What do you think?
Rate this book
A Postmillennial Primer: Basics of Optimistic Eschatology
I'm sometimes asked the best place in the Bible to start for proving postmillennialism. I reply, “Genesis 1:1.” An optimistic eschatology rests in an optimistic protology. The sovereign Creator fashioned a very good creation that will fulfill his kingdom-expanding dominion purposes in time and history.
This primer shows what an optimistic eschatology looks like.
This primer shows what an optimistic eschatology looks like.
- GenresTheologyNonfiction
Audible Audio
First published January 1, 1997
6 people are currently reading
46 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
March 16, 2024
Let's just admit it – eschatology is confusing. So many different views, and so many brilliant thinkers disagreeing on all of them. That's why I am prone to hold to any view rather loosely, but the postmillennial view makes increasing sense to me.
The postmil view expects three things to happen: an extended era of earthly righteousness and peace; the incremental advancement of God's kingdom; and the presence of God to empower his people in their "kingdom-advancing commission" (p.33). Bottom line is that it is a very optimistic way of looking at the future. In other words, the world is not going to get increasingly evil as we get closer to Christ's return, which is a startling statement to most evangelicals.
Sandlin spends about half of this book critiquing dispensationalism, premillennialism and amillennialism (though he admits that an optimistic amillennialism is basically the same as postmillennialism). Then in the second half of the book, he reasons from scripture that postmillennialism makes best sense of the entire Biblical story.
With eschatology in particular, it's easy to get so deep in the weeds that we miss the broad scope of redemptive history. Sandlin makes the case that the postmil view makes the best sense when we start in the first few chapters of Genesis, not in Revelation. "God's purpose is not chiefly to save man and fit him for heaven, but to restore him to covenant-keeping submission and his calling as God's dominion agent in the earth." (p.70).
Sandlin also dispels two common critiques of postmillennialism -- that it leads to a denial of Christ's second coming (preterism is plainly called heresy in ch. 6), and that it leaves no room for the reality of suffering. "There is no room for a Christian army that craves victories without battles, glory without pain." (p.72).
By no means am I suggesting that this book resolves all the difficulties, but it's a good place to start in exploring a view that has fallen out of favor in the last hundred years. And it's much meatier than its mere 77 pages would suggest.
The postmil view expects three things to happen: an extended era of earthly righteousness and peace; the incremental advancement of God's kingdom; and the presence of God to empower his people in their "kingdom-advancing commission" (p.33). Bottom line is that it is a very optimistic way of looking at the future. In other words, the world is not going to get increasingly evil as we get closer to Christ's return, which is a startling statement to most evangelicals.
Sandlin spends about half of this book critiquing dispensationalism, premillennialism and amillennialism (though he admits that an optimistic amillennialism is basically the same as postmillennialism). Then in the second half of the book, he reasons from scripture that postmillennialism makes best sense of the entire Biblical story.
With eschatology in particular, it's easy to get so deep in the weeds that we miss the broad scope of redemptive history. Sandlin makes the case that the postmil view makes the best sense when we start in the first few chapters of Genesis, not in Revelation. "God's purpose is not chiefly to save man and fit him for heaven, but to restore him to covenant-keeping submission and his calling as God's dominion agent in the earth." (p.70).
Sandlin also dispels two common critiques of postmillennialism -- that it leads to a denial of Christ's second coming (preterism is plainly called heresy in ch. 6), and that it leaves no room for the reality of suffering. "There is no room for a Christian army that craves victories without battles, glory without pain." (p.72).
By no means am I suggesting that this book resolves all the difficulties, but it's a good place to start in exploring a view that has fallen out of favor in the last hundred years. And it's much meatier than its mere 77 pages would suggest.
August 3, 2023
An updated reprint of a book from the late 90s with new material added. It's easy to understand, short, and hits all the high points one would want to in an introduction to postmillennialism. I think this would be a good one to give to poeple.
February 24, 2024
An excellent presentation of the postmil worldview as well as a gracious critique of the other popular eschatological positions. This is a book that I will be rereading in the near future.
July 15, 2023
4.5. Great little introduction to the postmillennial hope! This gets close to the type of resource I want to share with people initially. There were a couple of concepts and words that I would’ve defined differently as they present much confusion to the church in general. Nevertheless, excellent little booklet, I commend it!
October 22, 2023
Sandiln’s book is well written and makes scripturally grounded arguments, but I would not call this book a primer on postmillennial eschatology. This book defends the position and shows errors in differing eschatological views; however, it does not expound the position or its implications.
February 3, 2017
This fifty-page monograph gives a brief critique of three eschatalogical viewpoints - dispensational premillennialism, historic premillennialism, and amillennialism - followed by an equally brief sales pitch for postmillennialism. Sandlin zeroes helpfully in on the basic tenets of each view and instead of a blanket refutation, attempts to explode the foundational argument of each view. So, for such a short book (booklet?), this comes with a lot of solid content.
However, I was a little disappointed by how little time Sandlin gives to refuting amillennialism. This is currently the regnant view among the reformed churches, and obviously it comes with academic cred, which has always been catnip for Calvinists. But it's a perfectly ghastly thing to have to believe, and one of the reasons I read this book was in the hope of finding a succinct explanation of postmillennialism geared toward the ordinary amillennial. Oh well - the search continues.
However, I was a little disappointed by how little time Sandlin gives to refuting amillennialism. This is currently the regnant view among the reformed churches, and obviously it comes with academic cred, which has always been catnip for Calvinists. But it's a perfectly ghastly thing to have to believe, and one of the reasons I read this book was in the hope of finding a succinct explanation of postmillennialism geared toward the ordinary amillennial. Oh well - the search continues.
July 9, 2023
This book was a bit of a challenge to read but I think that was more because of my wrong expectations of it, rather than the book itself. I read “Primer” and assumed it would be a fairly basic introduction to the topic, but that’s not really what you get. It’s more of a rapid fire overview of some fairly complex stuff, with lots of further reading you could do if a certain part caught your interest. Definitely worth a read but just don’t go into it expecting an easy read like I did!
April 23, 2025
The title well summarizes the contents of the book–it is a brief defense of optimistic eschatology and postmillennialism in particular. The book succeeds in being accessible, arguing for covenentalism, and showcasing the promises (optimism) of Scripture, but not so much in clearly demonstrating that postmillenialism is superior to alternative views.
Sandlin's basic support for postmillenialism stems from promises related to world-wide righteousness/peace/prosperity/etc. which will accompany the gradual growth of the kingdom as it marches forward according to the kingly rule of Christ and the mighty power of God at work in His people. The basic problem with the above support is, apart from a few minor details which Sandlin gives little attention to, amillenialists and even many historic premillenials would agree. The more important questions are: When will righteousness cover the earth? Before or after Christ comes? In what way will the kingdom grow? Through the growth of the church or necessarily politically/nationally as well? It is not enough to declare that the church will triumph--the when and how of that triumph are the important differentiators. These questions could have been hashed out in the chapters addressing premillennialism and amillenialism.
Sandlin argues that premillennialism arises primarily out of a mistaken view of Revelation 20:5-6, which from my understanding is itself mistaken. Premillenialism arises from the conviction that the Bible promises a glorious, yet future manifestation of the kingdom of God on the earth (Sandlin himself argues this point) and from the conviction that this manifestation of the kingdom follows the second return of Christ. These two beliefs arise from a much broader sampling of Scripture than a single difficult passage in Revelation, and again, only the later belief actually conflicts with postmillenialism. However, this understanding leads Sandlin to not take premillennialism very seriously. He devotes four pages to it and thinks that if he can poke a couple holes in their understanding of Revelation 20 he has undermined their entire eschatology.
Sandlin gives more care in addressing amillenialism, but his critiques are a little misplaced. The biggest disconnect I noticed is that for Sandlin, "the eternal state" or "eternity" is absolutely incompatible with "earthly" or "physical" promises. Therefore, to refute amillenialism he merely has to establish that the Bible has unrealized promises of peace, prosperity, and fruitfulness ("earthly" stuff related to animals, children, plants, houses, lands, etc.). If there are such promises Sandlin concludes, then they must be fulfilled on the physical earth prior to the establishment of the “eternal state”. However, because what he calls “the eternal state” is none other than a restored creation, the New Heavens and Earth, his argument is invalid. The argument that Sandlin needs to make is that there are biblical promises that cannot fit a perfected future earth (again, this is also one of the primary arguments for premillenialism), but he only follows such a line of reasoning for a single paragraph. He writes, “[These promises] cannot refer to the eternal state, since the symbolic discussion of life expectancy, agrarian labor, and nature’s increased harmony with man are not appropriate to the eternal state.” (pg. 28) Even in the above quotation a false dichotomy between the present creation and a future creation can be seen (i.e. agrarian labor being incompatible with our final dwelling place), but it is the closest he gets to making the right argument.
Interestingly, he also makes the case that the foundational protestant Confessions are optimistic in their eschatology. He argues this because, for example, the Westminster Larger Catechism states that Christ is “restraining and overcoming all [the church’s] enemies” (pg. 51). The Westminster Confession makes a very similar statement (8:8). I could be convinced otherwise, but I tend to see this as meager evidence to make such a claim. The authors of the confession were incredibly careful with their language–with what was included as well as what was excluded–and if they wanted to articulate the triumph of the church on the earth they would have done so clearly. The articulators of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith actually added some clarifying statements that tend away from this as well. For example, they add this about Christ’s kingly rule: “Because we are hostile and utterly unable to return to God, and so that we can be rescued and made secure from our spiritual enemies, we need His kingly office to convince, subdue, draw, sustain, deliver and preserve us for His heavenly kingdom.” (8:10). The focus of Christ’s present kingly rule seems to focus on his authority and power at work in his people to cause their hearts to submit to him, and then preserve and strengthen their faith in the face of opposition. They also add a chapter on “The Gospel and the Extent of its Grace” and therein state “in every age the preaching of the gospel to individuals and nations has been granted in widely varying degrees of expansion and contraction, according to the counsel of the will of God.” (20:3) On the other hand, I think section V on the church in the Savoy does have a Post-mill flavor–it might be the case that it is inherently optimistic. On the whole, there isn’t enough evidence to substantiate Sandlin’s claim that the major historical protestant confessions favor postmillenialism/optimistic amillenialism.
I suppose I spent a lot of time critiquing A Postmillenial Primer, but I actually really enjoyed it and appreciated how succinct it is. I just think the author could've better identified how to best differentiate postmill from other views. I look forward to reading better and more detailed support for postmillennialism in the future.
Sandlin's basic support for postmillenialism stems from promises related to world-wide righteousness/peace/prosperity/etc. which will accompany the gradual growth of the kingdom as it marches forward according to the kingly rule of Christ and the mighty power of God at work in His people. The basic problem with the above support is, apart from a few minor details which Sandlin gives little attention to, amillenialists and even many historic premillenials would agree. The more important questions are: When will righteousness cover the earth? Before or after Christ comes? In what way will the kingdom grow? Through the growth of the church or necessarily politically/nationally as well? It is not enough to declare that the church will triumph--the when and how of that triumph are the important differentiators. These questions could have been hashed out in the chapters addressing premillennialism and amillenialism.
Sandlin argues that premillennialism arises primarily out of a mistaken view of Revelation 20:5-6, which from my understanding is itself mistaken. Premillenialism arises from the conviction that the Bible promises a glorious, yet future manifestation of the kingdom of God on the earth (Sandlin himself argues this point) and from the conviction that this manifestation of the kingdom follows the second return of Christ. These two beliefs arise from a much broader sampling of Scripture than a single difficult passage in Revelation, and again, only the later belief actually conflicts with postmillenialism. However, this understanding leads Sandlin to not take premillennialism very seriously. He devotes four pages to it and thinks that if he can poke a couple holes in their understanding of Revelation 20 he has undermined their entire eschatology.
Sandlin gives more care in addressing amillenialism, but his critiques are a little misplaced. The biggest disconnect I noticed is that for Sandlin, "the eternal state" or "eternity" is absolutely incompatible with "earthly" or "physical" promises. Therefore, to refute amillenialism he merely has to establish that the Bible has unrealized promises of peace, prosperity, and fruitfulness ("earthly" stuff related to animals, children, plants, houses, lands, etc.). If there are such promises Sandlin concludes, then they must be fulfilled on the physical earth prior to the establishment of the “eternal state”. However, because what he calls “the eternal state” is none other than a restored creation, the New Heavens and Earth, his argument is invalid. The argument that Sandlin needs to make is that there are biblical promises that cannot fit a perfected future earth (again, this is also one of the primary arguments for premillenialism), but he only follows such a line of reasoning for a single paragraph. He writes, “[These promises] cannot refer to the eternal state, since the symbolic discussion of life expectancy, agrarian labor, and nature’s increased harmony with man are not appropriate to the eternal state.” (pg. 28) Even in the above quotation a false dichotomy between the present creation and a future creation can be seen (i.e. agrarian labor being incompatible with our final dwelling place), but it is the closest he gets to making the right argument.
Interestingly, he also makes the case that the foundational protestant Confessions are optimistic in their eschatology. He argues this because, for example, the Westminster Larger Catechism states that Christ is “restraining and overcoming all [the church’s] enemies” (pg. 51). The Westminster Confession makes a very similar statement (8:8). I could be convinced otherwise, but I tend to see this as meager evidence to make such a claim. The authors of the confession were incredibly careful with their language–with what was included as well as what was excluded–and if they wanted to articulate the triumph of the church on the earth they would have done so clearly. The articulators of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith actually added some clarifying statements that tend away from this as well. For example, they add this about Christ’s kingly rule: “Because we are hostile and utterly unable to return to God, and so that we can be rescued and made secure from our spiritual enemies, we need His kingly office to convince, subdue, draw, sustain, deliver and preserve us for His heavenly kingdom.” (8:10). The focus of Christ’s present kingly rule seems to focus on his authority and power at work in his people to cause their hearts to submit to him, and then preserve and strengthen their faith in the face of opposition. They also add a chapter on “The Gospel and the Extent of its Grace” and therein state “in every age the preaching of the gospel to individuals and nations has been granted in widely varying degrees of expansion and contraction, according to the counsel of the will of God.” (20:3) On the other hand, I think section V on the church in the Savoy does have a Post-mill flavor–it might be the case that it is inherently optimistic. On the whole, there isn’t enough evidence to substantiate Sandlin’s claim that the major historical protestant confessions favor postmillenialism/optimistic amillenialism.
I suppose I spent a lot of time critiquing A Postmillenial Primer, but I actually really enjoyed it and appreciated how succinct it is. I just think the author could've better identified how to best differentiate postmill from other views. I look forward to reading better and more detailed support for postmillennialism in the future.
February 5, 2025
A nice introduction that answers many of the basics questions and provides a good starting point.
December 13, 2023
Postmillennialism Explained Plainly
Dr. Sandlin has done an excellent job explaining what Postmillennialism is. I hear so many from other eschatological views totally misrepresent this view. The pre tribulationionalist, dispensationalist are the worst. They for some reason believe they’re the only ones who evangelizes. Our LORD JESUS CHRIST commanded that all who follow HIM are to go into the world!! Before the seventeenth century this was the prevalent belief.
Dr. Sandlin has done an excellent job explaining what Postmillennialism is. I hear so many from other eschatological views totally misrepresent this view. The pre tribulationionalist, dispensationalist are the worst. They for some reason believe they’re the only ones who evangelizes. Our LORD JESUS CHRIST commanded that all who follow HIM are to go into the world!! Before the seventeenth century this was the prevalent belief.
November 14, 2023
A really good explanation of the postmillennial perspective. The brief case made here will most likely not succeed in convincing anyone hostile to the view of changing his mind, but it does provide clarification for the seeker who is already sympathetic with the postmillennial outlook. Simple and straightforward
December 27, 2023
A great introduction to an important doctrine. Sandlin deftly explains why dispensationalism is thoroughly unbiblical, amillenialism is an anomalous and weak position, who historic premillenialism is a credible and respectable position (while incorrect), and how postmillenialism is the correct way to understand the Bible and why proper eschatology is important for proper living.
July 8, 2023
A great primer to postmillennialism
This book was very helpful in Biblically evaluating and criticizing the various eschatological outlooks, and then providing a good case for postmillennialism.
This book was very helpful in Biblically evaluating and criticizing the various eschatological outlooks, and then providing a good case for postmillennialism.
October 11, 2023
Good introduction to Postmillennialism. I think it’s too technical to be called a primer. I couldn’t hand this book to just anyone in my congregation. However, Sandlin covers a lot of material in under 100 pages. Good overview!
April 9, 2024
If I wasn't already a postmillennialist...
This was an excellent primer. I was looking for something accessible to give to congregants and others who are interested in the Gospel hope of postmillennialism. I think I found it.
This was an excellent primer. I was looking for something accessible to give to congregants and others who are interested in the Gospel hope of postmillennialism. I think I found it.
June 18, 2023
I held back one star due to the repetitive writing in the first couple of chapters as well as the lack of needed context.
August 29, 2023
This book was so helpful in giving a clear overview of the different eschatological views! He makes a strong case for the postmillennial view using biblical support.
September 5, 2023
Fantastic primer on postmillennialism
January 16, 2024
Great intro to postmillenialism.
Read
February 17, 2025Great! Concise!
May 10, 2025
As the title suggests, a helpful primer on the postmillennial position. This book is short and to the point, yet deep, encouraging and saturated in Scripture. Read this book.
August 11, 2025
Good starter.
April 1, 2024
This is a super short book that covers the dangers of pessimistic eschatology and why we can be optimistic about the future of Christianity. I loved it - very concise and practical.
July 10, 2023
I appreciated the brevity. Academic, but when discussing issues of eschatology I'm assuming that's pretty necessary.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews