The Last Days according to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return?

by R.C. Sproul

Book Overview

Speculation and theories abound about what the last days have in store for us. But what did Jesus believe and teach about the end times and the timing of his return? R. C. Sproul points believers back... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 080106340X
• Release Date: October 2000
• Publisher: Baker Books
• Length: 256 Pages
• Weight: 0.93 lbs.
• Dimensions: 8.8" x 0.8" x 6.0"

Customer Reviews

Should be titled LAST DAYS ACCORDING TO THE PRETERIST INTERPRETATION

I bought the book while going through a Bible study of Revelation. I read the book only to discover that the title is misleading. It Is not “The Last Days According to Jesus”. It is a preterist discourse on the subject and should be called, “The The Last Days According to a Preterist Interpretation.” The book deals a lot with the Olivet Discourse (of course) so I have questions. Did ALL the nations mourn as stated in Matthew 24: 30 at the destruction of Jerusalem and Israel? Verse 36 Jesus states that no one knows but the Father when that day or hour will be. So how can it be said that it has already happened? And verse 40 where it says two men are in a field, one is taken and one is left. Did that happen? I understand there are full preterist, partial preterist. How can they say all or even any of this events have occurred. Is there no 7 years of tribulation? Anti-christ, Beast? Which is before the (pre) millennial. How can this be if they say we are living in the millennial age now? I ask question rhetorically or sarcastically, you pick. It seems preterists (Full/ Partial) do not want to suffer 7 years of tribulation. Depending of course on your view of when the rapture occurs ( pre-tribulation, mid-trib (Before the Great Tribulation), or post-trib (a split second before the appear you Christ on a white horse at his second coming with His army angels and saints. The book was a dud and did not help in the study of Revelation.

A ground breaking book for making sense out of difficult Bible eschatology

Early on in this book, R.C. Sproul astutely observes that the recorded accounts of Jesus' discourse on the Mount of Olives in the three synoptic gospels can be the most persuasive proof of divinely-inspired fulfilled prophesy due to the amazingly accurate account of the destruction of Jerusalem. Yet at the same time, due to a passage in the Matthew account that alludes to Jesus physically appearing when these events occur, this Discourse opens up plenty of skepticism from unbelieving critics. Unlike the dozen or so R. C. Sproul Sr. books that I've read, this book presents itself more as a research paper that points to observations by plenty of external sources rather than a lone commentary by Sproul himself. To his credit, he's not intolerably dogmatic nor takes a hard line about issues open to interpretation, except for ones that clearly conflict with creeds or scripture. To give the best overview, Sproul writes the following in the final conclusion of the book: "The purpose of The Last Days according to Jesus has been to examine and evaluate the various claims of preterism, both full and partial. The great service preterism performs is to focus attention on two major issues. The first is the time-frame references of the New Testament regarding eschatological prophecy. The preterist is a sentinel standing guard against frivolous and superficial attempts to downplay or explain away the force of these references. The second major issue is the destruction of Jerusalem. This event certainly spelled the end of a crucial redemptive-historical epoch. It must be viewed as the end of some age. It also represents a significant visitation of the Lord in judgment and a vitally important "day of the Lord." Whether this was the only day of the Lord about which Scripture speaks remains a major point of controversy among preterists. The great weakness of full preterism--and what I regard to be its fatal flaw--is its treatment of the final resurrection. If full preterism is to gain wide credibility in our time, it must overcome this obstacle. With respect to partial preterism, Kenneth L. Gentry Jr. has done excellent work in forcing reconsideration of the date when the Book of Revelation was written. If he is correct in arguing for a date prior to A.D. 70, then sweeping revisions must be made in our understanding of this book's content and focus. Debates over eschatology will probably continue until the Lord returns and we have the advantage of hindsight rather than the disadvantage of foresight. The divisions that exist within the Christian community are understandable, considering that both the subject matter and the literary genre of future prophecy are exceedingly difficult. This does not mean that we may push the Bible aside or neglect its eschatological sections. On the contrary the interpretative difficulties presented by eschatological matters simply call us to a greater diligence and persistence in seeking their solution." The book doe

Important part of the prophecy discussion

Regardless whether you agree with his conclusion, Sproul delivers important questions on Jesus statements in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. What did Jesus mean when he said the temple would be destroyed, Jerusalem sacked, and that He would return all before the generation to whom He was speaking would pass away? Sproul argues that we cannot play "linguistic gymnastics" with the meaning of words (i.e. was His predicted return referring to His transfiguration soon afterward or did "generation" mean Jews throughout history, not the ones who heard Jesus words at that time). This book attempts to reintroduce the Biblical view of prophecy that Christians have believed for centuries, but has been forgotten in recent years; yet it doesn't spend time discussing the validity or problems with other equally Biblical views. Sproul targets his arguments primarily against the complaints of liberals who take Jesus's words at face value and believe was wrong (meaning, Jesus said he would return but hasn't). In doing so, he ends up "placing in doubt the conclusions of many contemporary evangelical prophecy enthusiasts," as Kenneth Gentry said.In short, Sproul gives us a great introduction to a view call Partial Preterism, meaning that some, not all, of the prophecies in Scripture have been fulfilled, in part if not in full. A challenging, thoughtful book that must not be ignored.

Good place to start!

Although I am now a futurist (I was a Full Preterist for 5 years), now disagree with the Preterist take on prophecy, and the timeline mentality prevalent today (I believe we must follow the orthodoxy of the apostles 100% regardless of what time it is, 2 Thess. 2:15) I would recommend reading Sproul and other partial preterist authors as long as it is cautiously. This is a very good place to start, you can see my point why I recommend his book as a futurist if you read my site. Email me if you would like to discuss theology and we can talk about Dr. Sproul's book and other respectable Christen writers.Donald James Perry

Very good introduction to Orthodox Preterism

I must admit, I never heard of preterism before hearing R.C.'s 'Last Days According to Jesus' tape series on the radio a few months ago. But, prior to that R.C. convinced me of his commitment to truth, so I decided to get the book. It brings texts to view from not only Revelation, but also from the Gospels, the Epistles, and the Old Testament. That is something I never thought of doing while I was looking for the rapture and I am sure there are others that are `Revelation-only Eschatology Students'.I encourage all students of eschatology to read this book, especially the Dispensational Premillenialists (Or, in English, those who look forward to rapture). Also, I recommend you go out and learn eschatology and not lay back and have it taught to you (via class or audio). If you do your own research and make your own decision between full-preterism, partial-preterism, some type of Futurism, or another view, you can defend your position better and give a solid reason for what you believe.