David Chilton... anyone, anyone?

[shackleton]

I came across a commentary on Revelation today at a half-price bookstore called "Days of Vengeance." and overlooked it at first because I figured it was more sensationalistic end times garbage but then saw that the author was in the OPC and the book was only $8 so I bought it.

Anyone familiar with him? Good book?

 

[Notthemama1984]

He is in the preterist camp. I would have snatched the book up.

 

[Christusregnat]

I came across a commentary on Revelation today at a half-price bookstore called "Days of Vengeance." and overlooked it at first because I figured it was more sensationalistic end times garbage but then saw that the author was in the OPC and the book was only $8 so I bought it.

Anyone familiar with him? Good book?

If I'm not mistaken, Chilton discusses the partial-preterist view of Revelation, based upon the words of Christ that "days of vengence" were coming on the Jews for their rejection of the Messiah.

I haven't read the book, but my pastor has, and taught through Revelation using Days of Vengence as one of his sources.

I think you'll enjoy it, if the comments my pastor quoted from this book are any indication.

Cheers,

Adam

 

[shackleton]

It looks as if it were written about the same time as Gentry's "Before Jerusalem Fell" and if very similar.

Amazon has if for $45 so I guess $8 is a good deal.

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Do I recall correctly that he has a claim in that vol that a generation = 40 years, the Lord promises 1000 generations, therefore, since the earth is 6000 years old Jesus won't return for 34,000 years? I recall looking at the commentary sometime many years ago.

 

[JDKetterman]

I came across a commentary on Revelation today at a half-price bookstore called "Days of Vengeance." and overlooked it at first because I figured it was more sensationalistic end times garbage but then saw that the author was in the OPC and the book was only $8 so I bought it.

Anyone familiar with him? Good book?

Yea, I've read the commentary. It has some good points, but I wouldn't recommend it as it being a theonomic postmillenial interpretation.

 

[Christusregnat]

Yea, I've read the commentary. It has some good points, but I wouldn't recommend it as it being a theonomic postmillenial interpretation.

Uh oh! He used the "t" and "p" words. For shame!

 

[Dearly Bought]

I came across a commentary on Revelation today at a half-price bookstore called "Days of Vengeance." and overlooked it at first because I figured it was more sensationalistic end times garbage but then saw that the author was in the OPC and the book was only $8 so I bought it.

Anyone familiar with him? Good book?

Where in the world did you find that in Kansas??????

 

[shackleton]

[Where in the world did you find that in Kansas??????

The "Half-Price Book Store." There is one over in JO on Metcalf across the street from Borders books, I have found all sorts of gems there. There is another one in Westport by the Plaza, they also have very good books from time to time. Both locations are in the midst of very well educated people so they give up good books and 1/2 price does not usually know the value of what they have.

 

[Dearly Bought]

[Where in the world did you find that in Kansas??????

The "Half-Price Book Store." There is one over in JO on Metcalf across the street from Borders books, I have found all sorts of gems there. There is another one in Westport by the Plaza, they also have very good books from time to time. Both locations are in the midst of very well educated people so they give up good books and 1/2 price does not usually know the value of what they have.

Huh. I'll have to check out the one in Westport again next time I'm down there. If I remember last time correctly, the best they had was an AiG book or two. My wife and I like to browse a number of area thrift stores, but they're packed with RLDS literature and Left Behind books...

 

[Contra Marcion]

Chilton's book is, In my humble opinion, the best commentary available on Revelation. I taught through Revelation using it, and found it immensely helpful. It's definitely Postmil (but then, so am I), and Chilton does, at times, reach a bit in his exegesis, but WOW, what a great work! If you can still find a copy, especially for eight bucks, grab it!

 

[Marrow Man]

I have that book on my commentary shelf. I bought it almost 20 years ago, I'm guessing right after it was first published by Dominion Press. I probably paid over $20 for it then, so you got a decent deal.

It is pretty good. I have a few disagreements, but generally he is pretty right on. One of the great values of the book is his connection of elements and allusions in Revelation with their OT background.

BTW, we have Half Price Bookstores here in Louisville as well. Pretty decent stuff. If you wait long enough (and no one snaps it up), you can get some books for $1 or $2 on clearance. One weekend I bought a volume on Russian theology (where are you going to find that ?!?) and an anthology of Aquinas' works, each for $1. But even the "newer" books aren't bad; I found a copy of the NICOT volume on Deuteronomy for about $5 a few weeks ago.

 

[nicnap]

Yea, I've read the commentary. It has some good points, but I wouldn't recommend it as it being a theonomic postmillenial interpretation.

Uh oh! He used the "t" and "p" words. For shame!

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Hi:

The book is available for free online here:

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/pdf/1987_chilton_days-of-vengeance.pdf

Anyone who pays $45 for it is being ripped off. Eight dollars is a good price for a hardcopy.

Chilton's particular brand of Preterism will lead one into Full Preterism, as he himself admits:

Some of you know my sort of gradual movement into full preterist position....I recently ran across a passage in Paradise Restored, that now I look at and think - That should have pushed me over the cliff twelve years ago into full preterism! I don’t know why it didn’t! I don’t know what I would have done if somebody had come to me and said, "David Chilton, look at what you said!" What I’m getting at is - here I am as a full preterist. (Conference on Bible Prophecy, Oklahoma City,1997)

The more I pondered the awesome implications of Jesus’ words, the more I realized their truly revolutionary significance for eschatology. Without exception, every event foretold by the Biblical prophets was fulfilled within that generation, as Jesus said....Scripture foretells a Second Coming - not a third! (From the Foreword to Ed Stevens' book, What Happened in AD 70?, 1997)

The Book of Revelation has been firmly established by scholars to have been written well after the events of 70AD. See: Beale, G.K., The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, and, Osborn, Grant R., Revelation: Baker Commentary on the New Testament.

The argument for a pre-70AD dating by Chilton and Gentry are specious at best. Gentry claims that Jerusalm must have been standing because Rev. 11:1-2 mentions that Herod's Temple is still standing. If this is the case, then it is a false prophecy, because, according to the text, the inner Temple will be spared. Yet, the history of the destruction of Jerusalem shows that both the Court of the Gentiles and the Inner Temple were completly destroyed as Jesus predicted in Matthew and Mark. We are left to either hold to Gentry's interpretation of the event, or, give up the idea that Revelation was written prior to 70AD.

The argument that "we are all Preterists" by partial preterists can be applied to them concerning futurism. Partial preterists claim that Jesus will return in the future, therefore, "we are all Futurists" in one way or another.

Chilton's book is sensationalist in nature, and is a cursory reading of Revelation. John Muether wrote an article entitled, "The Theonomic Attraction," in Theonomy: A Reformed Critique: As Theonomy is a reaction against American Evangelicalism, so, "Preterism" is a reaction against Dispensationalism (that is not what Muether says - it is my application of his principles.)

Preterism presents an "Attraction" of Biblicalism, as opposed to the wild speculations of Dispensationalism, but fails in understanding the overarching principles of Prophetic interpretation. Simplicity, in this case, is not the best means of interpreting the Book of Revelation, and it is illustrated by the fact that Chilton has fallen into the Hymanean heresy.

Blessings,

Rob

 

[Pergamum]

Didn't Chilton gooff the deep end and defect, going to become eastern orthodox or something?

 

[KMK]

Hi:

The book is available for free online here:

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/pdf/1987_chilton_days-of-vengeance.pdf

Anyone who pays $45 for it is being ripped off. Eight dollars is a good price for a hardcopy.

Chilton's particular brand of Preterism will lead one into Full Preterism, as he himself admits:

Some of you know my sort of gradual movement into full preterist position....I recently ran across a passage in Paradise Restored, that now I look at and think - That should have pushed me over the cliff twelve years ago into full preterism! I don’t know why it didn’t! I don’t know what I would have done if somebody had come to me and said, "David Chilton, look at what you said!" What I’m getting at is - here I am as a full preterist. (Conference on Bible Prophecy, Oklahoma City,1997)

The more I pondered the awesome implications of Jesus’ words, the more I realized their truly revolutionary significance for eschatology. Without exception, every event foretold by the Biblical prophets was fulfilled within that generation, as Jesus said....Scripture foretells a Second Coming - not a third! (From the Foreword to Ed Stevens' book, What Happened in AD 70?, 1997)

The Book of Revelation has been firmly established by scholars to have been written well after the events of 70AD. See: Beale, G.K., The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, and, Osborn, Grant R., Revelation: Baker Commentary on the New Testament.

The argument for a pre-70AD dating by Chilton and Gentry are specious at best. Gentry claims that Jerusalm must have been standing because Rev. 11:1-2 mentions that Herod's Temple is still standing. If this is the case, then it is a false prophecy, because, according to the text, the inner Temple will be spared. Yet, the history of the destruction of Jerusalem shows that both the Court of the Gentiles and the Inner Temple were completly destroyed as Jesus predicted in Matthew and Mark. We are left to either hold to Gentry's interpretation of the event, or, give up the idea that Revelation was written prior to 70AD.

The argument that "we are all Preterists" by partial preterists can be applied to them concerning futurism. Partial preterists claim that Jesus will return in the future, therefore, "we are all Futurists" in one way or another.

Chilton's book is sensationalist in nature, and is a cursory reading of Revelation. John Muether wrote an article entitled, "The Theonomic Attraction," in Theonomy: A Reformed Critique: As Theonomy is a reaction against American Evangelicalism, so, "Preterism" is a reaction against Dispensationalism (that is not what Muether says - it is my application of his principles.)

Preterism presents an "Attraction" of Biblicalism, as opposed to the wild speculations of Dispensationalism, but fails in understanding the overarching principles of Prophetic interpretation. Simplicity, in this case, is not the best means of interpreting the Book of Revelation, and it is illustrated by the fact that Chilton has fallen into the Hymanean heresy.

Blessings,

Rob

I don't know any hyper-preterists who do not also love "Days of Vengeance".

Bahnsen did not recommend it in his review here: http://www.cmfnow.com/articles/pb075.htm

So then, I cannot recommend my friend David’s commentary on Revelation. (1) It embodies an unsound, imaginative hermeneutic. (2) It is confused about the book’s structure and meaning. (3) It is guilty of considerable errors in history and interpretation.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Chilton did go deep-wading into the waters of EO-style liturgicalism. Probably influenced and influencing JJordan.

Chilton had a "breakdown" of some kind, he survived it, but his health failed rapidly. He did not recognize a lot of the religious accoutrement he had started to accumulate. Some have speculated that God may have allowed him to "regress" to a better place, when he finally fell asleep in Jesus.

Bahnsen panned DoV. If you like BG, you should read his review. He was not sparing of his theonomic acquaintance.

I have the book. I got it used, and cheap. It has quite a few interesting thoughts, as most long books do. He does try to interweave the OT in his writing,...

(and there is a great deal of OT illustration and use in Revelation. I believe, without any real warrant, that Calvin may have decided not to write a commentary on Revelation until he had completed the Old. Just my opinion.)​

... but so do other commentaries. It might have been Sweete or Charles who once calculated that there was probably only a handful of verses in the whole book that did not directly quote, or allude to at least one OT passage or verse.

I personally would get a different commentary than DoV, if I were presently purchasing. Beale fascinates me, I might buy that, since I think he "gets" the NT use of the OT. I doubt anyone ever agrees 100% with any author, but its a good idea to find someone who has substantial basic appeal to you. Chilton will appeal to theonomists generally, unless Bahnsen dissuades them; and to some partial preterists (or full) who are tired of waiting for KGentry's promised tome.

You might be able to get Chilton for free now, at Garynorth's free books site.

 

[JDKetterman]

Dennis Johnson has a book on Revelation that I heard is pretty good. I'm putting that on my wishlist.

 

[Spinningplates2]

Was in a two year study on Saturday Mornings of Book of the Revelation using David Chilton and Dr. Gentry as study guides and it was fantastic.

 

[KMK]

I am stilll awaiting the Matthew Winzer Revelation Commentary...

 

[Anton Bruckner]

This work by CHilton is the best commentary on Revelation. I am hoping that when Mr. Gentry's commentary is finished he will have purged out the interpretative maximalism and the antinomian liturgy that was found in Chilton's work. But CHilton's work so far is the best and it should be in every Christian's library. His historical research of the 1st century Mediterranean world is unmatched.

 

[Pilgrim]

On Chilton, see these old threads, especially the first one:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f78/david-chilton-days-vengeance-exposition-book-revelation-15086/
http://www.puritanboard.com/f78/david-chilton-yea-nay-20011/

 

[brymaes]

do i recall correctly that he has a claim in that vol that a generation = 40 years, the lord promises 1000 generations, therefore, since the earth is 6000 years old Jesus won't return for 34,000 years? I recall looking at the commentary sometime many years ago.

qirc?

 

[nicnap]

I am stilll awaiting the Matthew Winzer Revelation Commentary...

 

[Marrow Man]

I do remember reading one negative about the commentary, but it was more about the foreward/preface written by Gary North. North goes a little over the top in denouncing pre-mil dispensationalism, and D.A. Carson takes a bit of exception in his New Testament Commentary Survey (5th edition). Carson writes, "The lengthy (18 pp.) 'Publisher's Preface' by Gary North is so arrogant and condescending it is embarrassing; I earnestly hope Chilton found it so."