Victory in Jesus: The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism

by Greg L. Bahnsen

"Victory in Jesus: The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism" offers a sober and faithful examination of Scripture while clearly demonstrating that Christians have every reason to expect the victory of Jesus and the triumph of the gospel as the Great Commission is fulfilled on earth.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Christianity, Nonfiction

201 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1999

About the author

Greg L. Bahnsen was an influential Calvinist Christian philosopher, apologist, and debater. He was an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and a full time Scholar in Residence for the Southern California Center for Christian Studies.

Reviews

[Leigha Fairchild · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great read. Not a completely thorough exposition on the topic, but a clear walk through scripture to explain the postmillenial position. I especially enjoyed the final chapter regarding the “reign of satan” and discussion of Jesus victory over all, and God’s sovereignty of all.

[Gabe Mira · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this audiobook. If you want to listen to it you can find it here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... or on cmfnow.com. It was 7 hours and 40 mins long.

Even if you don’t agree with the post millennial view of eschatology I think you find the Scriptural arguments compelling, you’ll be encouraged by the reminder of the Kingdom of God, the success of evangelism, and a solid doctrine on Satan and demonology (this last one is the last chapter of you want to skip to it).

God bless.

Soli Deo Gloria

[Dylan Stinson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great intro to postmillennialism.

[Austin Cox · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thoroughly biblical

[Steve Irby · Rating 3 out of 5]

I just finished "Victory in Jesus," by Greg Bahnsen.

I for years said that I hate eschatology. Then I learned a bit about the renewed earth and embraced it generally while staying away from many the specifics like the millennial reign and "this candle represents this thing/those people." In light of a renewed earth this kind of thing seems so minor (yes, I am trying to get people to read about the renewed earth; read about it and find out just how Platonism/Neoplatonism/Gnosticism and the concept of the disembodied soul has skewed the scriptural doctrine of last things; start with N.T. Wright's "Surprised by Hope").

While I know that I am going to, in places, take issue with Bahnsen because we come from theological systems that are opposed when it comes to the nature of reality (I am an open theist and he was a theological determinist). That being said I dont think this means that he has nothing to teach. Most importantly, and something Christianity needs to embrace more and more, this foundational difference does not mean he or others of like mind are morons; we intellectually disagree while looking to the same Jesus who is central to us all.

I like that he states that he is not pessimistic, he looks forward to a future that is good and getting better, rather than a "late great planet earth" (Lindsey).

His writing style is inviting. He spends a bit of space telling how the Revelation is highly symbolic and figurative. I only wonder if he will apply the figurative part to the one thousand year reign. Just a random thought. EDIT: yes, he does.

This is an apt hermeneutic that Bahnsen suggest: when the Revelation says "these things will soon happen," does that mean in some two thousand years? I would agree with his intent: there cant be a meaning here which the original writer/readers didnt get. John wouldnt have said and meant "soon" but what was really meant was for Christian's to look for the Beast etc in two thousand years with a MAGA hat (though I'm starting to rethink...never mind). But I would kindly ask Bahnsen (I know he has passed away so I intend any of this mindset) to extend this hermeneutic to 1 Cor 13:10, in spite of what Warfield said. Embrace, dont squelch the Spirit (see Pinnock who was of the B.B. Warfield mindset until his detached retina was healed at a tent revival).

Ch1 is a fly-by interpretation of the book of revelation. It must be remembered that his stance appears to be that the Revelation was written before 70 ad and the destruction of the temple. I am not entrenched in one view (70 ad vs 98 ad) over the other, though I do respect that the early/late date of the writing impacts what John was writing about. And that is the main reason I borrowed the book to get a close view of the specifics. EDIT: yes, pre 70 ad was Bahnsen's position.

I find it interesting that he timed the destruction of the temple by Jews who crucified Jesus -- non messianic Jews -- to 70 ad and the destruction of Rome to "250 years later" which would mean that he believes Rome under Constantine was a good thing. Respectfully, I totally disagree. This raises church/state questions I cant get past.

He gives a good and fair summary of the other positions: premill, premill dispensationalist, amill. Usually one would try to make the other views in play look as bad as possible, I think he was fair in his review, personally I would have found it difficult to not negatively review dispensational premill because of how it is so entrenched with U.S./Isreal relations.

It seems he believes that the one thousand year reign is figurative for "quite a long time." I agree.

One attractive part about postmill for me is that it holds that things are generally getting better. While it holds that this has more to do with the spread of the Gospel, I dont discount this progressive view from all of life: ups and downs along a upward trajectory. He speaks about "things getting better" in this next chapter (3).

Interestingly he says that the Kingdom will be the Kingdom not via the state or Revolution but by the Gospel. I'm interested to see how well that sticks as the book plays out. But honestly with his and my grand differences highlighted already, he hasn't said much that I disagree with on the face of it.

I did find this interesting: Bahnsen seems to lay a lot of import on the completion of the Great Commission. I wonder what he would say about Michael Heiser's interpretation of the great commission (it's been done; the 70 nations have been evangelized before the close of the Canon in a full reversal of Babal).

Ch 4 is a defence of postmill in light of Reformation theology. This may get interesting since for the vast majority of Reformation Theology I am "N/A." This may be more of the nuts and bolts i have been looking for; maybe it's a systematic treatment of postmill in light of Reformation Theology.

He starts out with a list of who is to blame: post enlightenment liberalism, evolution, dispensational premill via Darby. To be blunt, I dont disagree with the list. But I am not scared by the suggestion of God using evolution because causation begs someone (or SomeOne) to create the first single cell which Darwin cant answer for (that is my defensive position apologetically; really I havent thought too hard about it and dont loose sleep over it). Science cant answer for. Even if one suggest the first single cell was in/on the singularity, fine: what was the cause for the formation of the singularity and what made it go bang? Liberalism and Darby?--they did their damage.

He lists the common list of Reformed scholars who affirmed a postmill position. No surprise but no offence either: I can look at Auschwitz and Hiroshima and say, yes, in spite of some men's horrific sins humanity is getting better. And not just from a salvific perspective but overall things are better now than they were before the industrial revolution, or even before the most modern of medicines, procedures and devices. Today is better than yesterday and tomorrow will be better yet. Other than that this chapter is Calvin-heavy. I guess there internal debate over where he stood. Not my cup of tea, but these conversations will happen.

Dude just spent 55 pages, over 1/3 of the book showing its Reformed roots. I just wish he would have began with the patristics rather than just the imperial reformers.

The final chapter is on Satan. In general I agree with him until he says that we shouldnt think that Satan is a real rival force in the universe and demons doing Gods bidding. I disagree but because of the above comments where I list our disagreements I think it not worth spelling out why I take issue with this statement.

I speaking to Satan and the atonement it was hard for him not to go all Christus Victor with it so he made sure to throw "substitution" in there (I do the same) but then he had to get limited atonement. it was still a good chapter.

I'm going to be a bit tough on Bahnsen out the gate because of his theological determinism, that aside this was really a good intro to Postmill.

[Ryan Watkins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Easy to read introduction to the postmillennial eschatological view. Bahnsen explains the partial preterist interpretation of the book of Revelation. He compares postmillennialism to the other eschatological views, premillennialism and amillennialism, showing where they are in agreement and disagreement. In the chapter The Prima Facia Acceptability of Postmillennialism Bahnsen explains how there has been a decline in adherence to postmillennialism due to the rise of theological liberalism, dispensationalism, and evolutionary progressivism. Also in this chapter Bahnsen refutes common misconceptions about this view as well as quotes extensively from well know theologians, hymn writers, and commentators, mostly from the reformed tradition, who have had an optimistic eschatology. The last chapter deals with Satan and his binding.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

A useful overview of Partial-Preterist Postmillenial eschatology. Some weaknesses in the book cannot be directed at Bahnsen since this book was edited after he passed away; the book is composed of some lectures He gave on eschatology and some journal articles, so it may have been different and more thorough on some portions if Bahnsen had written the book himself. I still recommend it as a useful introduction to Postmillenialism, even through lean more towards an Amillenial position and found Bahnsen's critique of Amillenialism lacking, as well as some of his support for partial-preterist postmillenialism.

Some of the high points that were useful was Bahnsen's summary of the 10 tenets of Postmillenial eschatology (pg. 40-44), His useful section comparing some of the basic commonalities and differences between premillenialism, amillenialism, and postmillenialism (pg. 66-68). He focuses on the 2 major disagreements fundamental to one's eschatological position: 1. chronology of the millenium, 2. the nature of the millenial kingdom. Bahnsen did an excellent job refuting strawman arguments i.e. Postmillenialism is based on enlightenment or secular eschatology, which is the common guilt by association argument that can be used against anybody's eschatology since the cults such as JWs and Islam resemble a premillenial eschatology and people will argue against amillenialism by arguing that it is the view of the Roman Catholic Church. He makes the important distinction often missed in describing Postmillenials' view of the kingdom of God that they admit it is gradual such as the parable of the mustard seed, so merely citing WWI & II doesn't refute the plausibility of Postmillenialism, a refutation requires dealing with both hermeneutical presuppositions and exegesis.

Bahnsen's last chapter on the Person, work, and present state of Jesus was a useful overview describing Satan's role, the conflict between the Kingdom of God and Kingdom of Satan. Bahnsen did a good job of explaining how Satan has been weakened and bound by virtue of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, and he spends most of the time in the chapter explaining what word and age mean in terms of the Bible's description of Satan as God of this world and the relationship of this age and the age to come (Bahnsen views the present and future age as overlapping, which is not the 2 age model of amillenialism).

I have 3 major criticisms of Bahnsen's book. In his response to Amillenialism he argues that Postmillenialism is the most balanced view as a middle road between premillenialism and amillenialism in hermeneutics,

"One reason biblical postmillenialism is worthy of consideration is that it does justice to two factors: one of which the premillenialists use against amillenialists and the other the amillenialists against premilenialists. Postmillenialism is able to incorporate the strengths of both the other two positions. The strength of amillenialism is its understanding of the timing of God's kingdom-that the millenium began at the first advent of Jesus Christ and at the end of the Church age there will be a general resurrection and a general judgment-no millennial kingdom after Jesus returns. That is its strength, and it has always urged that against premillenialism. One the other hand, the premillenialist turn around and urge against the amillenialists the visible and earthly successes for God's kingdom, which are clearly promised in the Bible. Amillenialists are always at a disadvantage here, because they end up having to do such gymnastics to explain how all these really powerful promises of kingdom success are being fulfilled today in a kind of invisible way, or in heaven. As postmillenialists, we can take the strengths of both positions. We can understand the visible earthly success of the kingdom and apply it to this present age". (Pg. 40)

"A further criticism which cannot be applied uniquely to postmillenialism is that it interprets biblical prophecy both figuratively and literally... All three schools [premil,amil, & postmil] end up finding both kinds of literature in the prophetic passages, and it is dishonest to give an opposite impression. If anything, the fact that postmillenialism is seen as too literal by amillenialists and too figuratively by premillenialists perhaps suggests (certainly does not prove) that it alone has maintained a proper balance". (pg. 62-63)

I don't want to respond with a strawman argument here since Bahnsen is not saying that Postmillenialism hinges on this aspect, but argues that it is one element that gives support to it. The problem with Bahnsen's criticism is that the Postmillenial hermeneutic ends up being in an untenable position with the grammatical-historical hermeneutic being the grid for Premillenialists, and the redemptive historical hermeneutic for Amillenialists, both of these hermeneutics are distinct and incompatible, so the middle road approach is inconsistent for Postmillenialism. Also it is a strawman to say that Amillenialsits have to do gymnastics to get around physical promises by over spiritualizing them since that criticism fails to take into account how Amillenialism is supported by Biblical Theology, i.e. Vos' Biblical Theology as well as recent works by G.K. Beale. It is not "allegorical or spiritual" interpretation of the temple representing both Christ and the church, when you take the time to trace the theme throughout Scripture and see its development (as Geerhardus Vos does in his Biblical Theology). Along the same lines Bahnsen's preterist interpretation of Revelation and Prophecy emphasizes more of the grammatical historical hermeneutic as its foundation rather than biblical theology, which doesn't seem to support the preterist position since the grammatical-historical hermeneutic is most consistent with Premillenialism (specifically Dispensational Premillenialism). For example the Temple in Revelation is the literal temple destroyed in 70AD, Christ, and the Church according to Postmillenialists, but both amillenialsm and premillenialism are more consistent with their own hermeneutic to interpret it as referring to Christ and the Church (Amil) or a literal temple (Premil).

My second primary criticism is that when Bahnsen discusses the reformed heritage of Postmillenialism he makes some logical fallacies to argue that Calvin and other were Postmillenialists. He admits that John Gill and Charles Spurgeon as Historical Premillenialists both held to an optimistic view of the success of the Church,

"For example, the professed premillenialists John Gill and Charles Spurgeon have (quite inconsistently and uncharacteristically) held to important beleifs of postmillenialism-particularly the great success of the church on earth prior to the parousia". (pg. 67)

However, Bahnsen uses this criteria to label John Calvin as a Postmillenialists because he affirmed the Church would be vicorious. I would have expected Bahnsen to be more thorough here and show how Calvin's theology meets all 10 of his points listed for Postmillenialism, but he doesn't, he bases it on a single point that even some that are not postmillenialists agree with i.e. Gill & Spurgeon as well as some forms of Amillenialism such as John Murray's interpretation of Romans 11 which is similar to a Postmillenialism interpretation of the passage.

Bahnsen first only cites that Calvin accepted the major tenet of Postmillenialism,
"It must be clear by this point that Calvin endorsed the central tenent of Postmillenialis, the optimistic confidence that the gospel of Christ shall convert the vast majority of the world some time prior to the return of the Lord in judgment and glory". (pg. 80)

Then Bahnsen jumps to the conclusion based on that one point by prooftexting portions of Calvin's Institutes and commentaries that Calvin must be postmillenial,

"Thus we conclude that Reformed theology was launched with a postmillenial perspective, a heart-felt confidence in the promise of Scripture to the effect that Christ would subdue the whole world with the gospel. The dogmatics, commentaries, and prayers of John Calvin form a beautiful and orchestrated presentation of an eschatological hope which would become a doctrinal distinctive and motivating power throughout the history of Reformed Christianity". (pg. 82)

By the same standard of the criteria applied to Calvin, then Spurgeon & Gill were both postmillenialists.

My last criticism is not something that is Bahnsen's fault, but the way the book was put together since the first chapter dealing with a Postmillenial interpretation of Revelation was only 17 pages, so there wasn't as much of a presentation and defense of preterism as I was expecting.

[Rob Mongeau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though the editors have done a great job at putting together the teaching of Dr. Bahnsen on the subject of eschatology, it is lacking uniformity, and flow of thought. That being said i think, that whatever one’s position on the subject, one would benefit from reading Victory in Jesus. There’s a few thing the author set up, or at least put up for consideration, like the name of the book; Revelation; unmasking; putting forth; showing. This is not a book of confusion, mystery and hiding, but of revelation and putting forth before us. No one truly interprets literally. One claim a literal millennium, but then turn arounds and talk of “this generation” as only a period of time, or a people a that kind… the other says no literal millennium, and turn around and claim all the passages about the church victory as being literal, therefore we should expect a growth of the church leading to a golden age. The important bracketing of the all book between “things which must soon take place” Rev1;1; 22:6. I still have questions and problems with some texts, but i think that Dr. Bahnsen gives solid and convincing arguments for the posmil position strongly anchored in the Bible. We may disagree with his comprehension of the texts, but we can’t say it comes from his own imagination or liking. He aptly show the points of agreement, isolating the distinctive of each positions, demonstrating that they are not as great as we may thing, particularly between amil and postmil. My hope is that some will picked up on that and start discussing on those disctinctives,in order to come to the truth, NOT TO BE RIGHT, to be able to say soli deo gloria, not i told you so.

[Ryan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book itself is fine for what it is: a “Sunday School” level introduction to postmillenialism. Here the reader will find the normal postmillenialist talking points: 1) postmillennialism is more optimistic than other systems; 2) postmillennialism, at minimum, is a historic Reformed position and, therefore, is at least plausible.

Unfortunately, as a “Sunday School” level introduction, one cannot expect to find a thoroughgoing exegetical defense of postmillennialism. This is what was most lacking from the book. Apart from a very curt, and not all that convincing, survey of Revelation’s structure, there was not much exegesis whatsoever.

I am not opposed to postmillennialism, per se; I am not entirely convinced of another position at the time of writing this review; and Bahnsen is one of my favorite speakers to listen to, as he is patently brilliant. All that said, I didn’t find this book to be particularly convincing.

[C.S. Wachter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Though Postmillennial eschatology has been overtaken in recent years by the Premillennial Dispensationalism reflected in the theology of the Left Behind series, I have found Postmillennialism to be more Biblical and sensible. That is my opinion and perspective. Having said that, Bahnsen’s Victory in Jesus does a good job of explaining the different perspectives of Post-, Pre-, and Amillennialism. His points are clear and concise. I especially appreciated the final chapter of the book, The Person, Work, and Present Status of Satan. The subtitle says it all. The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism.

If you are interested in studying this topic from a biblical perspective, consider including Victory in Jesus on your reading list.

[Christian Salazar · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love Bahnsen’s lectures and writings. The first 3 chapters are a great introduction to Postmillennialism- The Eschatology of Victory. Chapter 4 gives great overview of the recent history of Postmillennial thinking from the Reformation while chapter 5 goes into the scriptural teaching of Satan.

My hope is that more of Bahnsen’s lectures get transcribed and his writings published.

I only wish his lecture series on Revelation were transcribed and published into a book; perhaps this a project someone can work on in the future.

[Saolomon Mouacheupao · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

There was quite a bit of simply stating “so and so was obviously postmill…” without much quotation or source citing. The most helpful example that was listed was of Calvin who given the most source material to argue of his “Postmillenial” expectations.

His dealings on the differences between the views were a helpful introduction to eschatological conversations. I appreciated how he dealt with the issues of the other views and argued strongly for the postmillienial perspective.

His dealings with Satan at the end were helpful.

[Tim Zornes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very thorough and academic introduction to Postmillennialism. Centralizes the victory over the world as the cross of Christ as opposed to a future or ethereal event. The chapter on the present status of Satan was particularly compelling. Because of the academic style, it can be a tedious read. Long chapters do not lend to a quick or simple reading and require tremendous effort to keep up with a rather rapid pace.

[Evan Cruse · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great introduction for anyone new to postmillennilism. The book may not be the most exciting for those who are more familiar with postmil eschatology, however, Bahnsen does two things exceptionally well. 1) He lays out a coherent case that postmil was accepted and supported by many giants of the faith, and 2) His words brilliantly describe the active (or better yet, dying) work of Satan and the adversary's place in the Kingdom of God. Soli Deo Gloria!

[Derek · Rating 3 out of 5]

After a few chapters Mr. Bahnsen has already established what Pre/Post & A Mil's believe, the emphasis on his Postmil thinking and then begins to lose my interest. It's possible that I will come back and finish this book; I don't like DNF's. I'll give it the 3 stars for it's ease of understanding and info, but there are more books by him and other Recons/Theonomists that I'd rather check out.

[Steve Gentry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Worth reading, especially for the first three chapters. It gives a very good introduction to understanding Postmillennilalism. If you want to understand the topic better. This is a good place to start.

[Christopher Brehm · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent

[Rory Fry]

One of the best Postmill titles

[Joshua Jenkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

So good.

[Rick Mitchell · Rating 5 out of 5]

As in anything else I have read by him, Greg Bahnsen is clear, scriptural, logical, and irenic. He simply lays out the biblical case in most careful manner. Great read. Great reference resource.

[Chaz Farmer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great. Didn’t read every word, but every word I read was fantastic.

[Jon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good. More people need to understand the truth of postmillenialism. At the same time, Bahsen is a little long-winded, at times belaboring the point. Still an excellent read though.

[Mark & Janette Boesch · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well Done

A clear, concise, and thorough biblical defense of postmillennialism. The section on Satan is a theology of demonology that is worth reading by itself.

[Jonathan Mitchell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book. It makes solid biblical post millennial arguments. I listened to the audiobook, and the voice was rather mundane.

[Josh Pannell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Just finished my first book of the year, Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus."

While I do not consider myself post-mil, my eschatology has been shifting over the past 5 years to be more optimistic regarding the spread of the gospel and the success of the kingdom on earth.

Bahnsen does an excellent job explaining the post-mil position and responding to common strawman attacks against the view both biblically and historically. It is orthodox, theologically and exegetically rigorous, internally sound, and historically tested.

If you are unfamiliar with the view, or have only heard the position described by dispensationalists, I would highly recommend reading this book.

He does get a little winded at times and tends to repeat himself, so just prepare yourself.

I give "Victory in Jesus" 4/5 stars.

[Brandon Bellinghausen · Rating 5 out of 5]

An absolute pleasure to read.

The first three chapters of this book are transcribed lectures that Dr. Bahnsen delivered (presumably to audiences that contained laymen) and the last two are reprinted publications of some of his work for scholarly journals.

Bahnsen was such a powerful communicator, and this is evident even from simple differences between the delivery and emphases of his oral communication versus that of his published work. He was certainly a scholar who wrote (or spoke) with his audience at the forefront of his mind.

In terms of content, the book is an excellent introduction to some of the central themes and tenets of biblical postmillennialism. While not comprehensive in scope or systematic in structure (remember, Bahnsen did not publish or edit this work), the material contained within these pages is perfect for anyone who has no prior exposure to the topic at hand.

The fourth chapter is particularly helpful in explaining the reasons for the decline of biblical postmillennialism in the West. In addition to burning the common "straw men" that are commonly erected by proponents of other eschatological views, Bahnsen explains that this decline is not a symptom of the church moving closer to an integrated biblical worldview, but rather of her sliding out of one.

Christ shall have dominion over the kingdoms of this earth, and this will happen within human history. However, this is not because of the inherent or increasing goodness of man, but rather because of the grace and promises of God which are found in and through Christ alone.

[Adam T. Calvert · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great primer on the eschatology of postmillennialism. Dr. Bahnsesn is as sharp and articulate as always. Of course, like several of his books this was put together after his untimely death from lectures and articles of his. So the book as a whole didn't have the flow of someone setting out to write a primer on postmillennialism. It certainly lacked in some areas, like addressing alternative interpretations to specific passages that amillennialism and premillennialism have to offer. But again, that wasn't the intent of any of the individual chapters (articles/lectures).

As far as the intent of the individual chapters do go, Dr. Bahnsen was a terrific teacher as he's always been. Chapter 1 set out in a very broad sense a postmillennial view of the book of Revelation. Chapter 2 discussed the clear differences between the opposing millennial views. Chapter 3 gave a hopeful, Biblical expectation of the triumph of the gospel (the postmillennial view). Chapter 4 presented a very compelling history of the postmillennial doctrine, not in the sense to show that longevity means it must be true but to show that it's not - as some critics would say - a newer belief that's only been around the last couple centuries. And Chapter 5 was a terrific systematic theology on the subject of Satan - probably the best I've ever read.

[Josh Pannell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good!

Just finished my first book of the year, Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus."

While I do not consider myself post-mil, my eschatology has been shifting over the past 5 years to be more optimistic regarding the spread of the gospel and the success of the kingdom on earth.

Bahnsen does an excellent job explaining the post-mil position and responding to common strawman attacks against the view both biblically and historically. It is orthodox, theologically and exegetically rigorous, internally sound, and historically tested.

If you are unfamiliar with the view, or have only heard the position described by dispensationalists, I would highly recommend reading this book.

He does get a little winded at times and tends to repeat himself, so just prepare yourself.

I give "Victory in Jesus" 4/5 stars.

[Shane McGrath · Rating 4 out of 5]

Forgive me. I need some time to decompress and figure out my address, phone number, etc, ..Yes I'm quite out of sorts at the moment. The Post-Mil position is blowing my mind! Having been a committed dispensationalist for so long, I have to try and find my bearings. But I do know this-there is no way to understand Jesus' prophetic statements and John's writing in Revelation without putting many of the prophecies in the immediate generation of Jesus' listeners. The Roman siege of Jerusalem in 70AD is important. So important, that it must become the primary center of making sense of things. The fog is lifting for me but I still have a long way to go. This is an excellent book to explain and argue for the Post-Mil position.

[Devin Geiger · Rating 5 out of 5]

This provides a great layout of what the postmillennial position believes and how it differs from the premillennial and amillennial views of eschatology. There are a few things that I particularly appreciate about the book:
1. It shows postmillennialism is far more than naive optimism, including Scriptural claims for all of its arguments.
2. It is a historical view held throughout church history. A large section of the book highlights the impact of postmillennialism on the writings of puritans and other prominent Christians throughout history.
3. Holding true to it’s title, it shows a bright hope that is found in postmillennialism. God’s plan is not to let the world descend into chaos, but to save the world through the gospel of his son. (John 3:17)