A Case for Historic Premillennialism: An Alternative to “Left Behind” Eschatology

Written by Craig L. Blomberg and Sung Wook Chung, eds. Reviewed By A. J. Gibson

A Case for Historic Premillennialism (hereafter CHP) is a collection of essays edited by Craig L. Blomberg and Sung Wook Chung. Most of the essays were first presented as papers in a 2007 conference on historic premillennialism at Denver Seminary. CHP’s arrival is timely since historic premillennialism has enjoyed little systematic defense and development since the work of George Eldon Ladd. The essays in CHP set out to fill this lacuna by presenting a defense of historic premillennialism and a critique of its rival, dispensationalism.

Timothy P. Webber begins the book with a fascinating survey of the history of premillennialism in which he chronicles the revival of premillennialism in the post-reformation era and the rise of dispensationalism in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Webber’s primary goal it to explain why “Left Behind” eschatology ultimately eclipsed nondispensational premillennialism in terms of size and influence in the twentieth century. His answer is that from the beginning, dispensationalism has always been a popular movement, marketed to “the populace … at a populist level” in a way that non-dispensational premillennialism never has (p. xvii).

Richard H. Hess follows with an essay examining what the OT “has to say about the future and especially about the events that people refer to as the great tribulation and the millennium” (p. 25). Hess argues that in the major OT prophets a pattern emerges that leads one to conclude that although “God preserves his faithful people through suffering and trials, there is no evidence that they are preserved out of such experiences” (p. 28), including the final great tribulation. The second part of Hess’s essay advocates a literal view of the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in keeping with a literal, straightforward reading of Ezek 40–48. Hess concludes that the OT Jewish expectation concerning the future should lead us to expect an earthly millennial kingdom in which God’s promises to the Jewish people find fulfillment.

Hélène Dallaire broadly surveys “the themes of millennialism, the afterlife, and resurrection in the Jewish literature of the biblical, intertestamental and rabbinic periods” (p. 38). She illustrates the broad variety of views on these themes within this vast body of literature and demonstrates that premillennialism is, by no means, incompatible with Jewish eschatological expectations.

Craig L. Blomberg’s article sets out to defend posttribulationalism in the NT. He deals with issues such as imminence, the nature of the tribulation, and the NT expectation that Christians would experience the great tribulation. His exegesis of pertinent texts addresses the major issues surrounding the debate, showing that “without exception every relevant Scripture supports posttribulationism over pretribulationism” (p. 83).

Don J. Payne explores the “inner logic” (p. 90) and theological method that drives premillennialism. His general thesis is that although “both dispensational and nondispensational versions of premillennialism claim a similar hermeneutic” (p. 95) that stresses “a straightforward and objective reading of Scripture” (p. 93), the fact is that there are other factors that account for the variations within premillennialism. Payne’s argument is that a literal hermeneutic and a straightforward reading of the text raises certain tensions that require “both-and” exegetical conclusions that dispensationalists find difficult to deal with, betraying a greater dependence upon tradition, reason, and experience than they are generally willing to admit. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, are much more willing to accept and live with these tensions, and therefore more consistently follow their own premillennial hermeneutical commitments.

Donald Fairbairn addresses questions concerning the millennial views of the early church. He argues that although in the third and fourth centuries there was a shift away from chiliasm, the consensus of the post-apostolic church was premillennialism. Furthermore, he shows that the patristic writers, with their view that the church is the fulfillment of OT hopes, align more closely with modern nondispensational premillennialism than with dispensationalism.

Sung Wook Chung proposes an approach to premillennialism from a Reformed covenantal perspective that emphasizes Gen 1:26–28 as a “kingdom mandate” that unconditionally “gives humankind dominion over the whole creation” (p. 137). Chung argues that by giving priority to this unconditional kingdom mandate in Gen 1:26–27, rather than overemphasizing the importance of Gen 2:15–17 and “the soteriological dimension of the covenant of grace throughout the Bible” (p. 134), one is led to expect the establishment of a literal millennial kingdom in keeping with the plain teaching of Rev 20:1–6.

Finally, Oscar A. Campos chronicles the impact that premillennialism has had on missions and church growth in Latin American evangelicalism. Campos’s essay explains how premillennialism, and especially the dispensational variety, has been largely responsible for the growth of the faith missions movement in Latin America in the twentieth century, and how modern progressive dispensationalism has opened the door to a more “holistic gospel.”

Although CHP addresses many important issues relating to nondispensational premillennialism and does an adequate job of refuting its rival, overall the work fails to make a clear, comprehensive case for historic premillennialism. As one might expect (given its origin), the feel of the book is more that of a series of papers presented at a conference on historic premillennialism, than of a monograph intended to present a cohesive case for that system (as its title suggests). While several of the articles are excellent and make a strong positive contribution to the overall case, others, although good in their own right, contribute very little to the actual case for nondispensational premillennialism. The result is a work that offers many good arguments in favor of historic premillennialism and provides a helpful critique of “Left Behind” eschatology, but that never really defines either in a way that makes their fundamental differences clear (outside of their differing views of the timing of the rapture) or that advances a cohesive, systematic case for its preferred premillennial scheme. Perhaps the best way to summarize my impression of CHP is that I found its essays helpful and informative, but overall the book failed to deliver what its title had led me to expect.


A. J. Gibson

To Every Tribe Ministries

Los Fresnos, Texas, USA

Other Articles in this Issue

We begin with a question of translation. Many translations place a period after the word “conviction” in 1 Thess 1:5: “in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction...

July 10, 2009 was the 500th birthday of the acclaimed French Reformer John Calvin...

The name of Martin Luther is perpetually linked to the doctrine of justification by faith alone...

Of the many questions currently surrounding the discussion about justification, the relationship between justification and spiritual fruit merits attention...

Every year a few students ask me my thoughts about whether they should pursue doctoral studies and I respond with what has come to be known as ‘The Speech...