[.ca] The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack (ISBN 0736909532)

Always ready to make a defense:
Once again, LaHaye avoids the discussion and leaves his defense to Ice. In spite of the biblical admonition to always be ready to make a defense, LaHaye is always ready to send Ice in his stead. Numerous requests have been sent to LaHaye to meet publicly and debate this issue. He doesn't even do his correspondents the courtesy of acknowledging their requests, much less meet them publicly. According to John Bray, author of "Matthew 24 Fulfilled," Dallas Theological Seminary was the only seminary in the world teaching LaHaye's view in 1924. Today it is held up as an idol that everyone must worship or risk the label of heretic. Biblically, a heretic is one who is sectarian and divisive. The preterists I know seek to tear down the walls that divide Christians and unite them in the truth of God's word. Ironically, it is LaHaye and others who would divide Christians over their eschatological view that meet the biblical definition of heretics! It's too bad there is not an option of zero stars. The only value of this book is that it documents how desperate the doomsday crowd is to keep the gravy train running. If you must by this book, buy it used so as not to increase sales!

Outstanding Book! What a surprise!:
I am not a fan of Tim LaHaye, but this is an exceptional book that credibly presents furturism and does great damage to the preterist view. After being happy to learn that LaHayes duties of this book were limited to writing the introduction and editing the works, I was even happier to see what gem of a book this is. Despite your own view, buy and read this book...it is truly a well presented, thought out and researched work. In reading the naysayers' response here it is probably the case that they are "full preterists", as the book does a bang up job of addressing the partial preterist view, and discussing why full preterism is heretical. \oIt should be noted that partial preterists such Dr. Ken Gentry, also believe that full preterism is heretical and it is for this reason this book focuses the bulk of discussion towards partial preterism, as most of the eschatological world (again including partial preterists) believe that full preterism is false.\c This book meets preterism on its own ground and shatters the already brittle architecture of the view. The Olivette Discourse, when Revelation was Written, the time texts that preterism proclaims as evidence, Nero, the Church Fathers, historical evidence, Josephus, the list goes on...and yet the book addressses each point from a clear and concise biblical persepective that will simply leave you wondering why such eschatology is taught. As for all the "errors" claimed by the naysayers, I did see two typos but it did absolutely nothing to detract from the point being conveyed, nor do they inhibit the reader from understanding it. Great book, great value, get and read it.

Not bad, could use an index:
I was a little disappointed by this book. I really did think there would be more in it by LaHaye. Ice's prose is just a tad too astringent from my taste, probably because he tends to serve up a healthy slice of opinions on preterism, usually one to two pages worth, before getting to the meat of his arguments. The first third was not easy going for me, perhaps because I was looking for a higher substance to verbage ratio. The back two-thirds of the book, however, I found to be full of good writing, decent presentation of futurist arguments and little gems of knowledge that I did not know existed. I thought both the discussion of early church fathers' views of the second coming and the timing of writing Revelations, and the use of 1st century AD Greek in prophetic writing were quite interesting and worthwhile. When I wanted to trace several themes I saw developing through various chapters, however, that quest was severely hindered by the lack of an index. I also felt that some of the authors were talking down to the readers in places. But if you want a book that will explain substantive objections to preterist interpretations from a post-rapture tribulation futurist point of view, this book does the job. Normally I think I'd give this book four stars, but I really feel a bit put out over the lack of a proper index. Perhaps the authors could include one if they ever put out a revised or second edition. I believe a good index would really improve the utility of this book.

Great book, and a definite read!:
LaHaye and Ice certainly have presented a credible defense of the futurist view and finally address illogical preconceptions of preterism, and the dubious tactics taken by Gentry in presenting this viewpoint. It is particularly encouraging to see LaHaye finally discuss futurism on scholarly grounds, rather than the fictional which has damaged the views' credibility. Regardless of your personal view, this book is a must have and will challenge your misconceptions about futurism, and get you thinking about how to defend or affirm your own views. Gentry's arugments in 'Before Jerusalem Fell" and "The Beast of Revelation" are stripped and exposed as "smoke and mirror" hermeneutics that grasps at the circumstanstial while dismissing hard evidences, history, and simple logic. Again, this book is a must have for the serious eschatologist!

A Calm, Systematic Refutation of Preterism:
I have never begun a book review in this way before, but I feel constrained to do so now. The pro-preterist reviews you read below are written by people either so fanatically devoted to preterism that they are incapable of assessing a book against it, or the only other possibility is that they are just out-and-out lying to you. The latter is highly possible, since one large branch of preterism has taken on a directly-cultic form (in its denial that there is a future visible second coming, a future general resurrection of the saints, or a future new heaven and earth). Cultists lie to people about what they believe. The partial-preterists are flailing around trying to refute the heretical consistent-preterists, but will never be able to do so since the cultic form is just preterism following its controlling precepts through to a completely consistent conclusion. This textbook -- which is really what it is -- is a compilation of authors in which each deals with a specific area of preterism. Many of the chapters are written by Dr. Thomas Ice, but there are other notable contributors (including Dr. John MacArthur). There is a great deal of highly-detailed material dealing with historical accounts of antiquity, archeological facts, as well as theological exegesis. One of the features that stands out most starkly in this book is the muck-raking job it does in exposing how guilty of special pleading is Kenneth Gentry (a prominent preterist). In several different chapters Dr. Gentry is demonstrated to have suppressed and omitted critical material, used partial-quotations (from material that actually contradicts preterism), flip-flops back and forth in his interpretive methods depending on what "works" to promote preterism, and so on. Ken Gentry is the Dave Hunt of preterism. If you are interested in Biblical futurology and want to read a non-ranting refutation of preterism, this is a very good book to consider buying. You should realize that all the wild raving against Tim LaHaye below is just rhetoric. LaHaye doesn't even contribute a chapter to this project. He only contributes an introduction, and let the publisher put his name on the cover .This is most assuredly nothing more than a marketing device, to attract people who wouldn't otherwise read a theology book. This is a calm, non-attacking book that does not smear, libel, or name-call against preterists. It also does not promote dispensationalism, so even traditional amillennialists could read it with some profit (even though it's authors are pre-millennial). There is no kooky "ripped from the headlines" , Jack Van Impe prophecy-junk here. In reality, you had better be someone who enjoys reading dry theological journals, to get into what this book presents. Perhaps in the end you will conclude that you do not agree with it, but I hope you recognize that it is a carefully-written, intelligent text. Calling it names, ridiculing Dallas Seminary, and bloviating about the supposed imminent demise of pre-millennialism are all deceitful tactics driven by wild partisanship.