web site hit counter The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times . . . and Why It Matters Today - Ebooks PDF Online
Hot Best Seller

The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times . . . and Why It Matters Today

Availability: Ready to download

"Most of what you've heard, read or been told about the End Times is wrong," says popular radio host and bestselling apologist, Hank Hanegraaff. "We have come to accept a wide range of beliefs and teachings about the future, about the ultimate battle between good and evil, about the last days, and about how our world will end. And most of these beliefs and teachings are ba "Most of what you've heard, read or been told about the End Times is wrong," says popular radio host and bestselling apologist, Hank Hanegraaff. "We have come to accept a wide range of beliefs and teachings about the future, about the ultimate battle between good and evil, about the last days, and about how our world will end. And most of these beliefs and teachings are based on fundamental misinterpretations of what the scriptures really say about the end times." The Apocalypse Code helps readers understand what the Bible really says about End Times, and why what we believe matters so much in today's world.


Compare

"Most of what you've heard, read or been told about the End Times is wrong," says popular radio host and bestselling apologist, Hank Hanegraaff. "We have come to accept a wide range of beliefs and teachings about the future, about the ultimate battle between good and evil, about the last days, and about how our world will end. And most of these beliefs and teachings are ba "Most of what you've heard, read or been told about the End Times is wrong," says popular radio host and bestselling apologist, Hank Hanegraaff. "We have come to accept a wide range of beliefs and teachings about the future, about the ultimate battle between good and evil, about the last days, and about how our world will end. And most of these beliefs and teachings are based on fundamental misinterpretations of what the scriptures really say about the end times." The Apocalypse Code helps readers understand what the Bible really says about End Times, and why what we believe matters so much in today's world.

30 review for The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times . . . and Why It Matters Today

  1. 4 out of 5

    Jacob Aitken

    The gravitas of one's writing is determined by whom one is writing against. Hanegraff, a radio populist by profession, writing against the bizarre wackiness of dispensationalist authors, has no chance of writing with gravitas. I will go ahead and list everything wrong with the book. Hanegraff creates his own acronyms, many of which are just silly, and often labels those who do not accept his reasoning as "not understanding the bible." His alliteration gets the best of him and is distracting to t The gravitas of one's writing is determined by whom one is writing against. Hanegraff, a radio populist by profession, writing against the bizarre wackiness of dispensationalist authors, has no chance of writing with gravitas. I will go ahead and list everything wrong with the book. Hanegraff creates his own acronyms, many of which are just silly, and often labels those who do not accept his reasoning as "not understanding the bible." His alliteration gets the best of him and is distracting to the reader. The book lacks a conclusion and the last chapter is literally copied and pasted from earlier segments of the book. The book sort of...ends with no warning. To the degree that the last chapter had some kind of concluding argument, it is question-begging. To say that we must interpret Scripture by (clearer) Scripture begs the question of what clearer Scripture is. As one said elsewhere, The appeal to “what Scripture says in other places” or to “what the rest of Scripture teaches” is fallacious for a number of reasons. First, because if we are to interpret any given passage in light of what Scripture says everywhere else, then we will never know what Scripture says in any one passage for the simple reason that the process could never begin, except by an arbitrary brute text. But there are no such texts in the Bible. The book itself With those criticisms out of the way, let me commend the book for helpfully outlining the bizarre (and ultimately genocidal) theology of Dispensational Christian Zionism. Hanegraff begins his hermeneutics with what he calls "exegetical eschatology" (it is designated in the book as an "e" with a squared sign). This means one should let the entire bible determine what one believes about eschatology. That's true, but it is nothing different from what Baptists, Presbyterians, Catholics, Moonies, and JWs assert. Hanegraff explicates this by another acronym: LIGHTS Literal Illumination Grammatical Historical Typological Scriptural Synergy In doing so Hanegraff has simply expounded traditional evangelical hermeneutical models. If the reader is familiar with what the word "literal" actually means (e.g., literarily), and familiar with the grammatical-historical principle, then he can probably guess what much of the book will be. Hanegraff uses his principle to show how Dispensationalism fails the hermeneutical standard. His section on typology is quite interesting and for evangelicals, it will represent something new to most readers. The ordinances of the Old Testament are types that find their fulfillment in the Person of Christ. Therefore, to seek to go back to the shadows is literally to reject Christ, yet this is entirely what Zionism is predicated on in their desire to cleanse Palestine or Arab Christians and Muslims, rebuild the temple (presumably by C-4ing the Dome of the Rock), and sacrificing the "red heifer." Hanegraff makes the excellent conclusion that Jesus himself is "the land" which Christians inherit. Jesus is the Temple, and quoting N. T. Wright, the temple-builder is the true king, and vice-versa. Most of Hanegraff's argument--and I think I can agree with it--is that when Jesus said in Mark 13/Mathew 24 to the Jews that this generation will not pass away and that all of these things will fall on you, that Jesus means that generation circa A.D. 30. There is no way to get around the grammatical and logical force. Many amillennialists, though, while agreeing that Mark 13 refers to the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, will counter by saying, "Well, partial preterism demands a pre-A.D. 70 writing of the Apocalypse and we know it was written in A.D. 95-96." Two thoughts, and again I am with Hanegraff on this one, It is by no means certain (like it was earlier in the 20th century) that Revelation was written in AD 95. Many scholars are now advocating an earlier date (N.T. Wright, G. B. Caird, J.A.T. Robinson, etc). So what if it is written in AD 95? This simply changes the book's thrust from a prediction of the Temple's destruction to a theological interpretation of the destruction of 1st century Christianity's greatest enemy: Judaism. Partial Preterism can accommodate either. (Even when I was a militant defender of postmillennialism/partial preterism, I could never understand why people claimed preterism demands an early dating of Revelation. It makes the case easier, I suppose, but neither demands it. Of Particular Note Hanegraff gives an interesting summary of Gematria, the practice of assigning numeric values with letters, which in this case means NERO = 666. Gematria has never been taken seriously by evangelicals, and perhaps for this reason many evangelical scholars shy away from the conclusion that Nero was the antichrist. However bizarre gematria may be, though, the fact remains early writers did practice it and it does lead to Nero being antichrist. Hanegraff also identifies the whore of Revelation 17, not with imperial Rome, contra modern scholars, nor with the Roman Catholic Church, contra dispensationalists, but with covenant Israel. In the Old Testament, only one entity is called a harlot, and that is Israel. Compare Ezekiel 16 with Revelation 17, the book of Hosea. Conclusion Is it an open and shut case for partial preterism? Not quite. The fact that the early Church did not subscribe to a particularly preterist reading should give pause. We need to be careful here. We are not saying, as both Hanegraff and (ironically) Lahaye think, that since a Father did or did not give position to a view, therefore the early church has spoken. No, that's not how it works. The holy fathers did not intend to give an encyclopedia of how each verse in the Bible is interpreted--they did not think that is how the bible should be read. the Bible is not a blank database for receiving propositions, but primarily a book of liturgy. On the other hand, a study of early liturgy will reveal (no pun intended) that the Church recapitulated the Apocalypse in the liturgy. It is not necessarily the case that the holy fathers gave a preterist reading to the text; they did not. However, the lived and worshiped in a way that is very similar to a partial preterist reading. In the Eucharist we remember the Lord's coming. Let the reader understand.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Aaron Kleinheksel

    Crushing disappointment. "The" Apocalypse Code promises much, but fails to deliver. The title itself is disingenuous, and bears a troubling similarity to Hal Lindsey's Apocalypse Code (no "The" in the title). Hal Lindsey is another current writer in the Bible Prophecy field who the author of this book heavily criticizes (though, it can be assumed, he liked the title of his book well enough). Incidentally, I wouldn't recommend Hal Lindsey any more than I'd recommend Hank Hanegraaff. In all honest Crushing disappointment. "The" Apocalypse Code promises much, but fails to deliver. The title itself is disingenuous, and bears a troubling similarity to Hal Lindsey's Apocalypse Code (no "The" in the title). Hal Lindsey is another current writer in the Bible Prophecy field who the author of this book heavily criticizes (though, it can be assumed, he liked the title of his book well enough). Incidentally, I wouldn't recommend Hal Lindsey any more than I'd recommend Hank Hanegraaff. In all honesty, THE Apocalypse Code is actually little more than a vitriolic polemic against Tim LaHaye, one of the co-authors of the Left Behind Series, and a man who Hank Hannegraaf seems to despise. For those familiar with the field of Biblical eschatology, The Apocalypse Code seeks to dismantle the view of dispensationalism. It attempts to do this using a blend of Preteristic and Covenantal/Replacement arguments. To be fair (which is more than I can say for the author) Covenantalism has much to recommend it, but this book does it no credit. If one is searching for a well-written scholarly treatise on either Covenantal or Preteristic thought, look elsewhere! Without going into any detail on the vast number of issues I have with Mr. Hanegraaff's book, I will just highlight what I consider to be 3 of the most problematic. 1) The author presents what must be an almost willful misunderstanding or misrepresentation of actual dispensationl thought. If anyone not familiar with dispensational eschatology read only this book, they would have a severely warped view of it. 2) The complete lack of any systematic way of presenting biblical eschatology. The author informs us that simply using "his" method of "exegetical eschatology (e2)," all Biblical prophecy suddenly becomes so clear only a fool could miss it. Apparently, in roughly 2 millennia of church history, no one has ever thought to use the exegetical eschatology model to figure out prophetic revelation. This would make one laugh out loud if one weren't so disturbed at the thought that the author is actually serious. Mr. Hanegraaff then goes on to give a couple acronyms to help the reader decipher Biblical prophecy. Of course, he himself fails to use them or "his" method throughout much of the text, but I digress. His way of dealing with the huge volume of biblical end-times prophecy seems to be simply to pick out specific areas where he disagrees with Tim LaHaye and then attack him again and again, often without clearly expressing what he himself believes. 3) The poor scholarship. The author rarely uses original source material, preferring to use secondary quotes and statistics from authors with whom he agrees without following them up. In many cases, I felt as if I should be reading their books instead of Hank's. In addition, the author gives no indication that he has a good grasp of Middle Eastern history, 20th century history pertaining to Israel, Christian Zionism, current events, etc. etc. etc. The worst example of this is probably when he equates the Nazi holocaust with a "Holy Land holocaust" initiated by the Jews in 1948 in the introduction! The length of the book itself is not nearly enough to have a chance of adequately covering the subject. Finally, the respectful way in which I am accustomed to academics presenting their own views over and against their peers was unfortunately completely missing from this book. As other reviews have pointed out, perhaps the most disturbing feature of this book is the very unchristian, uncharitable way which the author treats anyone with whom he disagrees, most especially Tim LaHaye. I don't consider Tim LaHaye to be the best representative of dispensationalism, but he certainly doesn't deserve the treatment he is given in this book. Lest anyone think I had something against Mr. Hanegraaff prior to reading this book, I actually read Hank's previous book Counterfeit Revival and found it to be a generally good, if shallow, introduction to its topic. After The Apocalypse Code, however, I cannot imagine reading anything else from this author.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Dana

    This is a book that I had put down for a while and picks back up again after Trump declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel recently. I've been wanting to read several books on the different eschatological views and Hank's book was on my shelf. I love his nerdy acronym writing style and I have no problem with his constant exposure of Tim Lahaye's bad theology throughout the book. Some people may be turned off by that. Hank does one thing well, and that is to point the reader to Christ, the true This is a book that I had put down for a while and picks back up again after Trump declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel recently. I've been wanting to read several books on the different eschatological views and Hank's book was on my shelf. I love his nerdy acronym writing style and I have no problem with his constant exposure of Tim Lahaye's bad theology throughout the book. Some people may be turned off by that. Hank does one thing well, and that is to point the reader to Christ, the true temple and the true Israel. I'll let you read for yourself about his eschatological views.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Roger Sigmon

    This is a well written eye opening book. The author shows how many so called prophesy experts have erred in some of their conclusions.It was a pleasure to read a point of view that is not the most popular and see the evidence of research and study that went into forming those opinions.This is a very interesting read and you'll see the book of Revelation in a different light. This is a well written eye opening book. The author shows how many so called prophesy experts have erred in some of their conclusions.It was a pleasure to read a point of view that is not the most popular and see the evidence of research and study that went into forming those opinions.This is a very interesting read and you'll see the book of Revelation in a different light.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Sam

    The perfect antidote for the silliness spread by Tim LeHaye and his ilk.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Kristine Johnson

    Would have liked a little more depth/explanation. I still don't feel like I really understand Partial Preterism. Would have liked a little more depth/explanation. I still don't feel like I really understand Partial Preterism.

  7. 5 out of 5

    Raymond Martin

    Difficult read. I gave this a five star review because Hanegraaff has completely challenged the normal accepted eschatology taught by most scholars and I love that. More than that, he equips the reader with the tools for use with proper discernment to reveal truth over fancy. I recommend this book to everyone.

  8. 5 out of 5

    Mark Vegh

    These radio and tv eveangelists and religious authors are usually left for a very specific audience to indulge in. Yet Hanegraaff debunks much of the eschatolical myth that conservative Christians believe, and as such does his piece to make the Bible more believable and approachable.

  9. 5 out of 5

    Jason

    This book debunks all the myths of the second coming of our lord;furthermore, this book explains how until recently main stream christianity understood that the antichrist and the apocacolypse has already happened and all that remains is Christs return.

  10. 5 out of 5

    Steve

    Have to agree with other reviewers that the author spends too much time and focus on demonizing the dispensational proponents. Other than that he makes some very good arguments.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Evan Minton

    Growing up in the church, I was taught one view of the end times; dispensationalism. This is what my parents taught me, what my pastor preached from the pulpit, and what every television preacher including John Hagee preached. It's what was depicted in the best selling novel series and movie series Left Behind. The view was so dominant everywhere I went to learn about end times Bible prophesy that I just assumed that this whole scenario is what The Bible taught. I thought the only areas of disag Growing up in the church, I was taught one view of the end times; dispensationalism. This is what my parents taught me, what my pastor preached from the pulpit, and what every television preacher including John Hagee preached. It's what was depicted in the best selling novel series and movie series Left Behind. The view was so dominant everywhere I went to learn about end times Bible prophesy that I just assumed that this whole scenario is what The Bible taught. I thought the only areas of disagreement would be on things like when the rapture would occur (pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib) and what the nature of the millennium would be (pre-mil, a-mil, post-mil), but the basic model of a worldwide demon possessed anti-Christ figure who rebuilt the temple, proclaimed to be God in it, persecuted Christians, etc. etc. was firmly established. The first time I read this book, I was absolutely floored. In this book, Hank Hanegraaff totally contradicts the vast majority of what I was taught about the end times. He presents a view that, prior to reading this book, I never even knew existed; preterism. Partial preterism to be exact. Hanegraaff argues that the majority of so-called end times prophesies were fulfilled in the first century, in Nero's persecution of the church, destruction of Jerusalem, and the destruction of the Jewish temple which took place from 64-70 A.D. I want to make clear that Hanegraaff does NOT deny the second coming of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the saints, or the creation of a new heavens and earth. However, most of what we take to be referring to the end times aren't actually referring to the end times. For example, The Olivet Discourse just isn't predicting a series of signs prior to the rise of the anti-Christ, rapture, and physical and visible return of Christ. It's predicting that "this generation will not pass away before" there are wars, rumors of wars, Earthquakes and famines in various places, false teachers claiming to be the Christ, and The Son of Man "coming" "on the clouds of Heaven". Hanegraaff shows that the language of "coming on the clouds" was a common Old Testament motif for Yahweh coming in judgment upon a nation. One example given is God's pronouncement of Babylon in Isaiah 13 in which God describes his judgment as "a day of clouds" and proceeds to say that the sun, moon, and stars will go dark. Precisely the same language used by Jesus in Matthew 24. Now, God did not come VISIBLY to the people of Babylon, nor did the stars literally cease to shine. All of this was metaphorical language describing fierce judgment Yahweh would unleash upon the Babylonians. Jesus was employing that same language to describe fierce judgment that would come upon Jerusalem for rejecting Him as Messiah. Just as the Babylonians B.C didn't see Yahweh visibly cloud-surfing, we have no reason to think that "The Son Of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven" has to mean that Jesus would show up visibly, riding on top of a cloud in the sky. That this is a prophecy of what would occur in the first century is strongly supported by two primary things. First; Jesus was speaking to his disciples constantly using the second person pronoun "You". "You" "You" "You". This strongly suggests that Jesus was speaking to his first-century audience rather than some 21st or 22nd-century audience. As Brian Godawa once put it, what would we think of a preacher who preached a sermon constantly using the word "You" from the pulpit, but in reality he was addressing congregation thousands of years in the future. We would think "If he doesn't mean US, why doesn't he say the word 'they'?" Secondly, Jesus said that "This generation will not pass away before all these things came to pass". Hanegraaff absolutely dismantles any attempt to make "this generation" mean the generation beginning in 1948 or the Jewish race. As Hanegraaff pointed out, whenever the word "This generation" (genea in Greek) is used in the New Testament, it always refers to the people living at that point in time. Of course, this is just the Olivet Discourse. Hanegraaff talks about the book of Revelation and argues that the first-century emperor Nero perfectly fits the image of the beast of Revelation. The Harlot who rides the beast is not The Roman Catholic Church, it is apostate Israel. The 7 hills on which the beast rests on is Rome. Secular history reveals that Rome was famous for being the nation of 7 mountains. The beast waging war against the saints was fulfilled in Nero's persecution of the church in A.D 64. After I read this book for the first time, my mind was blown. The eschatology that I had just presupposed to be true was left in shambles. This book makes such a powerful case for Partial Preterism that I would be surprised how anyone could read this book from cover to cover and still think Left Behind accurately reflects the end times by the time they put it down. I cannot recommend this book strongly enough. By the way, when you're finished, check out Brian Godawa's novel series "The Chronicles Of The Apocalypse". After all, the dispensationalists can't have all the good novels.

  12. 5 out of 5

    Naomi Inman

    I read the Apocalypse Code, to gain a clear understanding of the Historicist and Preterist approaches to the book of Revelation, as well as the historical teachings and interpretations of Augustine, Athanasius and Anselm. In this regard, Hanegraaff's work accomplishes what he sets out to do with precision and enjoyable to read. The tools he uses to look at the book of Revelation through the lens of textual criticism methodologies and principles, what he calls the Exegetical Eschatology, and his I read the Apocalypse Code, to gain a clear understanding of the Historicist and Preterist approaches to the book of Revelation, as well as the historical teachings and interpretations of Augustine, Athanasius and Anselm. In this regard, Hanegraaff's work accomplishes what he sets out to do with precision and enjoyable to read. The tools he uses to look at the book of Revelation through the lens of textual criticism methodologies and principles, what he calls the Exegetical Eschatology, and his well known "LIGHTS Principles" (Literal, Illumination, Grammatical, Historical, Typology, Scriptural Synergy). I do recommend this book for a nicely-illustrated example of this methodology. Hanegraaff is critical of Hal Lindsey (whom I have not read) and his original "Apocalypse Code" and Lindsey's premise that "prophecies can be fully understood only when their fulfillment drew near." I agree with Hanegraaff that scripture needs to be interpreted with scripture and not with conjecture or speculation. However, because Lindsey got the conjecture part wrong (i.e. comparing locusts to black hawk helicopters, etc.) in taking a stab at Revelation's symbolic descriptions, this does not negate (in my opinion) the premise that prophetic writings become more clearly understood as their fulfillment draws near, since this is explicitly written by Daniel, such as in Daniel 9:4 “But you, Daniel, keep these words secret and seal the book until the time of the end. Many will roam about, and knowledge will increase.” So, Hanegraaff's criticism that it is not possible for a fuller understanding of Revelation to have been hidden for 2000 years, is a non-sequiter to me. Lumping together speculation and conjecture (exegetical error) with the possibility of unfolding understanding (scriptural insight unsealed in due time) does not equate. Bottom line: Apocalypse Code does a great job helping the reader to understand the methodology and interpretations of a historicist view of Revelation and for that reason is worthy of reading in light of today's events.

  13. 4 out of 5

    Pat Groleau

    Excellent Book for those who love the scripture and truth! I did not put this book aside until I consumed every word. If you are a person who wants truth over men’s interpretation you want to read this book. No nonsense and easy to understand and read. Every word was backed by scriptural prooftext. I loved this book because it’s all laid out in such a way that you will be able to share this truth in an understandable way to others. I am a person who wants to not only understand myself but able to Excellent Book for those who love the scripture and truth! I did not put this book aside until I consumed every word. If you are a person who wants truth over men’s interpretation you want to read this book. No nonsense and easy to understand and read. Every word was backed by scriptural prooftext. I loved this book because it’s all laid out in such a way that you will be able to share this truth in an understandable way to others. I am a person who wants to not only understand myself but able to express it to others. Great Job Hank!

  14. 5 out of 5

    Joseph

    5 Stars For Theology 1 or 2 star for Tone Some of the other reviews sum it up well: he makes really good arguments. That said, the tone, while not as vicious as in some theological works, is still not a very good example of how believers are to deal with other believers who disagree. TONE We get it - dispensationalists are wrong. But, aren't there more respectful ways to present that than by pulling out our "baloney detectors" (most of chapter 4)? And, why does it matter that some early dispensation 5 Stars For Theology 1 or 2 star for Tone Some of the other reviews sum it up well: he makes really good arguments. That said, the tone, while not as vicious as in some theological works, is still not a very good example of how believers are to deal with other believers who disagree. TONE We get it - dispensationalists are wrong. But, aren't there more respectful ways to present that than by pulling out our "baloney detectors" (most of chapter 4)? And, why does it matter that some early dispensationalists were viciously anti-semitic, or that Joseph Smith (founder of Mormonism) was also really emphatic about the end of the world coming soon? Isn't that kind of poisoning the well? It doesn't have anything to do with what the Bible says about the issue...It's things like this and a bunch of other little things that just leave you with the feeling that Hank Hanegraaff is saying more about those with whom he disagrees (especially Tim Lahaye) than just "they are wrong about what the Bible says here." Think about it: if you are trying to convince a friend or family member that you are right (and we are all family in Christ), you don't try to beat them down with strong rhetoric. You want them to think "ya know, that is a good point. I hadn't thought of that. You are right" (end with handshake/hug/whatever). That may sound very idealistic, but we're Christians; we don't get to be like everyone else (that's why so few genuine Christ-followers succeed in politics without selling out and becoming the venom-mouthed slanderers and liars that we rightly assume most politicians are). We're different, and Christian academia is no different (from anything else, and thus it has to be different). Did I mention that we are supposed to be different? That said, I do think some exaggerate his nastiness. The most outrageous statements, for example, aren't made by Hanegraaff, but by rather dispensationalists when discussing other positions. For example, John Hagee says, "Replacement theologians [pretty much anyone who is not a dispensationalist] are now carrying Hitler's annointing and his message" (Chapter 3, page 69). Now, I haven't read the quote's actual source, but unless the next line is "...would be a radically untrue and unfair statement," that statement is hard to read any other way. Obviously, we can't hold what others say against Hank Hanegraaff. Also, I wouldn't exactly call him "anti-Israel." He never justifies Palestinian terrorism, and he even explicitly affirms the "definitive right" of Israel to exist (end of chapter 6). The fact that he denies that Israel has a God-given right to control not only the current nation but much of the Middle East (given Solomon's borders) is hardly anti-semitic. And pointing out that wicked things have been done by the Israeli government, especially against Christians for crying out loud, is hardly unfair if those things are true (and I don't hear anyone denying that they are). Still, he comes off as a bit arrogant. He's not exceptionally so; in fact, a lot of evangelical theological books I have read are like this. This SHOULD be exceptional, but rather, what is seen as exceptional today are those who write with humility and grace. Anthony Hoekema is a good example; I disagree with him throughout much of his seminol work The Bible and the Future, but I never felt attacked when he tried to convince me (as the reader) that what he was saying was what was biblical. This book, though more theologically correct, is no The Bible and the Future... THEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS I am hesitant to recommend any book that is not fully-Christlike in its tone towards those who disagree (I am the biggest nag about that kind of thing - I even hesitate to say "not-fully Christlike," but I think it's fair here). However, if you can get past the tone (which is not easy if you come in agreeing with Tim Lahaye and the other dispensationalists), he does present the (partial) preterist case really well. He opposes dispensationalism, and instead argues that much of what we think speaks of the end-times (though certainly not all of it) is forecasting not the physical return of Jesus (which he affirms will happen), but the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (and with it, the fall of the entire Old Covenant religious system). Furthermore, I think he does an excellent job of explaining and defending the principles of biblical interpretation that lead to this view (as opposed to the extremely literal reading that is the basis of dispensationalism). Although perhaps his acronyms are a little silly, I think he does an excellent job of defending them. For example, the "literal" principle dictates that, instead of taking everything as literally as possible, you take it in the most plain and obvious sense based on genre and context. Thus, the narrative about the woman clothed in the sun and the dragon hurling stars at the earth in Revelation 12 should be read differently from the straight forward, didactic account of Jesus' life in the Gospel of Luke. So, I still give it 3 stars, because, it's important enough and successful enough in its arguments for me to recommend, with the caveat that I would have written it with less negativity towards dispensationalist theologians (without softening the sharp accuracy against their interpretations, of course).

  15. 4 out of 5

    Jeroen Koornstra

    A Partial Preterist book that is well written. With a strong attention to the way we should read the Bible, Hanegraaff shows good principles we all should keep in mind when developing our end time view. The book has its focus on debunking Tim LaHay’s work, which is done very good but sometimes in a too agressive way.

  16. 4 out of 5

    Noula

    This book was one of the first Christian authors that I’ve read. It introduced me into non-fiction and fiction Christian authors. This one I remember most than the Afterlife book I’ve read on iBooks. I give this book 5 stars, because it’s such enlightenment and positivity.

  17. 4 out of 5

    Heidi

    Very different take on what Scripture says about the end times, than that presented in "Left Behind." Very different take on what Scripture says about the end times, than that presented in "Left Behind."

  18. 4 out of 5

    Gary Cain

    Excellent. Dispels modern myths on the return of Christ made popular by the “Left Behind” series using solid Biblical interpretation methods. A must read.

  19. 5 out of 5

    Phil Meadows

    I shall be brief. I'm listening to the audio version of this book, and my comments center around the performance of the audio version. If you're reading on paper, another review will be more suitable. I have listened to Hank Hanegraaf's radio show, off & on, for a few years now. In the show he answers the hard Bible questions that callers ask—sometimes topical, most times not. Needless to say he gets a lot of questions about Revelation. He holds a partial Preterist view, which has always intrigue I shall be brief. I'm listening to the audio version of this book, and my comments center around the performance of the audio version. If you're reading on paper, another review will be more suitable. I have listened to Hank Hanegraaf's radio show, off & on, for a few years now. In the show he answers the hard Bible questions that callers ask—sometimes topical, most times not. Needless to say he gets a lot of questions about Revelation. He holds a partial Preterist view, which has always intrigued me, and so I got the book. I'm only in the first chapter but I doubt I will hear him say anything doctrinally that I wholeheartedly disagree with. I'm not a "capital D dispensationalist" and it's good to be versed in all viewpoints anyway, so that's not a problem. The problem is that Hank is reading his own book. Very poorly. I realize he's a professional radio guy, and the radio show is mostly conversation so there's no problem there. In fact he has a nice delivery. Not so, this book. He will read, a FEW words and then. PAUSE for a moment. to EMPHASISE half a phrase and then, say the rest. and WITHOUT, Meaningful, inflection at the end. That was a little example of what I'm hearing. I don't have time to read, I listen on my commute or when folding clothes, etc. I need an audiobook. And I'm very interested in this topic and what Hank has to say. I trust him. But I doubt I'll be able to finish this book.

  20. 5 out of 5

    M. L. Wilson

    I realize that many folks may have an issue with Hank Hanegrasff's brusque approach, but his understanding of history and his ability to see through the smokescreen of long-held tradition is worth the read here. I found this book didn't so much as answer my questions as it helped to validate my own conclusions. Without beating theology to death in this review, let me just say that for people who desire to seek to have a better understanding of God Almighty; who seek to "...eat meat" rather than c I realize that many folks may have an issue with Hank Hanegrasff's brusque approach, but his understanding of history and his ability to see through the smokescreen of long-held tradition is worth the read here. I found this book didn't so much as answer my questions as it helped to validate my own conclusions. Without beating theology to death in this review, let me just say that for people who desire to seek to have a better understanding of God Almighty; who seek to "...eat meat" rather than continue to "...suckle milk", this book is a great starting point. What I wish that Mr. Hanegraaff did not do was hammer on Dr. Timothy LaHaye so much. I realize that he did so to illustrate the contrast, but to me it almost seemed like bullying after a time. Dr. LaHaye is from an "old school" theological teaching and at his age now, there is little chance the man will change; this is who he is and he will meet Christ still believing all that he believes. The Apostle Paul said it best, "If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal." - 1st Corinthians 13:1 I don't agree with all of Hanegraaff's theology, but that does not diminish my respect for the work he's done here. Again, this is a great book for those who desire to really learn more about the history of Christianity and the errors that have crept in and have been errantly established as truth.

  21. 5 out of 5

    Dav

    The Apocalypse Code ● by Hank Hanegraaff "...Hanegraaff argues that the key to understanding the last book of the Bible is the other sixty-five books of the Bible — not current events or recent history and certainly not any complicated charts. The Apocalypse Code offers sane answers to some very controversial questions... The Apocalypse Code is a call to understand what the Bible really says about the end times and why how we understand it matters so much in today’s world. —Lee Strobel, Author, The The Apocalypse Code ● by Hank Hanegraaff "...Hanegraaff argues that the key to understanding the last book of the Bible is the other sixty-five books of the Bible — not current events or recent history and certainly not any complicated charts. The Apocalypse Code offers sane answers to some very controversial questions... The Apocalypse Code is a call to understand what the Bible really says about the end times and why how we understand it matters so much in today’s world. —Lee Strobel, Author, The Case for the Real Jesus “This book is a withering and unrelenting critique of the positions of apocalyptic enthusiasts such as Tim LaHaye. Every fan of the Left Behind series should read this book. The fog will clear, and common sense will return to our reading of the Bible." CRI The book deals with hermeneutics, biblical interpretation & some of nonsense of Tim Lahaye's Left Behind series. Left Behind, can be enjoyed as the fictional series it is & not taken as the predictive prophecy of the Revelation of John.

  22. 5 out of 5

    Elise

    Strange book. Sections are cut and pasted and reappear verbatim in various other parts of the book. He can't write "read the bible" even once, apparently, without adding "for all it's worth". There's no actual ending, the writing just kind of stops. I don't think Hank Hanegraaff has ever seen an anacronym he hasn't loved. The e-squared thing is cheesy and his bizarre assertions that Bart Ehrman would have stayed Christian if he'd just learned Hanegraaff's method of interpretation was almost the Strange book. Sections are cut and pasted and reappear verbatim in various other parts of the book. He can't write "read the bible" even once, apparently, without adding "for all it's worth". There's no actual ending, the writing just kind of stops. I don't think Hank Hanegraaff has ever seen an anacronym he hasn't loved. The e-squared thing is cheesy and his bizarre assertions that Bart Ehrman would have stayed Christian if he'd just learned Hanegraaff's method of interpretation was almost the comic relief aspect of what was otherwise a pretty tedious book. Topically, it was an acceptable introduction to a partial preterist view of eschatology. Not the best but not the worst, either. Hanegraaff ducks the bigger issues with the view in favor of setting up dispensational straw men but he does hit the major points. Personally, I find the perspective attractive and intriguing and I've been able to retain that interest throughout this reading which I count as a win.

  23. 4 out of 5

    T C Netzley

    Don't let the title fool you if you are not familiar with Hal Lindsay. The Apocalypse Code is a fantastic rebuttal to popular notions, with a challenge to read and discover for yourself. Mr. Hanegraaff does not withhold his own opinion, nor ire toward certain ideas and there most contemporary proponents, but nonetheless delivers not only a great presentation of his studied viewpoint, but encouragement to find yours with mature and proper grounding, as if to say "It's not what I or anyone else sa Don't let the title fool you if you are not familiar with Hal Lindsay. The Apocalypse Code is a fantastic rebuttal to popular notions, with a challenge to read and discover for yourself. Mr. Hanegraaff does not withhold his own opinion, nor ire toward certain ideas and there most contemporary proponents, but nonetheless delivers not only a great presentation of his studied viewpoint, but encouragement to find yours with mature and proper grounding, as if to say "It's not what I or anyone else says, but what God himself says that should speak to you.". Furthermore, the given principles of study in this book, presented by two easily remembered acronyms, LEGACY and LIGHTS, are such that nobody can intelligibly argue with for thorough biblical study and deciphering regardless of eschatological viewpoints personally held.

  24. 4 out of 5

    Bryan Bridges

    Overall, this book was a good critique of dispensationalist balderdash. Tim LaHaye's name appears frequently, due to his role in conceiving the Left Behind series. Plenty of good anecdotes on dispensationalism's contribution to the mess in the Palestine as well. Also, I never quite noticed the eerie parallel between the spread of John Nelson Darby's eschatology and Charles Darwin's theories on evolution. As far as weaknesses go, this book went overboard with alliteration so much that I wanted to Overall, this book was a good critique of dispensationalist balderdash. Tim LaHaye's name appears frequently, due to his role in conceiving the Left Behind series. Plenty of good anecdotes on dispensationalism's contribution to the mess in the Palestine as well. Also, I never quite noticed the eerie parallel between the spread of John Nelson Darby's eschatology and Charles Darwin's theories on evolution. As far as weaknesses go, this book went overboard with alliteration so much that I wanted to bash my skull against a cinderblock wall. As Toby Ziegler once said, I needed an avalanche of aspirin. Also, I think it would have been better structured had the author gone verse-by-verse instead of theme-by-theme. These are both minor nuisances, though, and overall this book was very informative.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Russell Hayes

    I was hoping for a more systematic approach to this topic. Instead, the author just rudely attacks those the straw men he has created for his opponents. Disturbingly compares Israeli action to the Holocaust. Hank failed to address the possibility that the prophecies could refer both to events in the first century as well as still-future events, similar to Old Testament types and shadows he spends so much time discussing. He also repeatedly accuses those adhering to dispensationalism as blasphemo I was hoping for a more systematic approach to this topic. Instead, the author just rudely attacks those the straw men he has created for his opponents. Disturbingly compares Israeli action to the Holocaust. Hank failed to address the possibility that the prophecies could refer both to events in the first century as well as still-future events, similar to Old Testament types and shadows he spends so much time discussing. He also repeatedly accuses those adhering to dispensationalism as blasphemous, which I believe is uncalled for and false. In the end, I am not sure whether or not I agree with his exegesis.

  26. 5 out of 5

    William Dicks

    Hanegraaff sets out to make his point, and I think he does make it. The major point that he wants to make is that the dispensational interpretation of end-time events is based on incorrect interpretation of the Scriptures. He backs it up with allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture and not allowing newspapers to interpret Scripture. Although I enjoyed the book, Hanegraaff does have one annoying way of writing; he repeats himself a lot. He will say the same thing several times in different conte Hanegraaff sets out to make his point, and I think he does make it. The major point that he wants to make is that the dispensational interpretation of end-time events is based on incorrect interpretation of the Scriptures. He backs it up with allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture and not allowing newspapers to interpret Scripture. Although I enjoyed the book, Hanegraaff does have one annoying way of writing; he repeats himself a lot. He will say the same thing several times in different contexts, sometimes with almost the same words. It sometimes felt like a bad case of deja vu.

  27. 5 out of 5

    Faith

    Amazingly bad form to so obviously and repetitively attack someone that sees things differently than the author. Makes one wonder when considering the "you will be known by your love for one another" concept. The author also has a few obvious glitches in reasoning yet is blind to gaping holes in some of his own theories. Those interested may want to read "Breaking the Apocalypse Code: Setting the Record Straight About the End Times", by Mark Hitchcock, as a contrast. Amazingly bad form to so obviously and repetitively attack someone that sees things differently than the author. Makes one wonder when considering the "you will be known by your love for one another" concept. The author also has a few obvious glitches in reasoning yet is blind to gaping holes in some of his own theories. Those interested may want to read "Breaking the Apocalypse Code: Setting the Record Straight About the End Times", by Mark Hitchcock, as a contrast.

  28. 5 out of 5

    Mark Sequeira

    So I was looking forward to reading this and finally got it on bargain...Let me say that there is nothing much here compared to the Seventy weeks of Daniel by Phillip Mauro, the Beast by Ken Gentry or Before Jerusalem Fell, or Chilton's "Day's of Vengeance."...Those are all better, as is N.T. Wright, although there are a couple good ideas here. Since most of the above can be had online FREE, I would start there and only buy or read Hanegraaff if you want to get his take on things. So I was looking forward to reading this and finally got it on bargain...Let me say that there is nothing much here compared to the Seventy weeks of Daniel by Phillip Mauro, the Beast by Ken Gentry or Before Jerusalem Fell, or Chilton's "Day's of Vengeance."...Those are all better, as is N.T. Wright, although there are a couple good ideas here. Since most of the above can be had online FREE, I would start there and only buy or read Hanegraaff if you want to get his take on things.

  29. 5 out of 5

    Kevin Driskill

    I enjoyed this book even if I am not completely convinced. There are so many views of eschatological scenarios that they are hard to sort out and they all have a compelling argument for and against. I think Hank does a great job presenting his side and is very compelling. It should be reviewed by any scholarly investigator before passing judgment. I very much enjoyed the yeomanly work given here.

  30. 5 out of 5

    Monica

    So I decided not to continue reading this book because I feel like it is a waist of time. The book is all about trashing someone elses point of view. I wanted to read this book to learn a new perspective on reading and understanding the bible. This book did not deliver.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.