a literal 1000 year earthly reign in which the temple will be reinstituted.
Amillennialism and postmillennialism actually agree that the Second Coming of Christ will occur AFTER (post-) the millennial reign of Christ - and therefore are really two branches of a similar idea, differing on the details of how that earthly reign actually plays out. Postmillennialism largely posits that Christianity will bring about the dominion of Christ over the world through the evangelization of the world, that once this is complete we will bring about a golden age that will eventually suffer a rebellion led by Satan, and then Christ will return. Amillennialism basically posits that we ARE in the 1000-year Millennial reign - since when Christ ascended, He took His seat at the right hand of the Father over all authorities, and thus inaugurated His Kingdom rule, which continues through His Church. Those are broad brushstrokes
My Background
I was raised steeped in premillennial dispensationalism - both in Independent Baptist church and in college - so I always thought of amillennialism as an over spiritualization and non-literal approach to the Scripture. It wasn't until my brother started exploring amillennialism that he began to challenge some of my thinking on the topic. I thought it was dangerous that he was looking into this kind of theology. But as I searched the Scriptures for myself, I realized slowly but surely that I was turning into some form of amillennialist. My brother lent me this book and I finally sat down to read it and it has definitely helped to fill in some of the holes in my theology - as well as biblically address some of the unbiblical views I didn't even realize I had assumed.
A Nearly Exhaustive Work
First, the book is incredibly long and nearly exhaustive in the way Storms approaches very detailed, logical, grammatical, numerological, scholarly arguments on every question. I honestly went into this book not expecting such a scholarly work - I guess because the cover looks kind of cool, so I thought it would be somewhat of a light approach to eschatology. I was so interested in the subject that it didn't get dull, but it almost got too exhaustive even for my own tastes at certain points.
Storm's Handling Of Dispensationalism
Second, Storms does a great job of undressing dispensationalism. Really, more than half of Kingdom Come feels less of a presentation of "The Amillennial Alternative" and more a polemic that could be entitled "Against Dispensationalism." Most of his arguments are either attacking dispensational assumptions (such as the notion that there are two people of God - Israel and the Church - each with their own unique promises and blessings) or defending what have been deemed holes in the Amillennial teaching (such as the notion that Satan is currently bound from deceiving the nations as depicted in Revelation 20:3).
Additionally, Storms deals with Postmillennialism in a very favorable light. He's also very friendly with some preterist views of Scripture (that most prophecy has already been fulfilled) and portrays such views very favorably.
Favorite Takeaways
One of my favorite parts of the book was the way Storms showed that the New Testament clearly equates Israel with the Church, and the two are not to be distinguished (e.g. Romans 2:28-29; 9:6-7 and many more). Also learned a lot about so many literary methods used in the book of Revelation - for example, the deep parallelism found in the 7 seals, 7trumpets, and 7 bowls. I learned a lot from these things which personally helped my faith and helped me better understand apocalyptic scripture.
One Complaint
As far as Storm's style of writing - it can be repetitive at times. Sometimes he says the same thing about three different ways, which might be nice in a sermon but feels redundant in a book, especially when you're getting into a very detailed and long argument. I'll also add here that I did feel like some of the arguments Storms made felt a little bit stretched at times, and the scripture he used sometimes did not seem self-evidently to prove his point (at least to me).
Suggestion
I definitely would not recommend this book to someone who isn't at least acquainted with some of the basic ideas contained in this broader debate. I just can't imagine a typical lay person (at least here in Vermont) picking up this book and getting more than a chapter in (to give you an example, my brother, who is an Amillennialist and went to bible college, only got halfway through this book). However, if you want a quality assessment of the arguments against Dispensationalism (and for Amillennialism and even a little bit for Postmillennialism), this is a great book to have on your shelf.
One thing you'll realize when you approach this topic is that there are a plethora of theories, teachings, and views on these subjects. In case you're unfamiliar with these big fancy eschatological terms (eschatology means the study of the "end times"), there are 3 basic eschatological views regarding the question of when the 1000 year reign of Christ will take place - also called the "Millennial Kingdom" as depicted in Revelation. These are premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism. The prefixes have to do with the timing of the millennial kingdom in relation to the Second Coming of Christ.
Premillennialism takes the chronology of Revelation literally, saying that the Second Coming of Christ happens BEFORE (pre-) a literal 1000 year earthly reign in which the temple will be reinstituted.
Amillennialism and postmillennialism actually agree that the Second Coming of Christ will occur AFTER (post-) the millennial reign of Christ - and therefore are really two branches of a similar idea, differing on the details of how that earthly reign actually plays out. Postmillennialism largely posits that Christianity will bring about the dominion of Christ over the world through the evangelization of the world, that once this is complete we will bring about a golden age that will eventually suffer a rebellion led by Satan, and then Christ will return. Amillennialism basically posits that we ARE in the 1000-year Millennial reign - since when Christ ascended, He took His seat at the right hand of the Father over all authorities, and thus inaugurated His Kingdom rule, which continues through His Church. Those are broad brushstrokes
My Background
I was raised steeped in premillennial dispensationalism - both in Independent Baptist church and in college - so I always thought of amillennialism as an over spiritualization and non-literal approach to the Scripture. It wasn't until my brother started exploring amillennialism that he began to challenge some of my thinking on the topic. I thought it was dangerous that he was looking into this kind of theology. But as I searched the Scriptures for myself, I realized slowly but surely that I was turning into some form of amillennialist. My brother lent me this book and I finally sat down to read it and it has definitely helped to fill in some of the holes in my theology - as well as biblically address some of the unbiblical views I didn't even realize I had assumed.
A Nearly Exhaustive Work
First, the book is incredibly long and nearly exhaustive in the way Storms approaches very detailed, logical, grammatical, numerological, scholarly arguments on every question. I honestly went into this book not expecting such a scholarly work - I guess because the cover looks kind of cool, so I thought it would be somewhat of a light approach to eschatology. I was so interested in the subject that it didn't get dull, but it almost got too exhaustive even for my own tastes at certain points.
Storm's Handling Of Dispensationalism
Second, Storms does a great job of undressing dispensationalism. Really, more than half of Kingdom Come feels less of a presentation of "The Amillennial Alternative" and more a polemic that could be entitled "Against Dispensationalism." Most of his arguments are either attacking dispensational assumptions (such as the notion that there are two people of God - Israel and the Church - each with their own unique promises and blessings) or defending what have been deemed holes in the Amillennial teaching (such as the notion that Satan is currently bound from deceiving the nations as depicted in Revelation 20:3).
Additionally, Storms deals with Postmillennialism in a very favorable light. He's also very friendly with some preterist views of Scripture (that most prophecy has already been fulfilled) and portrays such views very favorably.
Favorite Takeaways
One of my favorite parts of the book was the way Storms showed that the New Testament clearly equates Israel with the Church, and the two are not to be distinguished (e.g. Romans 2:28-29; 9:6-7 and many more). Also learned a lot about so many literary methods used in the book of Revelation - for example, the deep parallelism found in the 7 seals, 7trumpets, and 7 bowls. I learned a lot from these things which personally helped my faith and helped me better understand apocalyptic scripture.
One Complaint
As far as Storm's style of writing - it can be repetitive at times. Sometimes he says the same thing about three different ways, which might be nice in a sermon but feels redundant in a book, especially when you're getting into a very detailed and long argument. I'll also add here that I did feel like some of the arguments Storms made felt a little bit stretched at times, and the scripture he used sometimes did not seem self-evidently to prove his point (at least to me).
Suggestion
I definitely would not recommend this book to someone who isn't at least acquainted with some of the basic ideas contained in this broader debate. I just can't imagine a typical lay person (at least here in Vermont) picking up this book and getting more than a chapter in (to give you an example, my brother, who is an Amillennialist and went to bible college, only got halfway through this book). However, if you want a quality assessment of the arguments against Dispensationalism (and for Amillennialism and even a little bit for Postmillennialism), this is a great book to have on your shelf.
May 2, 2018
Very readable for a book largely made up of exegetical argument, generous in tone, thorough, convincing.
April 29, 2018
It is a very well written book and worth the read. He is very clear and gracious towards other systems of eschatology. This book very clearly defines and refutes dispensational premillennialism and historical premillennialism. He makes a very compelling case for amillennialism, and for a while that is what I considered myself. After working through this book, I would say that I am, now, actually convinced of postmillennialism. With that said, he does interact with postmil., but it is not his primary focus. It seems as if he still had questions about this topic. Perhaps he should write a book on that specific topic. The bibliography is extensive and will be useful for further reading. Also, the cover design looks really cool.
November 1, 2024
Very detailed book on eschatology and specifically on amillennialism. Storms focuses on dismantling dispensationalism (which I personally appreciate) but touches on all veins of eschatological interpretation to weigh their merits and weaknesses. He eventually articulates what amillennialism is and why he thinks it’s superior, but I wish this was spelled out much sooner; the most concise points on what amils believe are on the very last pages. What’s funny to me is that his section on postmillennialism, actually sold me even harder on that view, rather than convince me that being amil was better! Storms loves his Bible though and I appreciate his work.
December 29, 2022
Here is a well-researched, well-argued, crystal-clear, and dense book on Amillenialism. The sources used are wide and deep. I love Sam’s writing.
I look forward to buying my own copy and revisiting the topics I want to consider more. Surely that is a sign of an outstanding book.
Next up, Hoekema’s “The Bible and the Future”.
I look forward to buying my own copy and revisiting the topics I want to consider more. Surely that is a sign of an outstanding book.
Next up, Hoekema’s “The Bible and the Future”.
July 22, 2021
Good content. But could have used a better editor to tighten it up, make it more concise, less verbose.
(I read about 70% of the book, skipping some chapters that touch on topics with which I'm already rather familiar. But maybe I'll return and read the rest of these at some later point.)
(I read about 70% of the book, skipping some chapters that touch on topics with which I'm already rather familiar. But maybe I'll return and read the rest of these at some later point.)
December 27, 2022
Really good, helped engage with other views in a respectful manner. It’s a lot to process in 560 pages. Sometimes I got clarity and other times I walked away from a chapter more confused. But that’s to be expected with eschatology, right?
February 6, 2024
Anyone wanting to study Revelation and/or eschatology should read this. Storms is brilliant, humble, simple, and very pastoral in his writing.
March 29, 2014
After reading Kim Riddlebarger's book A Case of Amillennialism, I learned of Sam Storms' book Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative, which dealt with the same subject. The majority of the reviews I had read were positive, and since I was still in the midst of learning more about amillennial eschatology, I decided to put this book on my must read list. I picked up the book from my church's bookstore and let it sit on my shelf for a few months. I finally decided to pick it up this month and give it a read.
At over 560 pages and over eighteen total chapters, this was no light read by any stretch of the imagination. I'll admit that it took me some time to get into the book. Having a fairly firm grasp on hermeneutics and dispensationalism (as a former dispensationalist, like Storms), I ended up glossing over the initial chapters since they only served as review for material that I was already quite familiar with. Once I got past that initial hurdle, my reading became much more engaged as I tried to think critically through Storms' exegesis of several key passages of Scripture that concern eschatology. Albeit good information, I didn't want to bog myself down with information that wasn't new to me.
As you would expect in a book that speaks on to the end times, Storms covers all of the key passages including: Daniel 9, Matthew 24, and Revelation 20. In terms of analyzing the arguments that Storms presents for each of the passages, overall I have mixed reviews. I was left unconvinced by his treatment of Daniel 9. While thorough, I don't quite agree with his understanding of Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy. That aside, his treatment there is quite good. If there is any exegesis given where Storms changed my mind, it would have to be Matthew 24. I thought his treatment of that passage (over the course of two chapters) was extremely coherent and has me rethinking Jesus' words in this passage. I now tend to believe, like Storms, that this is a prophecy that has already been fulfilled and is not still future. As for Revelation 20, it's practically what I thought it would be, and one where I admittedly need to spend more time studying. Yet, Storms didn't leave it at just those familiar passages, as he also brought in other passages to build his case for amillennialism: Romans 11, Revelation 13 and 17, as well as 2 Thessalonians 2.
While the book as a whole is worth the purchase price, it is not without its problems. One of the most glaring issues I had with Kingdom Come is that Storms likes to unnecessarily repeat himself. He does this constantly by restating his argument or understanding of another author, as if we, the reader, didn't quite get it the first time he stated it. While it's beneficial to do that on occasion, Storms makes it to be more of a distraction. Another issue is the fact that in Storms' discussion of some passages/topics, he makes it clear that he is still not totally convinced in his own mind of a particular view. This is clearest in his chapter on 2 Thessalonians 2 and the Antichrist; it is here that he basically says at the end of the chapter that he's still not quite sure what exactly Paul means by this passage of it's already fulfilled or yet future. While I appreciate Storms' honesty in not being dogmatic in something he's unsure about, for someone looking to him to understand amillennialism, his indecisiveness leaves you feeling as if you're walking alongside him as he tries to figure this out, instead of speaking as an authority on the subject.
At the end of the day, I'm not sure what I think about Kingdom Come. I'm not sure that I walk away any more confident in amillennialism than I was before I started reading the book. I don't know if my expectations for the book were too high or if my gut reaction is correct. Yes, I did glean some new insights on passages (like Matthew 24), but on others I'm left scratching my head more than before I started. Granted, eschatology is a difficult subject for any Bible teacher, so in that respect Sam Storms did a fair job. I am grateful for his detailed insights on the texts he does have a firm grasp on and his evenhanded criticism of premillennialism, and I can respect that he's not willing to speak dogmatically on texts that he is still unsure of himself. As a whole, this is a book worth having in my library and one that I may find myself turning to again at some point in the future. That said, I probably wouldn't recommend this book as the definitive source for understanding amillennialism, but it's one worth having in the discussion.
At over 560 pages and over eighteen total chapters, this was no light read by any stretch of the imagination. I'll admit that it took me some time to get into the book. Having a fairly firm grasp on hermeneutics and dispensationalism (as a former dispensationalist, like Storms), I ended up glossing over the initial chapters since they only served as review for material that I was already quite familiar with. Once I got past that initial hurdle, my reading became much more engaged as I tried to think critically through Storms' exegesis of several key passages of Scripture that concern eschatology. Albeit good information, I didn't want to bog myself down with information that wasn't new to me.
As you would expect in a book that speaks on to the end times, Storms covers all of the key passages including: Daniel 9, Matthew 24, and Revelation 20. In terms of analyzing the arguments that Storms presents for each of the passages, overall I have mixed reviews. I was left unconvinced by his treatment of Daniel 9. While thorough, I don't quite agree with his understanding of Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy. That aside, his treatment there is quite good. If there is any exegesis given where Storms changed my mind, it would have to be Matthew 24. I thought his treatment of that passage (over the course of two chapters) was extremely coherent and has me rethinking Jesus' words in this passage. I now tend to believe, like Storms, that this is a prophecy that has already been fulfilled and is not still future. As for Revelation 20, it's practically what I thought it would be, and one where I admittedly need to spend more time studying. Yet, Storms didn't leave it at just those familiar passages, as he also brought in other passages to build his case for amillennialism: Romans 11, Revelation 13 and 17, as well as 2 Thessalonians 2.
While the book as a whole is worth the purchase price, it is not without its problems. One of the most glaring issues I had with Kingdom Come is that Storms likes to unnecessarily repeat himself. He does this constantly by restating his argument or understanding of another author, as if we, the reader, didn't quite get it the first time he stated it. While it's beneficial to do that on occasion, Storms makes it to be more of a distraction. Another issue is the fact that in Storms' discussion of some passages/topics, he makes it clear that he is still not totally convinced in his own mind of a particular view. This is clearest in his chapter on 2 Thessalonians 2 and the Antichrist; it is here that he basically says at the end of the chapter that he's still not quite sure what exactly Paul means by this passage of it's already fulfilled or yet future. While I appreciate Storms' honesty in not being dogmatic in something he's unsure about, for someone looking to him to understand amillennialism, his indecisiveness leaves you feeling as if you're walking alongside him as he tries to figure this out, instead of speaking as an authority on the subject.
At the end of the day, I'm not sure what I think about Kingdom Come. I'm not sure that I walk away any more confident in amillennialism than I was before I started reading the book. I don't know if my expectations for the book were too high or if my gut reaction is correct. Yes, I did glean some new insights on passages (like Matthew 24), but on others I'm left scratching my head more than before I started. Granted, eschatology is a difficult subject for any Bible teacher, so in that respect Sam Storms did a fair job. I am grateful for his detailed insights on the texts he does have a firm grasp on and his evenhanded criticism of premillennialism, and I can respect that he's not willing to speak dogmatically on texts that he is still unsure of himself. As a whole, this is a book worth having in my library and one that I may find myself turning to again at some point in the future. That said, I probably wouldn't recommend this book as the definitive source for understanding amillennialism, but it's one worth having in the discussion.
August 14, 2025
0.5 on weight. 0.5 on logic. 1 on style. 2 on research. 0 on affections. 4 out of 10 or 2 stars. This book has several problems.
1. It is poorly organized. Before dealing with any of his proof texts or argument of Amillennialism, he gives a history of and attempts refutation of Dispensationalism. He goes like this for the first five chapters, before finally dealing with Covenant Theology in chapter 6. (I think if someone could give solid reasoning for Covenant Theology, it would go a long way to make me want to be Amill.) We also note that though he insists the church and Israel are the same, he does not cover the Old Testament prophets (outside of Daniel's 70 weeks) at all. If you want to prove the Old Covenant is germane, then use it as your proof text. He goes to Paul, whom he says is much more clear than John, even though John wrote a whole book on the subject. He ends with Rev. 20 and two lengthy chapters on the antichrist.
2. He is too wordy. He could have cut the book by 200 pages. He consistently brings up subjects none of the views disagree with, and spends several pages on it. He uses wordy phrases like "at the time of the second coming" or "at the consummation of history" instead of "at Christ's return" or "history's end."
3. He does a really pathetic job refuting Postmillennialism. He spends two lengthy chapters trying to prove Matt. 24 was fully fulfilled in 70 AD. In his chapter on Postmill., he spends 20 pages explaining it and 4 pages with some issues. He even says in that chapter that he thinks Postmill. and Amill. are very similar. When discussing the book of Revelation, he says if he could be convinced that Revelation was written before 70, he would be Postmill. This book conviced me that there are really only two positions: Covenantal Postmill. or Dispensational Premill.
4. His arguments themselves are really weak. In his chapter on Daniel, he argues that since the first 69 weeks cannot reasonably be divided into periods of exactly seven years, since it appears Daniel was reckoning from 537BC and not 453BC. He says that since the first 69 are not quite exactly seven years, neither is the last week, and so the first half of the seventieth week could span from 30-70AD and the last half span from 70AD to Christ's return. My response is measuring each week as a period of roughly 7-10 years, it allows for the 537 date. (God often speaks in approximations in the Bible). The problem comes when he wants to makes the last week over 500 times larger than all the other weeks. We see 69 7-10 year periods, and suddenly the last week is almost 2000 years? There are several examples like this in the book. I just chose this one for an example.
5. His proof texts are weak. He has many cross-references, but these cross-references are for doctrines 1) either we all agree on, or 2) are not directly related to the subject at hand. He'll have a string of eight references, but only three actually add anything to the argument. The others are just freeloaders. Don't put a string of references just to make your book look cool, or to seem as though you are really biblically profound.
6. His conclusion spells "death" for his argument. In the conclusion, he gives the top 30 reasons to be Amill. #1 is very thought-provoking. If this were true, it would indeed be a powerful argument for Amill. 2 or 3 other arguments are strong, but most of them are weak. 8 of his arguments are from Rev. 20, and then he says, basically, we know Premill. can't be correct because they have no firm foothold in Rev. 20. He puts as arguments several passages that Amill. can barely scratch together an explanation for. Amill gains no support a debate if they can simply concoct an explanation for a Bible passage, but if they can actually draw reasons from that text for their side.
All that does not say he has no good arguments, or that Amill. has no texts that seem to omit a millennium before the final judgment. In fact, he brings up a few important problems for Premill., and has a few good arguments scattered throughout the book, but overwhelmingly the book is a third too long and his arguments are weak. This book helped me get a better grip of Amill., and in the future I will be able to reference this book when discussing such topics. The best thing about the book is the cover. That is a good title and cover.
1. It is poorly organized. Before dealing with any of his proof texts or argument of Amillennialism, he gives a history of and attempts refutation of Dispensationalism. He goes like this for the first five chapters, before finally dealing with Covenant Theology in chapter 6. (I think if someone could give solid reasoning for Covenant Theology, it would go a long way to make me want to be Amill.) We also note that though he insists the church and Israel are the same, he does not cover the Old Testament prophets (outside of Daniel's 70 weeks) at all. If you want to prove the Old Covenant is germane, then use it as your proof text. He goes to Paul, whom he says is much more clear than John, even though John wrote a whole book on the subject. He ends with Rev. 20 and two lengthy chapters on the antichrist.
2. He is too wordy. He could have cut the book by 200 pages. He consistently brings up subjects none of the views disagree with, and spends several pages on it. He uses wordy phrases like "at the time of the second coming" or "at the consummation of history" instead of "at Christ's return" or "history's end."
3. He does a really pathetic job refuting Postmillennialism. He spends two lengthy chapters trying to prove Matt. 24 was fully fulfilled in 70 AD. In his chapter on Postmill., he spends 20 pages explaining it and 4 pages with some issues. He even says in that chapter that he thinks Postmill. and Amill. are very similar. When discussing the book of Revelation, he says if he could be convinced that Revelation was written before 70, he would be Postmill. This book conviced me that there are really only two positions: Covenantal Postmill. or Dispensational Premill.
4. His arguments themselves are really weak. In his chapter on Daniel, he argues that since the first 69 weeks cannot reasonably be divided into periods of exactly seven years, since it appears Daniel was reckoning from 537BC and not 453BC. He says that since the first 69 are not quite exactly seven years, neither is the last week, and so the first half of the seventieth week could span from 30-70AD and the last half span from 70AD to Christ's return. My response is measuring each week as a period of roughly 7-10 years, it allows for the 537 date. (God often speaks in approximations in the Bible). The problem comes when he wants to makes the last week over 500 times larger than all the other weeks. We see 69 7-10 year periods, and suddenly the last week is almost 2000 years? There are several examples like this in the book. I just chose this one for an example.
5. His proof texts are weak. He has many cross-references, but these cross-references are for doctrines 1) either we all agree on, or 2) are not directly related to the subject at hand. He'll have a string of eight references, but only three actually add anything to the argument. The others are just freeloaders. Don't put a string of references just to make your book look cool, or to seem as though you are really biblically profound.
6. His conclusion spells "death" for his argument. In the conclusion, he gives the top 30 reasons to be Amill. #1 is very thought-provoking. If this were true, it would indeed be a powerful argument for Amill. 2 or 3 other arguments are strong, but most of them are weak. 8 of his arguments are from Rev. 20, and then he says, basically, we know Premill. can't be correct because they have no firm foothold in Rev. 20. He puts as arguments several passages that Amill. can barely scratch together an explanation for. Amill gains no support a debate if they can simply concoct an explanation for a Bible passage, but if they can actually draw reasons from that text for their side.
All that does not say he has no good arguments, or that Amill. has no texts that seem to omit a millennium before the final judgment. In fact, he brings up a few important problems for Premill., and has a few good arguments scattered throughout the book, but overwhelmingly the book is a third too long and his arguments are weak. This book helped me get a better grip of Amill., and in the future I will be able to reference this book when discussing such topics. The best thing about the book is the cover. That is a good title and cover.
December 19, 2023
Very helpful for understanding the amil viewpoint.
December 16, 2025
This is excellent
April 10, 2019
The first question on my mind when someone mentions they’ve read a book like Sam Storms’ "Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative" is “Did it convince you to become an amillennialist?” In this case, the answer is no, it didn’t convert me to amillennialism. But that shouldn’t be held too strongly against the book, as it is still an important and helpful read regardless of whether it convinces you in regard to amillennialism. In "Kingdom Come" Storms not only does an excellent job of articulating the amillennial position, he deftly speaks to a range of different topics including Bible interpretation and various eschatological issues.
"Kingdom Come" is a huge book that touches on many topics including hermeneutics, prophecy in Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, premillennialism, the Antichrist, and others. But it circles (sometimes in large circles) around 2 main emphases: dismantling dispensationalism and building up amillennialism. Broadly speaking, popular dispensationalism is a way of understanding scripture, distinguishing itself on two big points: literal Biblical interpretation and the view that God has distinct and different plans for Israel and the Church. Storms spends much of the book explaining, dissecting, and refuting the different aspects of dispensationalism. Storms’ treatment of dispensationalism alone makes "Kingdom Come" worth reading. It is so thorough and well-presented that I think Storms would be well-served to pull out this material, brush it up, and publish it as a standalone refutation of dispensationalism.
Storms' other major focus is promoting Amillennialism. Premillennialism holds that the millennium--mentioned explicitly only in Revelation 20--is a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth which occurs after His second coming. Amillennialism sees the millennium as “the present age of the Church between the first and second comings of Christ” and, therefore, not a literal 1000 years. Storms’ presentation of amillennialism and the argument for it is deep, wide, and thorough. I find it difficult to imagine another book giving a more full and well-rounded explanation and defense of amillennialism than "Kingdom Come" does. Unfortunately, while I am completely on board with Storms when it comes to laying aside popular dispensationalism, I just can’t quite follow him all the way into amillennialism. I understand how Storms brings together the eschatological puzzle pieces the way he does, but I still find the premillennial case slightly more compelling.
Regardless of your position on Biblical hermeneutics and eschatology, "Kingdom Come" is a great read which is likely to challenge your viewpoint and expand your understanding in several important areas.
"Kingdom Come" is a huge book that touches on many topics including hermeneutics, prophecy in Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, premillennialism, the Antichrist, and others. But it circles (sometimes in large circles) around 2 main emphases: dismantling dispensationalism and building up amillennialism. Broadly speaking, popular dispensationalism is a way of understanding scripture, distinguishing itself on two big points: literal Biblical interpretation and the view that God has distinct and different plans for Israel and the Church. Storms spends much of the book explaining, dissecting, and refuting the different aspects of dispensationalism. Storms’ treatment of dispensationalism alone makes "Kingdom Come" worth reading. It is so thorough and well-presented that I think Storms would be well-served to pull out this material, brush it up, and publish it as a standalone refutation of dispensationalism.
Storms' other major focus is promoting Amillennialism. Premillennialism holds that the millennium--mentioned explicitly only in Revelation 20--is a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth which occurs after His second coming. Amillennialism sees the millennium as “the present age of the Church between the first and second comings of Christ” and, therefore, not a literal 1000 years. Storms’ presentation of amillennialism and the argument for it is deep, wide, and thorough. I find it difficult to imagine another book giving a more full and well-rounded explanation and defense of amillennialism than "Kingdom Come" does. Unfortunately, while I am completely on board with Storms when it comes to laying aside popular dispensationalism, I just can’t quite follow him all the way into amillennialism. I understand how Storms brings together the eschatological puzzle pieces the way he does, but I still find the premillennial case slightly more compelling.
Regardless of your position on Biblical hermeneutics and eschatology, "Kingdom Come" is a great read which is likely to challenge your viewpoint and expand your understanding in several important areas.
September 27, 2017
Wow. So much to be said.
First off, there are only a few books that handle their given topics as thoroughly as Kingdom Come handles its given topic- the Amillenial Approach to the end times. It handles well its subject as well as the subject of the competing perspectives.
I am grateful that Sam Storms serves as my pastor in this season, and this next point is something that not only paints the pages of his book but radiates from the pulpit from which he preaches. He consistently admits to the frailty of mere human interpretation and continually calls the listener to be a student and learner.
This is truly a remarkable work and one that will bear the standard in the conversation on the end times.
First off, there are only a few books that handle their given topics as thoroughly as Kingdom Come handles its given topic- the Amillenial Approach to the end times. It handles well its subject as well as the subject of the competing perspectives.
I am grateful that Sam Storms serves as my pastor in this season, and this next point is something that not only paints the pages of his book but radiates from the pulpit from which he preaches. He consistently admits to the frailty of mere human interpretation and continually calls the listener to be a student and learner.
This is truly a remarkable work and one that will bear the standard in the conversation on the end times.
April 18, 2014
I have thoroughly enjoyed some of Sam Storms other books, and this was no different. He presents a biblically-focused case for the amillennial eschatological position, showing why it is a very plausible alternative to premillennialism. Although not convinced, I appreciated his commitment to faithfulness to Scripture and his tone throughout most of the book.
I can do no better than Tom Schreiner's comment on this book: "Even those who remain unconvinced will need to reckon with the powerful case made for an amillennial reading."
I can do no better than Tom Schreiner's comment on this book: "Even those who remain unconvinced will need to reckon with the powerful case made for an amillennial reading."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 107 reviews