The Promise of the Future

by Cornelis P. Venema

The Promise of the Future says Sinclair Ferguson, introduces us to the full range of biblical teaching on eschatology (the study of the last things). It rightly stresses that...as Simon Peter pointed out on the Day of Pentecost, the resurrection of Christ and the gift of the Spirit mean that the future has invaded the present, so that we are already living in 'the last days'...I believe that you will find the study on which you are about to embark both intellectually satisfying and spiritually enriching.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Christianity, Nonfiction, Religion

560 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 2000

About the author

Venema is Dean of the Faculty and Professor of Doctrinal Studies at Mid-America Reformed Seminary, Dyer, Indiana. He gained his doctorate from Princeton Theological Seminary for work on the theology of John Calvin and has served as a pastor in the Christian Reformed Church in Ontario, California, and South Holland, Illinois.

Reviews

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

As an introduction to eschatology, I don't think you can find a better book.

First, he talks about what matters. The majority of the book is not a defense of a particular eschatological view, but a defense of the hope we have in the future. It's the parts of the gospel that so often get ignored. He talks trough the hope of the OT saints, then discusses the first coming of Christ, then he works through issues like the intermediate state, the second coming of Christ, the signs of the times, the resurrection, the final judgement, eternal punishment, and the new heavens and new earth.

This is a book you need to read for the above topics alone. He is easy to read, while being deep. And for those who want to go deeper into a particular topic, this book is filled to the brim with footnotes and references.

But what about the mills: premill, postmill, and amill? About 1/4th of the book is dedicated to fairly describing the various views and then breaking down their strengths and weaknesses.

No, it's not everything you wanted to know and a lot more needs to be said, but as a first book in seeking to understand God's promise of the future, I can't imagine a better book.

[Zack · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a most excellent book. A couple of points:
- Venema's critique of premillennialism (in both its historic and dispensational varieties) is decisive and comprehensive.
- Venema's critique of Postmillennialism as-such is charitable and even-handed. His defense of "optimistic amillennialism" is convincing and compelling. In full disclosure, this was my position going into the book, as I believe that Christ is current regnant over the heavens and the earth and that there is no future "golden age" antecedent to the consummation of all things at His second advent.
- The prose is easy to read without being overly casual or popular.
- The organization of the book is logical, clear, and
- The footnoting is appropriate and allows for great depth of exploration into the literature with which Venema interacts.

Some minor quibbles:
- Venema comes across as a bit overconfident in drawing from Rev. 12:24 to argue that cultural artifacts (particular examples of virtuous artwork, music, literature, and even scientific discovery) will continue into heaven (see pages 480-2).
- The analysis, evaluation, and critique of Dispensational Premillennialism is a bit tedious, but that is hardly Venema's fault. The subject matter lends itself to tedium, after all.
- There is some redundancy of material and exegetical engagement, born out of the nature of the project (turning serial articles into a book) and the scope of the book (focus on one head of doctrine).

[Rick Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cornelius Venema’s The Promise of the Future was a pleasure to read. Venema writes clearly and comprehensively about the eschatological hope presented to believers in Scripture. Though the book is divided into six parts, it can actually be looked at as two movements of general-personal eschatology. In the first movement, Venema lays out the parameters for general eschatology and talks about the first coming of Christ. Then in a personal eschatological chapter, he talks about the intermediate state of believers who have died prior to the resurrection and last day. He then moves on to general eschatology proper, talking about Christ’s second coming, signs of the times (tribulations, Antichrist, etc.), millennial views. Then in another personal turn, he discusses resurrection, final judgment, eternal punishment, and the new heavens and new earth.

One of the best things about Venema is that he treats opposing positions fairly, and takes care to tie his statements in with historical views on eschatology as they have developed in church history. Honestly, the amazing thing is that the book remains such an easy read for all that he managed to cram into his historically, biblically, and doctrinally.

I most appreciated his discussion of the various millennial views, as I had never seen another author divide them quite the way he does. The close relationship between postmillennialism and amillennialism historically was something I was unaware of, and the fact that he characterizes ammillennialism as one of two species of postmillennialism was new to me. Also the way he describes the two positions of amillennialism and postmillennialism shows the fuzziness of the categories. He says that posmillennialists do not believe that the millennium describes the entire period from Christ’s ascension to His second coming. However, as someone who would identify as a postmillennialist myself, I would agree with that definition of the millennium. He does say that theonomist and reconstructionist postmillennialists might say this, but I’m not a reconstructionist or theonomist. I think Venema might actually characterize me as an “optimistic amillennialist,” which I might protest but which wouldn’t bother me much.

His chapters on eternal punishment and the new heavens and new earth were very good as well. First of all, he ably defends the biblical doctrine of Hell, which, as he points out, has definitely fallen on hard times in our pluralistic and tolerant culture. Secondly, he does a good job of showing what can be known of life in the new heavens and new earth from Scripture and scriptural reasoning without going too far out onto any speculative limbs. Overall, this is a solid book for someone wanting an overview of biblical eschatology. It is well written, thorough, and cogent.

[Samuel G. Parkison · Rating 4 out of 5]

Incredibly helpful and clear.

[Jacob London · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good. Comparable to Hokema's Bible and the Future. Venema offers a balanced critique of Pre & Post millennialism while advocating an amillennial position. I would think that if someone who disagreed with his conclusions read this books they would feel their position represented adequately and charitably. Dr. Venema's own conculsions could be clarified, but since I will take this class with him next semester it won't be an issue for me as it could be for the reader apart from the class.

[Jim Ritchhart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dr. Venema is one of my new favorite authors. He is president of Mid America Seminary and has authored a number of books. This one, The Promise of the Future addresses eschatology from a perspective I had not seen in other books. It is organized differently from other books on eschatology, starting with "what happens to the believer immediately after death" and "what happens to the non-believer immediately after death." He defends the historical position of the church that hell exists, contrary to the modern position that unbelievers are annihilated at death.
Dr. Venema writes in a very clear way and is able to explain very complex topics.
I bought this book for an OPC pastor that is ministering to my youngest daughter. I would highly recommend it.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Venema did not disappoint with his crystal clear writing and thorough treatment of the topic. The book covers all aspects of eschatology including the future of the believer as well as of all creation. He is fair when he treats his opponents while making a compelling case for his own view. Venema calls himself an "optimistic Amillennialist." Definitely one of the better books I've read this year.

[Steven · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want a clear and no-nonsense look at the doctrine of the last things, this is the book to read. Venema's book is great on biblical exposition of key texts concerning the last days.

[Aaron Kleinheksel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was interested in reading a comprehensive book making the best case for a non-dispensational eschatology, and this book by Venema was often and highly recommended by those of a (typically Reformed) and “Covenantalist” persuasion. To place this book in context more broadly, of the 3 primary ways to understand orthodox Christian eschatology, namely Preterist, Pre-millennial, and Post-millennial, Venema takes a firm position in favor of Post-millennialism, and specifically Amillennialism.

1st, Venema is an engaging writer and very easy to read, regardless of one’s academic background. In addition, he does a good job explaining his terms as he goes along, so the reader does not need to have a strong background in the subject matter. I happen to be very familiar with this material, so it made the reading a bit faster for me.

2nd, for all the mockery and condescension I am accustomed to hearing from those of the theological background espoused by Venema toward Dispensationalism, they almost never exhibit any real understanding of dispensationalism, thereby forfeiting any credibility. They also fail to really explain their own positions well. Venema has done the reading, and in addition his background has exposed him to dispensational thought. I found him to generally treat his opponents fairly and seriously. He is credible.

3rd, that said, Venema begins this book on page 4 as a refutation of Dispensationalism, rather than an argument for Venema’s position on its own. Chapters 10 and 11 are the longest 2 chapters in this book, and they are both wholly devoted to disputing and discrediting Dispensationalism. Venema clearly sees Dispensationalism as the most serious challenge to his own eschatological position. I would say objectively, his efforts to do so are largely (though not entirely) unsuccessful. Venema seems to forget that many of the most convincing and influential Dispensationalists have arisen from his own Reformed-Presbyterian & Calvinist faith background (M.R. DeHaan, J.D. Pentecost, Harry Bultema, Albert Waalkes, John Bennink, etc.).

Venema does a great job extolling the importance of the preaching of the gospel to all nations as a sign that we live in the last days and as a means of the fulfillment of the OT promises (to Adam & Eve, to Abraham, etc.). In addition, I don’t think I can downplay how surprised I was to see that Venema agrees that Romans 11 cannot be understood correctly without an admission that it in fact ascribes a special status to ethnic Israel (pg. 138). This is usually the first bone of contention with anyone attempting to attack Dispensationalism, and Venema gained credibility with me for admitting to this obvious interpretation of the text.

In fairness, Venema finds what I consider to be the 2 weakest points in the Dispensationalist framework, that being the restored Temple sacrificial system and its place in the prophetic timeline (and reason?) and the multiplicity of “judgements” that are necessitated. Honestly, he could have gone harder on those 2 points, and I was surprised he did not.

Instead, Venema adopts an Amillennial understanding of eschatology that by design results in a very opaque reading of much of Biblical prophecy relating to the Day of the Lord. Unfortunately, as a consequence of this, Venema just flatly doesn’t deal with most of the OT apocalyptic passages (which comprise a huge body of text out of the major and minor prophetic books). To return to the above, Venema has no serviceable answer for Ezekial’s temple prophecies either, or for the invasion described in chapter 38. He only cursorily deals with Daniel’s apocalyptic visions, and makes no mention of Joel, Zechariah, Amos, Micah etc. etc. This is just not acceptable for the argument Vennema is seeking to establish.

Related to his silence regarding much of the outright apocalyptic OT prophecy, Venema largely ignores the other OT eschatological types, even while attempting to argue that it is Dispensationalists that miss much of the rich typology of the OT! Short rant: I don’t know what he’s talking about. I was raised in a Reformed church as a child, and it wasn’t until I began studying scripture from a dispensational perspective that the OT types began to leap out at me. Honestly, I can’t emphasize enough just how the Bible exploded to life for me in new ways as I saw the OT accounts in all their multi-faceted glory. The types are a major way the Bible is tied together as a supernatural whole. The entire Levitical calendar can be seen eschatologically and is where terms like “feast of the lamb” and the “last trumpet” get much of their meaning. Venema makes no mention of this, and it comes off as a major blind spot.

Venema understands the “1000 years” (millennium) spoken of in Rev. 20 to be idiomatic of a long but unknown period of time prior to the return of Christ. He believes we are most likely in the millennium right now, and that Satan himself is currently! bound until he is released for the “little season” of Rev. 20 immediately preceding the return of Christ. There are 2 flavors of this type of Amillennialism: one thinks things are going to grow progressively worse in the world (the signs of the times) even while the gospel is preached to all the nations up until Christ’s return, and the other thinks things are going to get progressively better as the world is “Christianized” in preparation for the return of Christ (also often characterized as “Dominionism,” and popular among many modern Pentecostal, “health & wealth” / prosperity gospel strains of Christianity). Venema is in the camp of the more believable former understanding, though I find both unconvincing.

One frustration I had with Venema in this book (among many - my marginal notes, particularly in chpts. 10 & 11 were copious), was his habit of using the words “obscure” or “disputed” when he didn’t like something. This is poor. If you are going to use those words when arguing against something, you need to explain why those words are appropriate. This came out most noticeable in Chpt. 11, titled appropriately “What About Revelation 20?” Venema acknowledges that Rev. 19 and particularly 20 do the most damage to his eschatological argument, because I’ll be honest and admit that without it, Venema’s view would be far more compelling. I got the impression that Rev. 20 annoys Venema. In my experience, most reformed-background theologians don’t know what to do with Revelation, and as a result would be happier if much of it didn’t exist.

To conclude his book, Venema’s chapters on eternal punishment and the new heavens and the new earth are quite good.

I had many problems with this book, but even though I disagree with the author on a great many things related to eschatology, I will still recommend this book for someone interested in a serious attempt to argue against Pre-millennialism (and Dispensationalism in particular) and in favor of Post-millennialism (and Amillennialism in particular). For books arguing in favor of Dispensationalism (of one type or another), my recommendations are always to start with Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology and Footsteps of the Messiah.

[Ethan McCarter · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid and thorough work on eschatology from a decidedly Reformed and amillennial perspective. Venema is quite thorough in his expounding of broad topics related to eschatology including the final state, the status of the soul at the death of the body in the intermediate state, and interpretation of Revelation 20. This is a strong work in eschatology that is a good beginning point for a wide range of topics. Granted, there are more in-depth books that deal with the individual doctrines Venema addresses, but he does an excellent job of covering a lot of ground in the work.
I do have two quibbles that knock it down from 5 to 4 stars. One is that Venema does not always address the strongest views of some of his oppositions. For instance, a postmillennial writer would differ on certain interpretations of Isaiah 66 or other prophecies; it would behoove Venema to interact with some of the stronger arguments in particular from church history. For the postmil side he primarily interacts with theonomic and Reconstructionist authors. Second, his section on the new heavens and the new earth is lacking in quality and shows a lack of interaction with the beatific vision espoused by the Reformed Orthodox and Puritan forefathers. I'd encourage a deeper look at that doctrine and not poison the well by stating, "It's a Roman Catholic doctrine." I know Francis Turretin and Junius wouldn't care for that characterization.
I'd recommend this work for a wide range of students, church members, and pastors interested in going deeper in the doctrine of eschatology. A great work most certainly!

[Joel Zartman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sensible, sober, and, at nearly 500 pages, thorough. The thoroughness is owing to how careful both the explanation options and the sifting of evidence are. It is a long and interesting exercise in carefully weighing and deliberating conclusion. I'm impressed with his respect for those who disagree and with his probity in labeling.

Those of us who have not been trained in classical (if I may so designate it) eschatology need to be carefully disabused. Venema has a good way of doing it. I remember how Martin Lloyd-Jones ingeniously disarms the claim about the 69 weeks that the Lord entered Jerusalem exactly "to the day" as Daniel predicted. Lloyd-Jones then remarks that the way to obtain such literal precision is to count backwards, which neatly displays how sometimes we get into the habit of going. Venema is helpful with this kind of thing, especially with the topic of the millennium.

The only thing dragging a bit on the book is that Venema is so sensible that one almost wishes he had his feet less on the ground when it came to the future state. To stress continuities, because of the resurrection and other considerations, he tends to downplay the wonder of the world to come. But those with a background which erred toward the more sensational can readily forgive this, and we can read C.S. Lewis to correct it.

[Timothy Denning · Rating 5 out of 5]

Events surrounding the second coming of the Lord are discussed in great detail, certainly in a thought-provoking manner. There, of course, division on some of the points discussed. We can rejoice in the certainties that are spoken of, too. The inexhaustible glory and splendour of God will be more than enough to furnish the praise of God's people in the life to come. Such is the great promise of the future for which the children of God wait, to dwell in God's blessed presence, glorifying and enjoying him forever.

[Simon Wartanian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pretty good and comprehensive study of eschatology from an amillennial viewpoint. My only downside is that he is more futuristic in his discussion of the Olivet Discourse than I am. Good discussion concerning postmillennialism and premillennialism. He remains respectful, but at the same time, good in his criticism.

I found his discussion on annihilationism in connection with the doctrine of hell also helpful.

[Josh Anders · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good overview of the main 3 views on eschatology. The authors argument in favor of amillennialism falls a little flat but his rebuke of pre and post mil arguments are strong. I appreciate the authors last third of the book where he goes through cosmic eschatology and what to expect Biblically in the restoration of all things. Worth the read.

[Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Venema has provided here a “one-stop shop” for a Reformed doctrine of last things. As always, the author is charitable with his critiques and his writing is clear. I would readily hand this book to any knowledgeable Christian — the book may intimidate new Christians or “beginners”, clocking in at 488 pages — who is interested in a broad survey of eschatology.

[Caleb Plattner · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent summary of amillenialist eschatology. Venema writes very even-handedly, noticeably going out of his way to explain in detail contrasting systems of thought. Competing views are well-represented and he does not resort to straw man arguments. Highly recommend for anyone interested in eschatology.

[Nick Sommers · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the best overviews of biblical eschatology (end times).

[Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good overview of the different positions on eschatology. Venema is amillenial, but he still give a fair analysis of other views.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent treatment of all things related to eschatology with a preference of amillennialism.

[Noah Gwinn · Rating 5 out of 5]

So helpful. Wonderful treatment of Reformed eschatology as well as well-written, comprehensive responses to views in opposition. Full of grace and hope.

[Benjamin Glaser · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I am a Post-Mill this book is an excellent introduction to the many issues surrounding eschatology. What I like most about the book is that the author is fair to the other positions and presents them in a way that the person holding to the position would recognize it. Most eschatology books, especially ones by Amill's, have a tendency to treat Postmillennialism as something only crazy people believe.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a book which thoroughly explores Christian Escatology, looking at all points of view. Venema makes a strong case for Amillenianism in this book. The strength of the book however is found in the way that Venema explores every point of view from a thoroughly Biblical point of view.

[Cbarrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the more balanced books on end times. A very good presentation and defense of optimistic amillenialism.

[Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

As thorough as Hoekema, but much more approachable.