My seminary diploma from Bethel has Erickson's signature on it (when he was there back in the 1980's), so I am familiar with this man's work. I studied theology using his Christian Theology text (it was 3 volumes at the time). I love what he has done in this second edition volume of Introducing Christian Doctrine, as he was able to condense his material to fit into 400 pages. He admits in his preface that it was his editor who is reponsible for being able to chop down his work in such a radical way, and I fully understand that the hardest task for a writer to do is to edit down his own work. Anyway, it worked.

We are using this text for the first time in our private Christian high school's junior and senior Bible classes. Some students appear to be a little lost, but many are welcoming the challenge to clearer thinking. The book is not "Theology Light," as another reviewer seemed to suggest, so please don't approach it as "easy." Good systematic theology takes lots of work, plenty of wrestling with scripture, and many restless nights. But I like the fact that this text is a softer approach (without a complete "dumbing down" of the material) for first-time theology students. (I'd be happy to let anyone know the results by the end of 2002 when we will complete this text.) Also, I like about Erickson's attitude is that, while he certainly has presuppositions, he attempts to fairly lay out the possibilities on issues that certainly divide Christians into separate camps. He gives his opinion, but he doesn't treat it as if anyone who disagrees is a heretic. All in all, Erickson's work gets a thumbs up for those who want an overview on the basic teachings of Christianity.

Erickson's students have called his CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY "the jolly green giant" partly because of it's content's depth, but mostly because of it's binding's girth. Other students have called this condensed version "theology light" because it contains the same meat as Erickson's tome without all of that filling. Students will gain a comprehensive understanding of evangelical Christian theology and the information necessary to effectively articulate traditional conservative evangelical Christain doctrine. As a theology textbook it is best suited for the undergraduate classroom (where I was introduced to it). It could also be utilized in a graduate setting, but it really isn't a sufficient treatment for studies at that level.

Highly recommended.

This abbreviation of Erickson's massive "Christian Theology" will be used mostly by graduate students in (Evangelical) Theology. For those purposes it is an excellent first choice. The writing is marked by a lucid and readable style and is coupled with Erickson's impressive erudition. A person wanting to know what (Evangelical) Christians believe in a nutshell, will find this extremely useful.

Aside from its use in seminaries, I think this volume is excellent for clerical work such as confirmation classes, Bible study and even preaching. If a minister wants to preach through major Christian doctrines, he can quite easily edit portions of Erickson. The only caveat is that Erickson is an evangelical theologian and his evangelical perspective is evidenced throughout the work. The weakest section of the book lies in his discussion of the sacraments, which he typically refers to as "ordinances". The sections on God and Jesus Christ are superlative.

I picked up this book by Millard Erickson expecting a rather basic look at trinitarianism that might prove helpful in discussing the doctrine of the Trinity on a basic level with folks who have introductory level questions about it. And while it's true that the book is predominately a beginner level book, I nonetheless found it to be quite thorough in a number of places that I found very rewarding.

The book is less than 100 pages, and in it, Erickson seeks to tackle three main questions - is the Trinity biblical, is it rationally coherent, and is it at all relevant to anything. While there have certainly been more exhaustive treatises written which address the first two questions, I thought that Erickson did a good job of analyzing them at a top level while still being pretty thorough. His analysis of deviations from the orthodox view of the Trinity was especially good for purposes of making it clear to the reader that the Trinity is an exacting doctrine that requires both exacting language and exacting thought in order to be true to the Bible.

Erickson's attempt at sorting through the rationality of the 'Three in One' aspect of the Trinity was also very interesting, as was his analysis of Trinitarian prayer. In particular, I appreciated his analysis of the functional subordination aspect of the Trinity that is too often neglected in other studies of the Trinity, as well as his proper focus on the Holy Spirit which is likewise treated almost as an afterthought in many studies of the Trinity.

Overall, I think this is an outstanding beginner level book that not only takes on basic questions with easy to follow answers, but also digs a bit to take on more difficult questions both Biblically and philosophically. An outstanding resource for one who wants to become firmly rooted in the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity.

Though the previous reviewer was right in saying this is a short read, brevity does not mean lack of meaty content. Erickson dives in deep for just one-hundred pages. I hope to read it again soon to get a better grip on the content. Erickson does a great job of preseting both scriptural and philosophical arguments. His last section on the doctrine's importance and application to both individual and corporate worship/service unto God is also very helpful. A good book on a deep, but oh so important topic. Flaws in the nature of God ultimately equate a different gospel. The time has come for the church to stand against those within who are apathetic about rightly defining and acticulating this timeless truth.

It's difficult to produce a thorough yet concise volume on such a deep and complex subject as God in Three Persons which sheds fresh light on the Trinity rather than rehashes of what others have written over the ages. Most appreciated is keeping Scripture in the magisterial role with reason/logic in the ministerial role as all good exegetes should. The author does an excellent, though brief, job of sketching the history of the doctrine's development, metaphysical considerations, and outlines the relevance of God as Triune to the Christian today. More helpful would be analogies that help get a handle on 3 in 1: Egg=Shell+White+Yolk; Water is H2O, 3 atoms in 1 molecule, as well as water existing simultaneously(like a Minnesota cloud) as vapor,condensation,hail (solid, liquid, gas); not 1+1+1=3, but 1x1x1=1; volume=LxWxH; U.S. Gov't is Legislative, Executive, Judicial branches; human is body, mind, spirit;Divine Family is Father and Son and Holy Spirit. There is a careful balance maintaining the integrity of God as three persons yet one essence or Being. Of animal beings, there are trillions of members; of human beings there are billions of members; of Supreme Being there are three members. For a more comprehensive treatment, read author's larger volume, God in Three Persons.

What I appreciate most about this book is its organization. In particular, part 2 of the book, the various millennial positions, employs these subheadings for each chapter: Overview, History, Tenets, and Evaluation (both positive and negative); since each view uses the same subheadings, it allows for easy comparison. Part 1 of the book, Background Views, was interesting reading; however, I didn't see how it connected with parts 2 and 3. Then again, I confess I haven't read widely in this field. I thought the presentation of each of the millennial views was more clear in this book than in Clouse's "The Meaning of the Millenium," although I enjoyed and recommend that book, as well.

This new edition of an earlier work is a very evenly balanced, scholarly work. It reads like a history book in some places and like a textbook in others. There are no dogmatic assertions made for any position, and the author's own opinion is well hidden -- you do not even know what it is until the end of the book.

The book covers a great deal of material including overviews of the traditional viewpoints of the millenium and the timing of the rapture. It includes basic arguments from each position and the persons who are the spokesmen for those positions. One of the prominent features is that evaluations are given of both positive and negative aspects of each position which is a big plus. While the arguments do not go into the greatest detail, they are not unduly brief so as to be unuseful. The scholar as well as the layman will find the book inviting.

Although the book is a newer addition and covers the recent trends in dispensationalism for example, it does not have information about the prewrath rapture position, which is becoming a major theory. It does however cover some of the less popular, or "mediating" positions such as the partial rapture view and the imminent posttribulational view.

This is a very informative and well written book. The author is quite fair to all positions and never engages in personal attacks. The book was written at the request of seminary students for an objective reference to the different eschatological options they would have when they would someday minister. Written by a scholar with the heart of a minister, their request has been well served in this book.

This book is a very detailed and thorough study of the history, theology, and person of Christ. Erickson goes into great detail about the councils which were formulated to combat heretical views of Christ. Further, Erickson discusses the various views, past and present, of Christ (i.e. liberation, existential, black, Universalist, feminists, etc.).

The incarnation and the resurrection of Christ are covered in great detail as well. Moreover, Erickson has a chapter that deals with the incarnation and the problem of evil. This is one of the most detailed Christological studies I have ever read. Erickson practically leaves no stone unturned in his research. What is more, Erickson documents his sources and research very well.

The book itself is for the layman and scholar alike since Erickson has a way of writing that reaches the beginner without losing the scholar (and vice versa). I highly recommend this volume for those who want to do a serious study of Christ, as well as for those who are simply wanting to gain a better grasp of who Christ is.

Lengthy volume covering the historical and biblical issues. "Conservative." Covers several viewpoints and a thoughtful evaluation of each. I wanted more detail in some areas, but it covered so much already.

This book was required reading for one of my seminary preaching courses. I'm so glad it was. I really enjoyed the book and the insight the authors have into preaching doctrine in the modern world.

The book is divided into four sections: Understanding the Issues, Gathering the Doctrinal Contnet, Delivering Doctrine in Sermonic Form, and Getting it Done.

I found the third section, Delivering Doctrine in Sermonic Form, to be the most helpful. The authors discuss four preaching styles: Expository, Topical, Narrative and Dramatic. In this section they address changes in our culture and how different sermon styles meet the needs of different hearers. Most preachers only use the first two styles, but the later two are equally valid and important. The authors give some biblical basis for these styles. I have ventured into the narrative sermon, but have yet to work with the dramatic style.

The final section on Getting it Done has some great info on keeping track of the sermons you've preached in order to make sure you're not ignoring some doctrines and focusing too heavily on others. It's a great help the authors provide in this section.

Anyway, variety is the spice of life. Variety in sermon delivery styles will help to spice up the worship service and keep your people interested - wondering what you'll be doing this week. Anticipation - it's a good thing.

So, if your pastor's preaching needs a little spicing up, get him a copy of this book. Tell him it's a hint. I think he'll enjoy the book, though maybe not the hint.

This book is an analysis of postmodernism (or neo-pragmatism, post-Nietzschean philosophy or maybe just relativism) for those looking for a deeper understanding of the subject. Actually, since postmodernism doesn't have any clear sense, it is probably better to view this book as an introduction to Rorty, Derrida, Fish and Foucault (some might object that no clear sense can be found here either, but anyway).

The book first details some of the main aspects of the premodern view, the view that the 'postmodernists' are spending their efforts to refute, or at lest blur many of the distinctions made by Plato and his type (appearance-reality made -found etc.).

Following the history of western thought to the modern period (the next chapter of the book) the major thoughts of Descartes, Kant and Newton are discussed. The historical periods prior to the 'postmodern' take up about the first 100 pages and give anyone unfamiliar a good understanding of what is about to fall apart or be fuzzed up by the four horsemen that come on the scene next.

Actually, the philosophical views held by Rorty and company where expounded prior to their coming - the chapter dealing with these men (the predecessors) is called 'twentieth-century transitions to postmodernism'. The cast of characters includes Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Gadamer and Kuhn. The book is as complete as one would hope and deals with other philosophers I failed to mention here -- but the main focus of the book is on the four most recent exponents of 'postmodernism' . Allot of the book, the first half or more, is solely descriptive with a critique coming in the latter sections.

I would recommend this book to anyone looking for a good intro. into the thoughts of Rorty Derrida, Fish and Foulcaut (postmodernism)-- although the book ends up being critical of much of what these men said it is a fair treatment.

I bought this theology at the urging of one of my ministers at Church. I found the book deep, but not overwhelming. Erickson comes from a robustly evangelical, gently Calvinistic background. He is respected by moderates and conservatives alike for interacting with other positions fairly, namely that position of Karl Barth--Erickson offering an Evangelical interaction.

For the information of one reviewer who said that Erickson's book Lacked the intellectual rigor of a Barth or Rahner, I would reply that this is an intro-level text at seminary , not a doctoral text (I went to one seminary bookstore to look around and conversed with other PhD students to find this out). In fact, Erickson's willingness to interact with Barth on numerous occasions is praiseworthy. Although Erickson is said to be Calvinistic in his approach, there will be times that he annoys Calvinists (See Wayne Grudem for a slight difference in, for example, "Does Regeneration precede faith?"). To get the most out of this text, read another systematic theology at the same time to compare and contrast.

Final Analysis:
THis is a good work, especially for young evangelicals as myself. It is a work that will get one excited about systematic theology.

This is an excellent systematic theology textbook written by a well-respected evangelical theologian. Erickson writes from a mildly reformed and baptistic perspective. Like most systematics, the book is long and thorough, but Erickson writes in a very readable manner and is generally engaging. He is fair in presenting the major understandings of different issues, and then presents a grounded defense of his own views. A great reference to own.

I have the 3-volume set of Erickson's work, and it is the one I utilize first when looking for background on a particular issue or doctrine. Erickson is evangelical, orthodox, and even fair. He shares different perspectives on an issue, though he will let you know what his conclusion is. In addition, he is very clear about his points and is not impossible to understand, unlike some books out there can confuse more than enlighten. Erickson deals with every issue you would expect a systematic theology book to discuss. You may not agree with everything he says, but then again, is there anyone you would agree completely with? I recommend this as a valuable tool.

This book brings to the fore a missing picture of true faith in Jesus. For too long the church in the West has become ingrained. We have refused to believe people can reach God. This book by George Hunter gives us the structure to take back our heritage of reaching others. It will rock your world IF you read it! Do so!

Praise God for this book! For too long the real Christian church has allowed the evils of liberalism to rule our pulpits. First, integration, then women, soon gays, and all under the guise of "postmodernism." All the men in this book will burn in hell for the way they have perverted the TRUTH of the BIBLE. Millar Erickson has the guts to tell the real story. It represents people like me, who think hard about what is wrong, and get sick when slick neotheologians try to tell us that there is no unchanging TRUTH. READ THIS BOOK, it reveals why the churches are weak, but the TRUE CHURCH will remain forever, and partly because of this book and other like it. Anything "postconservative" cannot be Christian, and modernism is bad enough (along with formalism and worldliness), but POSTmodernism cannot be tolerated. This book is great for Bible classes, church training classes, and adult reading clubs. It is for thinking people, but is written at a level that anyone in the Church can read it and profit from it. Please read this book.

A masterful exposure of the main shortcomings of neotheism, namely its unawareness of compensating for the bias of its own presuppositions. Every theological framework, including neotheism, has a historical/philosophical context with all the accompanying premises, stated or unstated, conscious or unconscious. The author irenically but repeatedly points out the failure of neotheists to put their control belief cards on the table for all to see, then honestly evaluate them in the light of Scripture, reason and history/philosophy/logic for consistency, coherence, and authentication. Until this movement and its proponents are able/willing to do this in a reasonably thorough way, it cannot hope to intelligibly or meaningfully engage the historic Biblical position on God's infinite foreknowledge, for example. Assuming that even Almighty God cannot know a future we humans have not created makes the god of neotheism in Phillips' words, "your god is too small", and thereby colors all relevant texts examined in support of their theory. Can't the Bible declare a God Who knows all the future exhausively while simultaneously allowing humans to unfold it making Him aware but them responsible? The presupposition that God knowing the future doesn't force humans to make it so should be just as valid as the opposite premise. Which is more plausible and Biblical is a matter of examining all the relevant Scriptural material,not selective anthropomorphic/anthropopathic verses, to see which presupposition can account for all the Biblical data. This book read in conjunction with D.A.Carson's Exegetical Fallacies is a powerful rebuttal to neotheism. See also Norman Geisler's Creating God in Man's Image.

As of this writing (July 1998) this book is "out of print". That is too bad. With so much garbage being churned out in the name of prophecy nowadays, someone searching for a real study of historical, biblical positions is out of luck. So if you CAN get this book, DO SO.

Erickson is a prolific author and impressive scholar. He is currently a professor at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon and Baylor University. His credentials are apparently unimpeachable. And his work in this book reflects that, with a couple of minor exceptions if one is a beginning student.

"Contemporary Options..." is a wonderful study that delineates the varying modern understandings about the last days: Pre-Millennialism, Post-Millennialism, and A-Millennialism. A chapter is spent describing each of these positions: Overview, History, Tenets, and Evaluation. A chapter is also devoted to each view of when the so-called "rapture" of the church will occur (! Pre- and Post- Tribulationalism)! Though he has his OWN view about which of these is the proper view, Erickson shows himself capable of allowing the reader to decide...he does not dogmatize OR indoctrinate. Only in his "p.s." at the end of the book does he mention his personal position.

A predominate view of the past 150 years, dispensationalism (a premillennial view) is given a good treatment as well. Erickson devotes a chapter to this widely held view of biblical interpretation. Also worthy of note is how the book begins: with a quick couple of chapters of how some others have interpreted eschatological material: to wit, Albert Schweitzer (so-called "Consistent" Eschatology), Charles Dodd (so-called "Realized"), Rudolf Bultmann ("Existential") and Jurgen Moltmann ("Hope").

The primary problem with the book (or perhaps with this reader!) is the challenge of understanding all that Erickson is saying in regard to the int! erpretation of some particular Greek phrases and tenses. P! ortions of the book seem to assume familiarity with the ancient language that most of us probably don't have. Despite this, however, the "gist" of the idea is understandable.

Also a minor disappointment was that Erickson does not touch too much upon the preterist or historical interpretation of prophecy, though they ARE mentioned. A complete study of prophecy or eschatology should involve a review of these positions. But again, don't let this keep you from reading the text. The book is outstanding in reviewing the modern positions described above.

All in all, Erickson does a TREMENDOUS job explaining for the layman or student these competing ideas. And he ends with the reminder that as fascinating as eschatology is, we need not allow it to divide Christianity!

With the reputation of a man like Dr. Erickson, one comes to expect good scholarship. Erickson does a masterful job a FAIRLY and OBJECTIVELY examinig each viewpoint. He lists the pros and cons of each position (he even critiques his own!) without name calling and mud-slinging, which we see enough of in today's echatology. One might wonder what the first chapters have to do with eschatology, but hang in there because he describes not only the echatology, but the theology of prominent, however somewhat neo-orthodox theologians. With a firm grip on this,one may confidently enter the book. Overall, it is a great handbook on introductory eschatology. Its flaws are not enough discussion on a prominent position such as preterism, however it is mentioned. If you are a student in New Testament or Systematic Theology, this book is an essential.

Oh come on, this book cannot be serious. "Postmodernizing the Faith," if this is not poking the latest bogeyman in the eye, I am not sure what is. All the talk about "positing presuppositions," when it is THE hallmark of fundamentalism that it never examines its own presuppositions! The big joke on this book (and supporters of it) is that it is with the advent of post-structuralism and hermeneutics that the importance of context and presuppositions really began to come to the fore! These are questions that would never have even been raised had "postmodernity" never been born, and yet this book (and its supporters) have the audacity to say, "pomo is blind to its foundations." That is irresponsible and would be laughable, if it didn't happen to be the crux of this (admittedly popular) book. If you assume the litany of beliefs that conservative evangelicals do, you naturally will get books like this, as well as other bloodless and dissecated works by evangelicals and "reformed epistemologists" alike. Can we strain any more at a gnat than this?

The adversarial stance this book takes at its outset is also in poor form. Working off of the assumption that "postmodernism" is antithetical to (what Erickson believes is) Christianity, Erickson tries to show through a savaging of several other author's works why pomo is from the devil. But I find no real discussion of why Erickson assumes pomo to be so awful. I find great Christianity in the work of Grenz, for example, the kind of faith I would like to have myself. Erickson's reasons for being so adversarial is clear (his prejudices and presuppositions), but I still wonder how he could come to most of his conclusions.

The arrogance and blindness of the positions taken by this author in this book is breathtaking. Erickson has never once, it seems, considered that all his assumptions about pomo, biblical interpretation, historical context, and such are not only challenged, but fringe-oriented and unsuportable! I am quite suprised that Erickson's subjects in this book haven't sued him for libel!

Tha main problem with this book, though, apart from the shallow scholarship it evidences and the blinders it asks the reader to put on, is the fact that it is un-Christian, in the most profound sense of that word. Why would Ericson have written this book, as opposed to another? And why his other book of character assassinations, "The Evanglical Left"? Why did he feel it necessary to attack these men in this way? I learn nothing about these men's works that I did not already know, but I learn quite a bit about the kind of faith Erickson would like to see. I am not at all sure it is mine.

In Postmodernizing the Faith, Erickson provides an summary and analysis of six evangelical theologians and their responses to postmodernism. He begins with those thinkers who have reacted negatively to postmodernism. David Wells, of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, the first writer Erickson deals with, urges a strong rejection of postmodernism, with its pluralistic and relativistic trends. His analysis is historical, cultural, and sociological and mainly attempts to show the many ways that evangelicals have been negatively influenced by postmodernism. Erickson criticizes Wells for neglecting to offer a real solution, and for his failure to engage the deeper epistemological issues that are the root cause of much postmodern thought. Erickson next turns to Thomas Oden, once a flaming liberal but now a converted paleo-orthodox thinker. Oden urges Christians to reject much postmodernism as simply ultramodernism, the last dying gasp of modernist nihilism. In its place, he exhorts Christians to recapture the greatness of their tradition. His solution is not a simple return to premodernity but rather a postcritical appreciation of premodernity. Francis Schaeffer is the third evangelical Erickson looks at. At L'Abri in Switzerland, Schaeffer dealt with the early European manifestations of postmodernism. In his major works he emphasized the need for Christians to defend the classical concepts of antithesis and absolute/objective truth. His apologetic attempted to drive the non-Christian to live consistently according to his presuppositions, which would prove impossible, because on atheistic premises, suicide is the only logical option. The second section of the book examines three thinkers who have embraced postmodernism, or at least parts of it. Stanley Grenz, author of the Primer on Postmodernism, advocates an end to the dry propositionalism/rationalism and destructive individualism/dualism of classic evangelicalism. He thinks that evangelicals have tied themselves to closely to Enlightenment thought - an alliance that will bring their downfall. He proposes a communitarian approach to Christianity and a revisioning of theology for the 21st century. Brian J. Walsh and Richard Middleton also take a positive view of postmodernism. Their concern is to justify Christianity in the face of the postmodern charge that the Biblical worldview is a violent totalizing metanarrative. Their hermeneutic reflects this desire. They go to lengths to eliminate the sovereignty of God, the conquest of Canaan, and the more violent aspects of revelation. They also adhere to the narrative based theology of Frei and Lindbeck. Lastly, Erickson analyzes the thought of Keith Putt, a prof at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Putt is an enthusiastic supporter of the deconstructionist project. His whacked-out reading of Scripture leads him to a theopassional theology that is virtually indistinguishable from process a/theology. Erickson concludes this volume with an essay outlining his view of what an effective apologetic to postmodernity might look like. He promises a forthcoming work that will flesh out his plan for the future of theology in a postmodern age. Erickson is a master at summarizing. He efficiently encapsulates the main thoughts of the thinkers he writes about. His writing style is lucid and eminently readable. In his analyses of the various thinkers, he seems to grasp the important issues and to have a rather nuanced understanding of the subject. I wait with anticipation for his promised work on postmodernism.

What is so outstanding about this volume is how the author points out what is the most glaring failure of this movement, namely its unawareness or unacknowledgement of its own Control Beliefs, Premises, Presuppositions, Historical Context, Philosophical/Metaphysical Bent which so heavily shape its content and conclusions. What is needed for any theological/doctrinal system that challenges evangelical/historical positions is a declaration,discussion and defense of such presuppositions, how they compare to the competition and why theirs are more plausible/tenable. Until postmodernism and other movements such as neotheism can engage at this fundamental level, any meaningful dialog with reality and Biblical truth is futile. Recommended highly to stimulate further research in this challenging arena.