I commended Jim Hamilton’s new commentary on Revelation on Wednesday. You might be interested to see two other commendations—one from Paige Patterson and the other from Mike Wittmer:
“In a day when most preachers appear to be terrified by the prospects of preaching any text beyond the third chapter of the Apocalypse, I find Dr. James Hamilton’s Revelation: The Spirit Speaks to the Churches to be an oasis in the wilderness. Though my own interpretation of the book is light years removed from that of Professor Hamilton, the purity of his love for Christ, for his church, and for the Word of God makes every page a delight to read regardless of his eschatological position.” —Paige Patterson, President, Southwestern Seminary
“The enigmatic imagery of Revelation often elicits one of two responses: some Christians eagerly interpret its mysteries as literal, play by play descriptions of future events while others, embarrassed by their excess, avoid the book entirely. Jim Hamilton wisely avoids the woods of overwrought prophecy on the right and the barren desert of avoidance on the left, and rips his tee shot right down the fairway. He warmly demonstrates that John’s Revelation was written primarily to encourage and exhort the church—and that is as true in the twenty-first century as it was in the first.
“Hamilton has done his homework–and numerous footnotes reveal his scholarship–but he keeps the plot moving as he focuses on the pastoral duty of preaching the book. When exegeting difficult texts he presents the best case for differing viewpoints and then argues persuasively for his, all with an eye on preaching. Pastors will find here an inspiring foundation to craft their own sermons (and check their work), and laypeople will discover a pastoral guide through the minefield that is Revelation. Do you have a question about a passage in Revelation? Look here first.” —Mike Wittmer, Professor of Systematic and Historical Theology, Cornerstone University
Order the book here.
What view does he take? I’m an A-mil partial Preterist and am looking for commentaries on Revelation with either an A-mil or Post-mil preteristic view. Don’t know your view so I might be asking the wrong question.
So, is Patterson essentially saying “while I basically disagree with his entire interpretation, therefore the entire book, he’s sincere so it’s a good read”?
Any commentaries on Revelation with a premillennial bent is good in my books.
Bradley, G. K. Beale’s massive commentary in the NIGTC is good from an amill perspective.