Comments on: Book Review: A Case for Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 02:48:14 +0000

In this excellent book, there are 2 issues that weaken Riddlebarger's credibility.
In the early going of this book, he advocates the proper view of using the NT to interpret the OT, as God's newer revelation gives additional insight. Then, without explaining why, he endorses the reverse – page 198, in describing how Exodus and Joel are key to understanding Revelation. This is a reasonable but unexplained exception. Minor gripe.
Page 211 – a flat out error. He states, “Satan deceived Adam in Eden,” whereas the Lord reveals in 1 Tim 2:14 that Adam was NOT deceived, but Eve was. There is no reason for such an error and this – though unrelated to his thesis – hurts his credibility.
All in all, I am enjoying this book greatly and am greatly benefiting from it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 31 May 2008 18:45:18 +0000

Thanks for your reply and explanation. I agree – the binding of Satan is a sign of the first advent. Satan's expulsion from Heaven, methinks, is a sign of birth pains of the first advent.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 31 May 2008 04:29:46 +0000

Obviously it would be best if Kim were to clarify his own words, but here's what I understand him to be getting at..
The Luke 10 and Isaiah 14 verses speak of Satan falling. The sign of the presence of the kingdom is more specifically the binding of Satan. Kim goes on to reference (actually page 108) the binding of Satan in Revelation 20:1-10 and the “restrainer” in 2 Thess. 2:7.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 29 May 2008 01:42:28 +0000

I am reading this book and find it very excellent. I have come across one question in his argument in chapter 9 for the “Present Reality of the Kingdom”; wherein he list (page 109) a case for this: “A second sign of the presence of the kingdom was that Satan fell from heaven and was bound.” – citing Luke 10:18.
I posted this on his blog, hoping for an answer: How does this line up with Isaiah 14:12? It appears to me that Isaiah and Jesus are referring to the same action, which predates His first advent, if not even the life of Job.
Any feedback on this?