# modern Partial Preterist Amillennialist authors/works



## monoergon

Can someone provide a list of Partial Preterist Amillennialist authors and their works?

I'm looking forward to studying contemporary authors, e.g. from the 1970s until today.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Hello Nathan -- before I answer that, would you please define how you understand "partial preterism"?


----------



## earl40

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Hello Nathan -- before I answer that, would you please define how you understand "partial preterism"?




I have often wondered if I could be considered a "partial preterist amillennialist" in that I believe Jesus prophesy "not one stone will be left upon another" was fullfilled in 70AD within that "generation" and I also believe the "comming" of Jesus physical descension back has not yet come. "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be".


----------



## KMK

'Partial preterists' are simply 'preterists' who wish to distinguish themselves from 'hyper-preterists' who have gone beyond orthodoxy by teaching that there is no future return of Christ.


----------



## JimmyH

brjesusfreak said:


> Can someone provide a list of Partial Preterist Amillennialist authors and their works?
> 
> I'm looking forward to studying contemporary authors, e.g. from the 1970s until today.



I think Dr Kenneth Gentry fits your description. This 4 part video series was very compelling to me, though I haven't come to a firm conclusion.

http://www.puritanboard.com/showthr...-Series-on-Partial-Preterism-By-Dr-Ken-Gentry


----------



## monoergon

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Hello Nathan -- before I answer that, would you please define how you understand "partial preterism"?



Hello Steve,
Although I'm just beginning to study eschatology, as far as I understand, a partial preterist believes Mathew 24 to have been fuffiled in the first century, and certain parts of Revelation during some time in the past. Also, I think partial preterists could be amillennial or postmillennial. 
I could be wrong about my description of partial preterism since I just begun researching.


----------



## GraceOverwhelmsMe

Dr. R.C. Sproul holds this view. You can read his book The Last Days According to Jesus

There is also a teaching series on this book that appears to be free right now: http://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/last_days_according_to_jesus/

Note that in these resources, he presents several views, but you can easily discern his bias toward preterism.


----------



## monoergon

GraceOverwhelmsMe said:


> Dr. R.C. Sproul holds this view. You can read his book The Last Days According to Jesus
> 
> There is also a teaching series on this book that appears to be free right now: http://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/last_days_according_to_jesus/
> 
> Note that in these resources, he presents several views, but you can easily discern his bias toward preterism.



Isn't Dr. Sproul postmillennialist?


----------



## GraceOverwhelmsMe

brjesusfreak said:


> GraceOverwhelmsMe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dr. R.C. Sproul holds this view. You can read his book The Last Days According to Jesus
> 
> There is also a teaching series on this book that appears to be free right now: http://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/last_days_according_to_jesus/
> 
> Note that in these resources, he presents several views, but you can easily discern his bias toward preterism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't Dr. Sproul postmillennialist?
Click to expand...


He seems to switch every now and then, but he seems pretty dead-set on Preterism. From what I gather, it sounds like he'd lean more toward amill than postmill, but he has been on the record talking like a premill guy as well.

Of all of the things he's sure about, his Eschatology is something that is extremely fluid: "That's because there are strengths and weaknesses in all three of them. I am only certain of one thing - it is not the dispensational premillennial position."

Who knows what his views are today. He doesn't really like to answer with a definitive answer on things he cannot be 100% sure of.


----------



## mossy

JimmyH said:


> brjesusfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can someone provide a list of Partial Preterist Amillennialist authors and their works?
> 
> I'm looking forward to studying contemporary authors, e.g. from the 1970s until today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think Dr Kenneth Gentry fits your description. This 4 part video series was very compelling to me, though I haven't come to a firm conclusion.
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/showthr...-Series-on-Partial-Preterism-By-Dr-Ken-Gentry
Click to expand...


Ken Gentry is post mill.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Hello Nathan,

Perhaps some folks could be partial preterists and think themselves amillennial, though it would be hard in my view, as to see most of Revelation pertaining to AD 70 and the years leading up to it would appear to preclude the understanding that the symbolic "millennium" of Rev 20 encompasses the NT age from the Lord's first advent to just before His second advent—the _Parousia_.

I've read RC's book, _The Last Days, etc_, and he is partial preterist and postmil, though a ways back he used to be amil.

Here are some amil books I'd recommend as excellent (Azurdia is MP3 sermons he preached on Revelation) :

G.K. Beale, _New International Greek Testament Commentary: Revelation_; _The IVP New Testament Commentary Series: 1-2 Thessalonians_; MP3 sermon series at Monergism; _Revelation: A Shorter Commentary _[the shorter commentary might be good for starters]
Dennis E. Johnson, _Triumph of the Lamb: A Commentary on Revelation_
Cornelis P. Venema, _The Promise of the Future_
William Hendriksen, _More Than Conquerors: An Interpretation of the Book of Revelation_; and _Three Lectures on the Book of Revelation_
Richard Bauckham, _The Theology of the Book of Revelation_
Kim Riddlebarger, _The Man of Sin: Uncovering the Truth About the Antichrist_; and, _A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times_
David J. Engelsma, _Christ’s Spiritual Kingdom: A Defense of _Reformed_ Amillennialism _(A shortened online version); and _The Messianic Kingdom and Civil Government_ (article)
Vern Poythress, _The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation_; online version
Stuart Olyott, _Dare to Stand Alone: Daniel Simply Explained_
Samuel E. Waldron, _The End Times Made Simple_
Arturo Azurdia, _An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (81 MP3 sermons)_
Dean Davis, _The High King of Heaven: Discovering the Master Keys to the Great End Time Debate_; some excerpts from it. [This is a really good book]


----------



## Peairtach

According to Riddlebarger:


> Thus as we can see, there is not any well defined line of demarcation between amillennialism and postmillennialism as they are contemporarily understood, through the end of the nineteenth century, and perhaps as late as the 1940’s.



http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/e...erican-postmillennialism-by-kim-riddlebarger/

Both amillennialism and postmiillennialism are postmillennial in orientation, because in both, Christ returns at the end of the millennium. 

On the other hand historic premillennialism and dispensational premillennialism are both premillennial in their orientation.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

You're right, Richard, although the _nature_ of the millennium is radically different in post and in amil—so that they are really opposing eschatological views. David Engelsma in my list above brings this out clearly.


----------



## monoergon

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Hello Nathan,
> 
> Perhaps some folks could be partial preterists and think themselves amillennial, though it would be hard in my view, as to see most of Revelation pertaining to AD 70 and the years leading up to it would appear to preclude the understanding that the symbolic "millennium" of Rev 20 encompasses the NT age from the Lord's first advent to just before His second advent—the _Parousia_.
> 
> I've read RC's book, _The Last Days, etc_, and he is partial preterist and postmil, though a ways back he used to be amil.
> 
> Here are some amil books I'd recommend as excellent (Azurdia is MP3 sermons he preached on Revelation) :
> 
> G.K. Beale, _New International Greek Testament Commentary: Revelation_; _The IVP New Testament Commentary Series: 1-2 Thessalonians_; MP3 sermon series at Monergism; _Revelation: A Shorter Commentary _[the shorter commentary might be good for starters]
> Dennis E. Johnson, _Triumph of the Lamb: A Commentary on Revelation_
> Cornelis P. Venema, _The Promise of the Future_
> William Hendriksen, _More Than Conquerors: An Interpretation of the Book of Revelation_; and _Three Lectures on the Book of Revelation_
> Richard Bauckham, _The Theology of the Book of Revelation_
> Kim Riddlebarger, _The Man of Sin: Uncovering the Truth About the Antichrist_; and, _A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times_
> David J. Engelsma, _Christ’s Spiritual Kingdom: A Defense of _Reformed_ Amillennialism _(A shortened online version); and _The Messianic Kingdom and Civil Government_ (article)
> Vern Poythress, _The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation_; online version
> Stuart Olyott, _Dare to Stand Alone: Daniel Simply Explained_
> Samuel E. Waldron, _The End Times Made Simple_
> Arturo Azurdia, _An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (81 MP3 sermons)_
> Dean Davis, _The High King of Heaven: Discovering the Master Keys to the Great End Time Debate_; some excerpts from it. [This is a really good book]



Thank you Steve; that's exactly what I was looking for.


----------



## TylerRay

brjesusfreak said:


> Jerusalem Blade said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello Nathan,
> 
> Perhaps some folks could be partial preterists and think themselves amillennial, though it would be hard in my view, as to see most of Revelation pertaining to AD 70 and the years leading up to it would appear to preclude the understanding that the symbolic "millennium" of Rev 20 encompasses the NT age from the Lord's first advent to just before His second advent—the _Parousia_.
> 
> I've read RC's book, _The Last Days, etc_, and he is partial preterist and postmil, though a ways back he used to be amil.
> 
> Here are some amil books I'd recommend as excellent (Azurdia is MP3 sermons he preached on Revelation) :
> 
> G.K. Beale, _New International Greek Testament Commentary: Revelation_; _The IVP New Testament Commentary Series: 1-2 Thessalonians_; MP3 sermon series at Monergism; _Revelation: A Shorter Commentary _[the shorter commentary might be good for starters]
> Dennis E. Johnson, _Triumph of the Lamb: A Commentary on Revelation_
> Cornelis P. Venema, _The Promise of the Future_
> William Hendriksen, _More Than Conquerors: An Interpretation of the Book of Revelation_; and _Three Lectures on the Book of Revelation_
> Richard Bauckham, _The Theology of the Book of Revelation_
> Kim Riddlebarger, _The Man of Sin: Uncovering the Truth About the Antichrist_; and, _A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times_
> David J. Engelsma, _Christ’s Spiritual Kingdom: A Defense of _Reformed_ Amillennialism _(A shortened online version); and _The Messianic Kingdom and Civil Government_ (article)
> Vern Poythress, _The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation_; online version
> Stuart Olyott, _Dare to Stand Alone: Daniel Simply Explained_
> Samuel E. Waldron, _The End Times Made Simple_
> Arturo Azurdia, _An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (81 MP3 sermons)_
> Dean Davis, _The High King of Heaven: Discovering the Master Keys to the Great End Time Debate_; some excerpts from it. [This is a really good book]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you Steve; that's exactly what I was looking for.
Click to expand...


Nathan, please note--Steve has listed for you idealist works, not partial preterist ones. They will be very helpful, no doubt (I am in agreement with the idealist view), but they aren't partial preterist.


----------



## TylerRay

As you may glean from the posts above, most partial preterist works are postmillennial; but if you take the optimistic/triumphalist part out of their eschatology (which is not really tied to their exegesis of Matthew 24, Revelation, I Tim 4, II Tim 3, or I and II Thessalonians), their interpretations provide a plausibly amil framework (they do not take a literal view of the 1000 years in Rev 20). Sound expositors of this view are Kik, Sproul, Gentry, and Mathison. Stay away from Chilton--too many hermeneutical excesses (in later life this led him to embrace the hyper-preterist heresy).


----------



## johnny

TylerRay said:


> Stay away from Chilton--too many hermeneutical excesses (in later life this led him to embrace the hyper-preterist heresy).



But "Days of Vengence" is still a fun read, especially Gary's Preface. 

I also have Mr Gentry's DVD series (it's great to watch and interesting) 

Nevertheless, after perusing the many many posts on this subject here on PB,
And reading some of the books that Steve and the other members have recommended.
I decided to make the change and I'm now a happy Amillennialist.  

So thanks everyone, for all your time and trouble and postings,


----------



## MW

G. I. Williamson, Study of Biblical Eschatology, is available here:

http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/EschatologyPages.pdf


----------



## Andrew P.C.

johnny said:


> a happy Amillennialist



I find this to be a contradictory statement... Can you be happy and pessimistic?


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Hello Tyler, I would say that the folks in the list I gave are "modified idealist" or "eclectic" amillennialists. Which means they use aspects of the other eschatological systems when hermeneutically appropriate, i.e., when the text requires it.

Andrew, "happy amillennialist" is a good term: happy (though I prefer joyous) in Christ, while *realistic* in the world. As the Scripture sees "this present evil world" (Gal 1:4)—"the whole world [that] lieth in wickedness" (1 John 5:19)—as a satanic place where "evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived" (2 Tim 3:13), to have a pollyanna attitude will lead many into profound disappointment with such (professedly) Christian teaching. David Engelsma in the list above elaborates on this in the chapter, "Apostasy and Persecution" of the book mentioned. Right teaching in this area is crucial for the saints throughout the NT age and especially at the very end of it to be prepared to suffer in Christ-like manner.
*JOY is not the absence of suffering, but the presence of God.*​


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Andrew P.C. said:


> johnny said:
> 
> 
> 
> a happy Amillennialist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find this to be a contradictory statement... Can you be happy and pessimistic?
Click to expand...


It is also possible to be post-millennial and to be very pessimistic about the future in the short-term. Unless the Lord intervenes, Christians in the western world will face increasing persecution from society in the near future. Given the current climate, it would be naive to think any other way. And, of course, like Paul many of us have suffered persecution at the hands of false brethren in the church.


----------



## TylerRay

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Hello Tyler, I would say that the folks in the list I gave are "modified idealist" or "eclectic" amillennialists. Which means they use aspects of the other eschatological systems when hermeneutically appropriate, i.e., when the text requires it.



Steve,

Not a problem! I was only pointing out what I think you implied: i. e., that you were providing resources that use a different hermeneutic than the partial preterist (I am, myself, convinced of the idealist view). I wanted to make sure there was no confusion on the part of Nathan, who was asking for partial preterist resources.

If I at all misrepresented your post, or stuck my nose where it doesn't belong, I beg your pardon.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Hi Tyler—No, you were perfectly fine in your remarks, I just wanted to clarify (for there are differences in the idealist camp) what sort of idealists the folks I recommended were. Thanks for your sensitivity!


----------



## Contra_Mundum

Jerusalem Blade said:


> *JOY is not the absence of suffering, but the presence of God.*​



Well said.


----------



## MW

Reformed Covenanter said:


> It is also possible to be post-millennial and to be very pessimistic about the future in the short-term.



Yes, witness the Y2K pessimism.


----------



## earl40

MW said:


> G. I. Williamson, Study of Biblical Eschatology, is available here:
> 
> http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/EschatologyPages.pdf



Would he be labeled Partial Preterist Amillennialist ?


----------



## TylerRay

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Hi Tyler—No, you were perfectly fine in your remarks, I just wanted to clarify (for there are differences in the idealist camp) what sort of idealists the folks I recommended were. Thanks for your sensitivity!



Duly noted, sir! No doubt your idealism would differ significantly from mine even! I've read your interactions with Rev. Winzer on these things!

That being said, the idealist camp is a camp inside of a camp, and differences among idealists are differences among close relatives.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Earl, yes, I think he (G.I.) would. He would say that Revelation chapter 2 through the middle of 19 pertains to the destruction of the Old Testament church—Jerusalem and the apostate theocracy of Israel. He considers Babylon to be Jerusalem.

This view is a shame, for we are blinded to the Biblical Babylon and its dangers in our day. Thanks be to our Lord, _contemporary_ amillennial authors and scholars have rescued Biblical eschatology from this dead-end path with an eminently cogent and true-to-the-text understanding of Old and New Testament prophecy, especially its climax in the final, major prophecy that the book of Revelation is.

Many have been put off from the study of this topic, _and_ Revelation, by the confusion and contentions that have obtained till recent years, but the light of our Teacher and Saviour in this better hermeneutic is changing that, as His glory and wisdom are increasingly made manifest.


----------



## monoergon

Should Jay Edward Adams's "The Time Is at Hand" also belong to the list above?


----------



## MW

earl40 said:


> Would he be labeled Partial Preterist Amillennialist ?



Something like that, and he seems to recognise the covenantal nature of the prophetic oracles.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Nathan, yes, I think Jay Adams' _The Time Is At Hand_ should be partial preterist (PP) amil. This was one of the earliest amil books i'd read (first published in 1966) and was edified by, though, oddly, I hadn't picked up on his PP at that time, though in his later _The Time of the End_ I had. I suppose I was just "spitting out the bones" as the saying goes, even a ways back.

I do believe the current consensus amil view I hold to is "a hill worth dying on" as it opens our understanding of the times we are in and times soon to come. The PP view takes an exegetical eraser and removes vital Scriptural data from our consideration. As with Daniel's prophecies concerning the devastation Antiochus Epiphanes would wreak in the church of God around 150 B.C.—the LORD preparing His remnant for the extreme suffering to come, the worship of Him even being outlawed and the temple defiled—so it is again in our day, the Lord having important discernment and encouragement for us who live near the end of days, which is direly obscured by the PP view, but made clear in the eclectic idealists'.


----------



## monoergon

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Nathan, yes, I think Jay Adams' _The Time Is At Hand_ should be partial preterist (PP) amil. This was one of the earliest amil books i'd read (first published in 1966) and was edified by, though, oddly, I hadn't picked up on his PP at that time, though in his later _The Time of the End_ I had. I suppose I was just "spitting out the bones" as the saying goes, even a ways back.
> 
> I do believe the current consensus amil view I hold to is "a hill worth dying on" as it opens our understanding of the times we are in and times soon to come. The PP view takes an exegetical eraser and removes vital Scriptural data from our consideration. As with Daniel's prophecies concerning the devastation Antiochus Epiphanes would wreak in the church of God around 150 B.C.—the LORD preparing His remnant for the extreme suffering to come, the worship of Him even being outlawed and the temple defiled—so it is again in our day, the Lord having important discernment and encouragement for us who live near the end of days, which is direly obscured by the PP view, but made clear in the eclectic idealists'.



I have bought Keith Mathison's _Rightly diving the people of God?_ and Sam Storm's _Kingdom Come_. The former does not refute the dispensational teaching of Daniel's seventy weeks. The latter does, but moderately. 

Which book do you recommend that does an extraordinary job in refuting the dispensational interpretation of Daniel's seventy weeks?
By the way, neither of these two books I mentioned refute Scofield's seven dispensations. Maybe because such teaching isn't popular in the U.S., although it is popular in Brazil. Do you know if O. T. Allis' Prophecy and the Church refutes each of Scofield's seven dispensations?


----------



## earl40

MW said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would he be labeled Partial Preterist Amillennialist ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something like that, and he seems to recognise the covenantal nature of the prophetic oracles.
Click to expand...


I am wondering in your opinion if he is off in any area in the article referenced. So far I think the explinations of what happened in the "this generation" in The Gospels was very good and has persuaded I have been reading this part wrong, in that I assumed it was speaking of the second coming of Jesus at the end of the age.


----------



## MW

earl40 said:


> I am wondering in your opinion if he is off in any area in the article referenced. So far I think the explinations of what happened in the "this generation" in The Gospels was very good and has persuaded I have been reading this part wrong, in that I assumed it was speaking of the second coming of Jesus at the end of the age.



In Old Testament eschatology the coming of the Messiah was viewed as a "day" of judgment, deliverance, and restoration in the kingdom of God -- a single coming with multiple references. From the New Testament perspective Christ has already come and established judgment, brought deliverance to His people, and inaugurated the kingdom with all its blessings; only He has not yet consummated it.

The problem for us is that we naturally read the Olivet discourse in light of the New Testament restoration, and we can easily miss the fact that our Lord Himself was speaking on the eve of the cataclysm which would usher in the times of restoration. If we read it from the Old Testament perspective in the light of its fulfilment by Christ we shall be better placed to take in its vision. From this perspective the coming of Christ was still regarded in terms of a "day," but in light of the fulfilment we can see that judgment upon the covenanted nation of Israel has already come, that deliverance has been brought to the elect, and restoration has been inaugurated with the expectation of its consummation when Christ visibly and personally comes again.

From the interpretative framework of "covenant realisation," I consider the preterists to be very close when they understand the oracles of judgment as having already taken place, but they miss the mark when they still try to make every detail fit a precise historical and chronological event.

A darkened sun and a bloody moon are references to a cosmic revolution in covenant terms. The sun and moon were witnesses of the covenant made with the nation of Israel. We are not to look for a physical manifestation in order to see a fulfilment of this prophetic oracle. Many preterist interpreters have understood this. But when it comes to the fulfilment of other details like armies surrounding Jerusalem and the abomination of desolation they have looked for a physical fulfilment in historical events, and have wandered from the covenantal interpretation. A more consistent approach would seek to understand these details in terms of the way they functioned in Old Testament prophetical oracles in relation to the covenant God made with the nation of Israel.

From the covenantal perspective of inaugurated eschatology we do not have the problem of full preterism, and it does not require the "partial" qualification in order to save it from the errors of full preterism. Once we are able to look beyond historical and chronological events to discern covenant realities we can see that God's word to theocratic Israel is already accomplished and that this is realised in the church of Jews and Gentiles; moreover it will be made manifest with the visible and personal coming of Christ in glory.


----------



## earl40

MW said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am wondering in your opinion if he is off in any area in the article referenced. So far I think the explinations of what happened in the "this generation" in The Gospels was very good and has persuaded I have been reading this part wrong, in that I assumed it was speaking of the second coming of Jesus at the end of the age.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Old Testament eschatology the coming of the Messiah was viewed as a "day" of judgment, deliverance, and restoration in the kingdom of God -- a single coming with multiple references. From the New Testament perspective Christ has already come and established judgment, brought deliverance to His people, and inaugurated the kingdom with all its blessings; only He has not yet consummated it.
> 
> The problem for us is that we naturally read the Olivet discourse in light of the New Testament restoration, and we can easily miss the fact that our Lord Himself was speaking on the eve of the cataclysm which would usher in the times of restoration. If we read it from the Old Testament perspective in the light of its fulfilment by Christ we shall be better placed to take in its vision. From this perspective the coming of Christ was still regarded in terms of a "day," but in light of the fulfilment we can see that judgment upon the covenanted nation of Israel has already come, that deliverance has been brought to the elect, and restoration has been inaugurated with the expectation of its consummation when Christ visibly and personally comes again.
> 
> From the interpretative framework of "covenant realisation," I consider the preterists to be very close when they understand the oracles of judgment as having already taken place, but they miss the mark when they still try to make every detail fit a precise historical and chronological event.
> 
> A darkened sun and a bloody moon are references to a cosmic revolution in covenant terms. The sun and moon were witnesses of the covenant made with the nation of Israel. We are not to look for a physical manifestation in order to see a fulfilment of this prophetic oracle. Many preterist interpreters have understood this. But when it comes to the fulfilment of other details like armies surrounding Jerusalem and the abomination of desolation they have looked for a physical fulfilment in historical events, and have wandered from the covenantal interpretation. A more consistent approach would seek to understand these details in terms of the way they functioned in Old Testament prophetical oracles in relation to the covenant God made with the nation of Israel.
> 
> From the covenantal perspective of inaugurated eschatology we do not have the problem of full preterism, and it does not require the "partial" qualification in order to save it from the errors of full preterism. Once we are able to look beyond historical and chronological events to discern covenant realities we can see that God's word to theocratic Israel is already accomplished and that this is realised in the church of Jews and Gentiles; moreover it will be made manifest with the visible and personal coming of Christ in glory.
Click to expand...


Thank you so much. Come Lord Jesus!


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

Hello Nathan,

Yes, Allis deals with the 70 weeks in his _Prophecy and the Church_, but not with the seven dispensations.

Engelsma contra premils on Dan 9 9:24-27: http://www.cprf.co.uk/pamphlets/seventyweeks.htm#.VfDV8ek41CQ

Rev. Martyn McGeown contra Dispensationalism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Y-NOWkV5-w

_Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism _, by John Gerstner (I know you're been recommended this before; it deals in the history and the hermeneutics).

EJ Young Commentary on Daniel, good on the 70 weeks

Seven Dispensations refuted https://theultimatereconciliationis...ensationalism-and-c-i-scofield-views-refuted/ (haven't read this over to know where the man is coming from)

I hope this is helpful.


----------



## monoergon

Thank you Steve, those resources are certainly helpful.


----------

