The price is also steep.

Nevertheless, the authors impressively articulate their positions and their reasons for believing what they do. This book will provide you with an intermediary starting place for being able to better understand each of the three positions (which are to be taken broadly since there are disagreements within each of the camps). I will not comment on who "won" the debate, partly because I am largely agnostic about it at this point (though I do favor one position). But each did provide thought-provoking arguments and responses that need to be more fully considered (at least for myself).

Darrell Bock's closing essay was helpful in pointing out both areas of agreement and disagreement. Despite his admonition of a possible bias towards premillenialism, I did not find that it was largely evident. I was also impressed to find that Robert Strimple admitted that he had changed his opinion on one section after reading another writer's argument in the book: certainly a rare case! Interestingly, the contributers would often respond with comments like, "that position is not necessarily indicative of the such and such view." Quite often, the writers agreed with eachother. But don't be fooled, for there are many disagreements as well.

Overall assessment: this book was very-well written, edifying, and educational in my eschatological studies. I recommend that others read a few books by Blaising (premil), Hendriksen or Hoekema (amil), or Gentry (postmil), prior to reading this book. That way, you will be more familiar with the terminology and the arguments. But if you are interested in the eschatology discussions, then you must read this book.

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.

1. Kenneth Gentry (Postmillennialism):

This is the worst essay by far of the three. Gentry's hermeneutical and exegetical method is flawed and absurd. I don't know how and why anyone would still want to be a postmillennialist after reading this essay. Trying to argue that the Edenic, Abrahamic, and New Covenants support some sort of postmillennial progressivism and reconstructionism of society is totally lacking in Biblical support. Also, his expositions of Psalm 2; Isaiah 2:2-4; Matthew 13; John 12:31-32; Matthew 28:19-20; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28; and Revelation 20 (especially this one) to support a gradual increase of Christ's reign on earth now is laughable. I don't see how the angel who binds Satan in Revelation 20:1 can refer to Christ, and how the "first resurrection" in verses 4-5 can refer to spiritual regeneration at conversion. Gentry pretty much shot down his own view with this one.

2. Robert Strimple (Amillennialism):

Good attempt, but doesn't meet the exegetical support. Trying to argue for an amillennial position using a Covenant Theology structure imposed on the text doesn't cut it (see his discussion on pp. 84-100 for a good overview of how Covenant Theologians interpret Old Testament promises). To argue that the Church has replaced Israel in the New Testament, that all the Israelite promises in the Old Testament refer to Christ, and that the New Testament should be given priority when interpreting the Old Testament is totally unnacceptable. This is typical Reformed interpretation of Scripture: as long as it fits with TULIP or the Covenant of Grace structure, it has to be true. Strimple's "Dutch" interpretation (a recent view) of Romans 11 is not convincing nor is his exegesis of Revelation 20 (he follows too much with Meredith Kline's double binary pattern to prove that the "first resurrection" is not a bodily resurrection). Of course, Reformed people say that if a new interpretation fits their system it must be Biblical, but if a new interpretation arises in another tradition it must be heretical. Typical of Reformed arrogance and myopism.

3. Craig Blaising (Premillennialism):

Very good essay. Proves his point well. The first section goes over the history and varieties of premillennialism. The only problem with this essay is that Blaising spends too much time on Revelation 20 (although a fine exposition) and too little time on salvation-history of premillennialism (especially dispensational premillennialism). He should have minimized his discussion of the history and varieties of premillennialism and focused on how God's program works in a premillennial scheme.

Overall, a good starter for those wanting a good understanding of the three millennial issues. I would also urge the reader to read Darrell Bock's summary essay. It is an excellent discussion on exegetical, hermeneutical, and presuppositional methods. How one comes to the Bible influences what kind of conclusions we come up with. Bock ends off his essay by arguing that the issue of the millennium is not merely an intellectual matter, it deals with how our position affects how we evangelize and work with our culture and society. This book should not disappoint anyone looking for a book on an important issue.

Walsh is careful to weave basic information about the presidents into the book. If you already know a good deal about the modern U.S. presidents, you will find much of this information either simplistic or repetitive. If you don't know very much about the modern presidents, however, but you want to know more about Air Force One, then you won't get lost here.

Walsh usually introduces each president with a brief history, and then shows convincingly that the planes they flew had a way of revealing the character of that president in a way that other places - the Oval Office, for example - did not. Reporters and staff, if they are fortunate enough to be allowed on board the jet, have access to a president that they do not have anywhere else. Presidents also seem to open up more when they fly Air Force One. Both of these circumstances allow a unique opportunity to see the usually powerful and distant man unfiltered.

While the historical moments that took place on Air Force One are all here (LBJ's swearing in as president just after the assassination of JFK; George W. Bush's long flight around the country after the terror attacks on 9-11, etc.), I personally found the trivial or less famous information more interesting. I had never heard, for example, that Nixon's Air Force One had to take evasive maneuvers during a trip to the Middle East after it appeared Syrian fighter jets might attack it (they were mistakenly sent up to welcome the Presidential jet). I also had no idea that secure communications on the president's hi-tech plane are often disrupted while it is in flight.

This is a light book that can be finished in an evening of reading. My only disappointment with it was the lack of basic drawings of the interior setup of Air Force One or drawings of the insides of previous presidential jets. I don't think the information is classified (since Walsh describes it in words), so it would have been interesting to see the various layouts.

The book starts with a very swift, journalist's sweep through Franklin Roosevelt to George Walker Bush. While Teddy Roosevelt was the first president in the air, FDR was the first to use it for presidential business including internationally. But Air Force One is really a contemporary element of the Presidency, becoming an important player in US history with the stunning image of the swearing-in of Johnson aboard the plane after the assassination of Kennedy.

Walsh describes everything from the food--Barbara Walters got a Spam sandwich, George H.W.Bush banned, what else, broccoli while son George likes Asian and spicy Tex-Mex. He tells you about the lavatories, souvenir notepads, who sits where (seats are assigned, and the president has a suite in the very front, including a desk and bed.) And there is other fascinating trivia--why, for example did George W. ground his father when both were flying? You'll find the answer here.

I once saw Air Force One on the tarmac at Boston Logan, when Clinton was at the end of his second term. It was night, we were delayed to allow Air Force One to land. Then we saw it, glistening huge and frosty-white in the glare of the runway lights. Air Force One IS impressive, and a symbol of our US leadership. This is a very fun read, and a unique insight into one aspect of the US President's life.

I have just finished reading Kenneth T. Walsh's newest book, "Air Force One: A History of the Presidents and Their Planes". This book, I am happy to report, is as informative and articulate a reading experience as I have had in a long time. Mr. Walsh's long-time "insider" status as well as his exhaustive research and crisp, concise style of writing made this a thoroughly enjoyable read, start to finish.

The short history of aviation and it's effect on American history is truly remarkable, as Mr. Walsh reports. Over the few years it has taken for the jet age to develop, our executive branch has been relatively quick to recognize and tap the potential for extending democratic values and influence. Between FDR's first tedious and exhausting hop-scotch to Casablanca and George W. Bush's incredible split-second decision on board Air Force One the day of September 11, 2001, this book gives the reader some wonderful minute-by-minute reporting from the key people involved, right up to the presidents themselves.

Each of our presidents has approached the Ait Force One experience in their own unique way, thereby revealing a closer insight into their hearts and minds. This book details each, from Clinton's relatively relaxed and homey flying style, Johnson's bullying, to Nixon's brooding and self-obsessed genius. And for me personally, the detailed descriptions of each airplane's awesome power and capabilities imparted a sense of certainty and reassurance that our leadership is just as secure and in command at 35,000 feet and 700 mph as it has ever been in the White House or Camp David.

These airplanes and the phalanx of people who fly them have known more history than one could ever have even imagined. With this book, Mr. Walsh has brought American history buffs as well as casual readers like myself a slice of flying knowlege and experience not soon to be forgotten.