Great book for those who love point-counterpoint presentations. Although I won't be as hard on Blaising as David in his review, I agree with him in that i would have preferred more defense and less history than was given. Premillennialism being so familiar to most, I couldn't fathom why Blaising felt the need to use valuable space presenting what many would already know. That given, i wouldn't call anyone of the three presenters a clear "winner" of their perspectives. All of them left unanswered questions and glossed over responses. Space was limited, however, so that could be expected. Still, it was well worth reading for i consider this kind of format the best for studying different viewpoints. Well worth the money spent.
I have read a few comparison books on eschatology in general and the millennium in particular. This one is the best yet on the millennium. I would have given it a five rating, except for the mediocrity of the premillennial presentation.Gentry, as usual, expresses himself very well and is very convincing, both in his own essay as well as in his responses. Strimple, considering the limitations of this work, does a fine job of covering various Scriptures that address the amillennialist position. The worst essay of the three is penned by Blaising, who takes entirely too many pages to explain the premillennial stance. He gets bogged down in the history of premillennialism, and then is so technical in the actual presentation of his own view that he is very tough to follow. The reader comes away scratching his/her head wondering what in the world did Blaising actually say! Premillennialism, however, is so commonplace that it requires the least explanation of the three positions.Bock provides a very cordial, conciliatory conclusion, touching upon points that are crucial to formulating one's own view of Revelation 20:1-6. I was rather surprised when he revealed his own position near the end of his essay, for I certainly did not detect it through his earlier remarks.This book gives a great presentation of the postmillennial and amillennial views. The presentation for premillennialism pales in comparison, but other readers may find Blaising's essay more helpful than I did.Overall, this work is a good investment for anyone wanting to compare the three basic millennial views.