Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.'s Blog, page 109

AMILLENNIAL PESSIMISM

PMT 2015-090 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Amillennialists often complain that postmillennialists wrongly categorize them as “pessimistic.” They generally reject this evaluation for two reasons: (1) It is negative sounding in itself. And (2) it overlooks the fact that they believe that ultimately Christ and his people win the victory at the end of history. Still other amillennialists deny this designation because they call themselves “optimistic amillennialists.”

What do postmillennialists mean by categorizing amillennialism as “pessimistic”? Is the charge legitimate. I believe it is.

Obviously all evangelical eschatological perspectives are ultimately optimistic — even dispensationalists who make a very nice living from books on cultural decline, despair, and doom. After all, Christ does lead his people to victory in saving them from their sins in history, resurrecting them from the dead at the end of history, and establishing them in righteousness in eternity. These issues are not debated among evangelicals: Christianity is of glorious, eternal consequence. But neither are these observations relevant to the debate between the millennial views.

Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond

(ed. by Darrell Bock)

Presents three views on the millennium: progressive dispensationalist, amillennialist, and reconstructionist postmillennialist viewpoints. Includes separate responses to each view

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Historically amillennialism has tended to be pessimistic in terms of the question of widespread, long-lasting cultural success for the Christian faith in time and on earth. That is, regarding these matters we should note:

First, as a system of gospel proclamation amillennialism teaches that the gospel of Christ will not exercise any majority influence in the world before Christ’s return. They allow that Christianity may enjoy flashes of revival and spurts of growth (e.g., the Reformation and the Great Awakening). Yet, by its very nature the amillennial system cannot allow that Christianity will become the dominant feature of human society and culture. Otherwise, it would actually be postmillennialism.

Second, as a system of historical understanding amillennialism, in fact, holds that the Bible teaches there are prophetically determined, irresistible trends downward toward chaos in the outworking and development of history. It is true that some amillennialists such as Jay E. Adams understand the great tribulation in the Olivet Discourse as referring (correctly) to the Jewish War and the AD 70 destruction of the temple. Yet their overall eschatological system necessarily demands a prophetically-determined collapse of society in history, as we can see in the writings of Jay Adams. Otherwise, it would actually be postmillennialism.

Amillennialism v. Postmillennialism Debate

(DVD by Gentry and Gaffin)

Formal, public debate between Dr. Richard Gaffin (Westminster Theological Seminary)

and Kenneth Gentry at the Van Til Conference in Maryland.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Third, as a system for the promotion of Christian discipleship amillennialism dissuades the Church from anticipating and laboring for wide-scale success in influencing the world for Christ during this age. It affirms the duty for churches to disciple converts, but it does not believe there will be enough converts to affect the direction of history. Otherwise, it would actually be postmillennialism. Regarding the question of so-called “optimistic amillennialists,” it seems to me that the verses an amillennialist would use to underscore his optimism are those that endorse a postmillennial perspective. Unless, of course, he is optimistic on grounds other than direct biblical revelation. Therefore, he should come out of the closet and be a postmillennialist.

MATTHEW 10:22 AND POSTMILLENNIALISM

PMT 2015-089 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Oftentimes critics of postmillennialism will go to NT passages such as Matt 10:22 to discredit postmillennialism’s long-term optimism. That passage reads:

“You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved.”

Since postmillennialism expects a future in which Christianity reigns supreme, and in which righteousness and peace will prevail throughout the world, texts such as this one must be explained. Postmillennialism cannot be true if Christians will always be hated and the only hope we have is our bare endurance.

But does this passage teach such? I do not believe that it does. We must read the verse in its context to grasp what our Lord is actually declaring.

Lord of the Saved

(by Ken Gentry)

A critique of easy believism and affirmation of Lordship salvation.

Shows the necessity of true, repentant faith to salvation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

In Matt 10 Jesus appoints his disciples as apostles, investing them with great authority (Matt 10:1–2). And at this stage of his ministry he limits their outreach to Israel alone: “These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them: ‘Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans; but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel’” (Matt 10:5–6). Of course, this is not the way it was always to be, for later at the end of his ministry he commissions his church to “make disciples of all the nations” (Matt 28:19).

Furthermore, immediately after his limiting their mission to Israel, he teaches them what they are to preach: “And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (Matt 10:7). This also shows the early phase of his ministry. The kingdom has not yet come, though it is close at hand.

He then directs them to go from city-to-city in Israel to preach the gospel, heal the sick, cast out demons, and so forth (Matt 10:8–15). He notes that he is sending them “as sheep in the midst of wolves” (Matt 10:16). And in doing so he warns them: “But beware of men, for they will hand you over to the courts and scourge you in their synagogues; and you will even be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles” (Matt 10:17–18). This clearly speaks of their ministry to Israel, for it mentions the trouble they will experience from the synagogues.

He further warns that “brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death” (Matt 10:21). Then we read the verse that raised our question: “You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved” (Matt 10:22).

Then following this warning he promises: “But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes” (Matt 10:23). We must ask: “Whenever who persecutes you?” Contextually, it is speaking expressly of Jewish opposition.

Navigating the Book of Revelation (by Ken Gentry)

Technical studies on key issues in Revelation, including the seven-sealed scroll, the cast out temple, Jewish persecution of Christianity, the Babylonian Harlot, and more.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

What Matt 10:22 is declaring then is that as his twelve disciples (who are all dead by now!) engage the mission to Israel, they must hang tough, they must endure through the raging of Israel against Christ and his followers. Not only so, but he promises he will come in judgment against Israel before they have finished going through all the cities of Israel. This refers to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the specific “end” in view.

A similar statement to Matt 10:22 is found in Matt 24:13: “But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.” And again, the context points to the time preceding the fall of Jerusalem, for he is answering a question about the coming destruction of the temple (Matt 24:2–3).

Thus, Matt 10:22 (and Matt 24:13) do not speak of relentless persecution to the end of history (are you persecuted to death?). Rather it is referring to Jewish persecution of the Christian faith that leads up to AD 70.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SEVEN ORACLES (2)

PMT 2015-087 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is the third in a mini-series on the seven “letters” to the seven churches in Revelation. I have been arguing that they are not really letters at all. Rather they are judgment oracles. This fits perfectly with the preterist understanding of Rev as a covenant lawsuit against Israel. In the previous article I offered the first two arguments for the oracular nature of these seven messages. In this article I will complete my argument.

Third, the oracles are a part of the crucial, introductory vision of the Son of Man and even flesh out this visionary unit that extends from 1:9 all the way through to 3:22. The oracles are not separate, free-standing material. Unfortunately, this is obscured by the modern chapter divisions imposed upon the text. But we can see the unified nature of this larger section from several lines of evidence:

(1) The initial portion of the vision of the Son of Man ends with a statement regarding the seven churches (1:20). Then it immediately begins presenting oracles to those very churches: “to the angel of the church in Ephesus write” (2:1a). This by itself should compel us to recognize this material as a related unit.

(2) The Son of Man in the vision is repeatedly declared to be the very one who is charging John to write (1:11, 12, 17, 19; cp. 1:3): this continuing charge is carefully repeated in introducing each of the seven oracles (2:1a, 8a, 12a, 18a; 3:1a, 7a, 14a). Thus, John is evidently still in the presence of the visionary Son of Man and continues to hear him speaking (which speaking began in 1:12) in the authoritative oracles: “the One who . . . says” (2:1b; cp. 2:8b, 12b, 18b; 3:1b, 7b, 14b).

Great Tribulation: Past or Future?

(Thomas Ice v. Kenneth Gentry)

Debate book on the nature and timing of the great tribulation.

Both sides thoroughly cover the evidence they deem necessary,

then interact with each other.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(3) The descriptions of the Son of Man in the vision (1:12–20) are repeatedly brought into the oracles to underscore the fact that he is the one who continues to speak. For instance, in 2:2 he is presents himself as “the One who holds the seven stars” which reflects the vision of 1:20. In 2:8b he calls himself “the first and the last” which is based on 1:17c. And so on (see more on this below).

(4) John provides no internal break, no textual clue to suggest that he has left his visionary experience (1:10). That is, we do not hear such transitional statements as “after these things” (4:1; 7:9; 15:5; 18:1; 19:1). Interestingly though, the actual name “Jesus” or “Christ” is never given in the oracles, though it appears in 1:1, 2, 5, 9; 11:15; 12:10, 17; 14:12; 19:10; 20:4, 6; 22:16, 20, 21)

Thus, regarding the importance of the seven oracles, we must recognize that they are a part of the all-important, opening vision of the risen, death-conquering Christ who will dominate the entire story of Rev. They are therefore important as introductions to the judgment/salvation visions to follow. All of this “is very important” in that by recounting “this vision as he does at the beginning of the work” he “established, in the customary fashion of Judaeo-Christian rhetoric, his thos as a prophet — the trustworthiness of character that Aristotle identified as perhaps the most effective source of rhetorical proof” (John Kirby).

Fourth, as historically-focused oracles they anchor Rev in the first century, which we should expect in light of John’s near-term indicators (1:1, 3; 22:6, 10). John opens his book with a vision of the Son of Man (1:12–22) among those particular churches (1:4, 11, cp. 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14), then immediately applies this vision to the real circumstances of his original audience. The preterist approach sees these messages as providing strong evidence for its understanding of the overall point of Rev.

Fifth, the presence of the oracles as microcosms of John’s larger story is also helpful for our understanding a very practical matter: the relationship of the seven churches to the drama therein. After all, the redemptive-historical preterist sees the main focus of Rev to be on Israel’s AD 70 judgment (1:7). If John is writing to Asia Minor churches about the approaching fall of Jerusalem over 450 miles across the Mediterranean Sea to the southeast how is Rev important for its original recipients? I would point out the following.

Kids Who Kill

(by Gov. Mike Huckabee)

Proposes a key to recovering our country’s basic values: faith, family, work, and community.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

John writes to the seven churches of Asia but through them to all the churches: note that the Son of Man “holds the seven stars” in his hand (2:1), each of the oracles speaks to “the churches” (2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22), and at one place we specifically hear that “all the churches” are to learn from the experience of one (2:23). Thus, “these seven churches have been singled out to complete the sublime number that figures so prominently in the symbolism of the book, and thus to epitomize the first-century church as a whole” (Kirby). The smaller story of the seven churches plays out on the larger canvas of the judgments closing out the old covenant in the fall of Jerusalem and the permanent collapse of the Jewish temple as a redemptive-historical act in establishing the new covenant. The larger story to unfold in Jerusalem is not irrelevant to the local churches far away in Asia Minor.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SEVEN ORACLES (2)

PMT 2015-087 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my last article I introduced the concept that the seven messages that appear early in Rev are not really letters. Rather they should be understood as prophetic oracles built on the covenant lawsuit model of the Old Testament. These seven oracles are important for several reasons. I will highlight two of those in this article, and the remaining ones in my next article.

First, a major reason John writes Rev is to encourage faithfulness through the storm of persecution befalling John’s original Christian recipients. Throughout Rev he urges perseverance through the coming trials (1:3, 9; 12:11; 13:10; 14:4–5; 16:16; 17:14; 21:7). For instance, John opens with: “I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” (Rev 1:9). So at the very beginning of his book John declares that he and his recipients are “in the tribulation” and that they must also engage in “perseverance.” The several other verses I list above also testify to the urgent call to hold on through the storm.

This perseverance theme holds true in the oracles as well (2:2–3, 10, 17, 19, 25–26; 3:3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 21). In this distinct section (2:1–3:22). For instance, in the opening comments in the opening oracle, we read: “I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false; 3 and you have perseverance and have endured for My name’s sake, and have not grown weary” (Rev 2:2–3). Christ speaks directly to the churches regarding their own specific issues in their own historical contexts and calls them to overcome (2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21).

Getting the Message

(by Daniel Doriani)

Presents solid principles and clear examples of biblical interpretation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

In each oracle Christ states: “I know your X” (2:2, 9, 13, 19; 3:1, 8, 15). He also calls for spiritual faithfulness in each of the seven churches by using “an aphorism rooted in the Jesus tradition”: ho ech n ous akousat (“he who has an ear”; 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22). This call reflects that which Jesus issues to his listeners (Mt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mk 4:9, 23; Lk 8:8; 14:35).

Second, the themes set forth in the oracles are developed in the dramatic visions to follow in Rev. John Kirby observes that “these serve more or less as ‘cover-letters’ for the rest of the work.” Consequently, as G. K. Beale notes, they serve as a “literary microcosm of the entire book’s macrocosmic structure.” James Barr agrees: “In this way, the story of the letters is really the story of the whole work.” Barr adds: “The letters to the seven churches are small rhetorical gems, not only perfectly balanced within themselves, but each correlated with the opening vision of the risen Christ. . . . They also contain all the basic themes of the work. . . . They are, in other words, a sort of miniature of the Apocalypse in prosaic style.” Or as Alan Bandy expresses it: “the impact of these messages cause ripples throughout the entire vision evident by the intratextual reverberations later in the book.”

We may see that the oracles anticipate the larger narrative of Rev in several respects. In addition to the

perseverance theme just stated, the later visions expand other oracle themes such as: overcoming (2:7, 11, 17, 26 = 12:11; 15:2; 17:14; 21:7), tribulation (2:9, 10 = 22; 7:14), Satan (2:9 = 13; 3:9; 12:9; 20:2, 7), martyrdom (2:13 = 6:9–11; 11:7–10; 14:13; 17:6), idolatry (2:14, 20 = 9:20; 13:4; 21:8; 22:15), sword judgment (2:16 = 6:4; 13:10; 19:15, 21), salvation blessing (2:7 = 22:2; 2:11 = 20:6; 21:8; 2:26b-27 = 20:4 ), and more.

God’s Law Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)

Summary for the case for the continuing relevance of God’s Law

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

This is especially significant in that Rev’s theme regards God’s imminent judgment against the Jews for their killing Christ (1:7), for in the oracles we also see Jewish opposition against the local churches (2:9; 3:9) and the divine judgment upon them that is approaching (3:10). Christ’s judgment-coming against Israel is also anticipated by his chastening-coming against the individual churches themselves (2:5, 16, 25; 3:3, 11). Significantly, “the conclusion of each message carries a theme that runs through Revelation — viz., God’s mercy and loving-kindness toward his own (cf. 7:15, 17; 19:7–9; 21:3–7). A conditional promise of salvation then follows after an exhortation to ‘listen’ (2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 12, 22)” (Robert Muse).

I will continue this study in my next article.

THE SEVEN “LETTERS” ARE NOT LETTERS

PMT 2015-086 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The “Seven Letters of Revelation” are a familiar and popular section of John’s Revelation. A number of scholars point out, however, that these popularly-designated “letters” to the seven churches are not actually letters at all. Rather they are prophetic oracles or royal proclamations. And as such they perfectly fit in with the theme and flow of Revelation.

These seven messages do not appear to be epistles in that they “diverge from the normal models of Greco-Roman epistolary writing” (Alan Bandy). Each one begins with a command to write to a church rather than a salutation which is altogether lacking (even though Rev as a whole has a salutation, 1:4–5). Nor do they have appropriate conclusions which were “a standard part of all personal letters in antiquity” (R. L. Muse).

In addition, the opening of each “letter” immediately declares tade legei, “thus says,” or more literally “these things he says.” This is more in keeping with a prophetic oracle or royal proclamation. Clearly, these oracles are uniquely framed in the NT, differing from common epistolary forms.

In the OT the prophets occasionally send prophetic oracles by way of letter, but they are most decidedly oracles — oracles structured by the covenant lawsuit pattern. In Rev the seven oracles come from Christ who “is above all the Faithful Witness (1:5) whose legal testimony will be decisive when the heavenly tribunal examines the earthly covenant partners” (G. Campbell). The OT prophetic oracles open with “thus says” and are followed by a statement of who speaks (Yahweh). This is like the seven oracles in Rev beginning with tade legei (“thus says”) followed by a description of the authoritative speaker (usually the Son of Man, 1:13–20).

Charismatic Gift of Prophecy

(by Kenneth Gentry)

A rebuttal to charismatic arguments for the gift of prophecy continuing in the church today.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

In this regard, we must consider the following OT examples: “Then a letter came to him from Elijah the prophet saying, ‘Thus says the LORD God of your father David’” (2Ch 21:12). “Now these are the words of the letter which Jeremiah the prophet sent. . . . ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel’” (Jer 29:1, 4). “Zephaniah the priest read this letter to Jeremiah the prophet. Then came the word of the LORD to Jeremiah, saying” (Jer 29:29–30). We also see this form in the OT in a royal proclamation: “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia” (2Ch 36:23). Outside of Rev the only time this common prophetic phrase is used in the NT is in Ac 21:11b. There Agabus issues a prophetic pronouncement regarding Paul’s coming captivity: “This is what the Holy Spirit says [tade legei].”

The oracles generally present two fundamental messages. Both of these message types conform to the OT prophetic pattern: (1) A warning message is presented to each of the churches, even to the two who are not rebuked: Smyrna (2:10) and Philadelphia (2:10–11). (2) A promise of salvation is given as the high point of each oracle (2:7b, 11b, 17b, 26–28; 3:4–5, 12, 21). These two message run throughout Rev’s narrative, with the salvation message being the goal of Rev.

 Finding a Vision

(by Michael Milton)

Presents a biblical vision of church ministry and involvement

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Since Revelation is an apocalyptic prophecy detailing God’s covenant curse on Israel, the structure and significance of these seven messages as prophetic oracles is significant. Even if widely misunderstood.

DOES THE NT TEACH GRADUAL VICTORY?

PMT 2015-085 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A reader has sent me a very perceptive email that well deserves my attention. And I think answering it will prove valuable to you in your postmillennial study as I engage the question it presents. He writes:

“Reflecting on Isaiah 11 —— ‘The Peaceable Kingdom.’ If we take that to be a portrait of the ‘post-millennial’ millennium, then I would find its New Testament counterpart in Romans 8 (redemption of all creation).

But — here’s the question — apart from 1 Corinthians 15 (‘and he must reign…’) and The Parable of the Mustard Seed and leaven in the lump, I see very little in the New Testament itself which seems to envision the slow growth of the kingdom resulting in a victorious display within an historic millennium.

I don’t, for example, see anything in the Pauline corpus (or other NT letters) which looks forward to ‘the Peaceable Kingdom’ within history, no references or allusions in the NT to Isaiah 11 and others like it (e.g., Isaiah 35) as developing within history (other than the historical earthly ministry of Jesus himself).

It seems to me that the predominant mood in the NT is ‘the eager expectation’, waiting for ‘the appearing of our great God and Savior’, and the hope for ‘the glory that is yet to be revealed…’

Sounds rather ‘sudden’ (not gradual) to me.”

Now, for my reply.

Thanks for your inquiry. It shows deep thought and strongly biblical concerns. As I read your inquiry I see your major concern as one which is being fed by four subsidiary questions. Your main concern appears to be that the NT does not seem to expect a gradual development of peace on earth as a consequence of Christ’s kingdom Rather it apparently looks to a sudden coming of kingdom victory at the end of history when the consummate order is established.

In answering your concern, I will first highlight these sub-questions. Then having these out front, I will answer your concerns in the course of a several-part study. In doing so I hope to show that postmillennialism is not undermined by this major question with its inter-related matters.

The Underlying Concerns

As I read this inquiry, it seems that the subsidiary concerns underlying your main question are:

1. Does Isa 11 find its counterpart in Rom 8 and the redemption of all creation? That is, does it find its fulfillment in the consummate order rather than in the temporal order to unfold before Christ’s second advent?

2. Does the NT see the peaceable kingdom imagery (such as found in Isa 11 and 35) occurring prior to Christ’s return in glory?

3. Does the NT envision slow growth for this kingdom?

4. Does not the NT call us to expect God’s kingdom to appear suddenly?

The relationship of Isa 11 and Rom 8

Most evangelicals agree that Isa 11 is a Messianic prophecy, not one that pictures Hezekiah’s reign or some other OT-era fulfillment. I will work on this Messianic assumption, which is obviously the conviction of my inquirer.

In this prophecy Isaiah presents Christ as arising from the reduction of the Davidic line to a stump (Isa 11:1). And it promises that he will bring righteous judgment for the poor and the afflicted (Isa 11:4a). Then it sees this as resulting in a world in which the wolf, leopard, and lion will dwell peaceably with the lamb, goat and calf. Which being interpreted means: he sees Christ’s rule as judging righteously even for the poor of the world (who are so often oppressed by the wealthy rulers, cp. Isa 1:23; 5:23; 10:2) and as bringing peace to in its wake (as pictured by the loss of the natural enmity between carnivores and herbivores).

Furthermore, all evangelicals would agree that Paul’s teaching on the consummate order — our final estate in the new heavens and new earth — is the ultimate fulfillment of Isaiah’s peaceable kingdom prophecy. When Christ returns to end history and establish the final order, sin will be banished and perfect holiness and righteous will remain forevermore.

And as my inquirer surmises, Rom 8:18–25 does speak of the coming final, perfect order. This renewed order comes as a consequence of the future resurrection, which effects the redemption of the body and its final release from sin (Rom 8:23). And I as a postmillennialist agree with this, as well.

He Shall Have Dominion

(paperback by Kenneth Gentry)

A classic, thorough explanation and defense of postmillennialism (600 pages)

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

But before I engage the possible negative implications of Rom 8 for postmillennial gradualism (i.e., the slow progress of Christ’s kingdom to victory in history), I would like to offer a brief analysis of the relevant portion of Isa 11. Postmillennialists recognize and can account for the catastrophic language of the suddenness of Christ’s rule, despite its looking like it comes in a moment at the end, rather than developing slowly over time.

Reflections on Isa 11 itself

The prophetic narrative of Isa 11 follows upon that presented in Isa 10. In that chapter God is speaking of Assyria (Isa 10:5, 12, 24). And he is promising Israel that he will destroy this evil oppressor. The language he uses in the final words of his prophecy serve as a segue into our “peaceable kingdom” prophecy in Isa 11. For in Isa 10:33–34 Assyria’s judgment is pictured as a cutting down of a lofty tree. And in the prophecy It is cut down “by the Mighty One,” and that is it. Assyria is to be destroyed.

However, when we enter Isa 11 Isaiah reflects on Israel’s dire circumstances that have resulted from Assyria’s oppression: her glorious Davidic line has been reduced to a stump, virtually cut down to its roots. Yet this is not Israel’s final death knell. The prophecy does not end with the stump; in fact, it starts there.

Though David’s kingly line has been cut down to the root, it will spring forth anew. Isaiah puts it thus: “Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, / And a branch from his roots will bear fruit” (Isa 11:1). This, of course, is a Messianic prophecy that speaks of Christ’s coming in the first century.

As a result of the renewal of Jesse’s line in the Branch (Christ), justice will prevail (Isa 11:3–4a) because righteousness will characterize him (Isa 11:5). And peace will be effected among natural enemies (Isa 11:6–8) so that “they will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, / For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD / As the waters cover the sea” (Isa 11:9).

Indefensible (by Sam Kastensmidt)

Sub-title 10 Ways the ACLU is Destroying America

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

But now what about the matter of a catastrophic coming as over against postmillennialism’s gradualistic development? After all, does not the prophecy add this catastrophic note: “He will strike the earth with the rod of His mouth, / And with the breath of His lips He will slay the wicked” (Isa 11:4b)? This sounds like the sudden coming of Christ at the second advent wherein he brings in the perfect, peaceful, perpetual order. How can this speak of slow, unfolding progress over time?

I would note that this prophecy clearly has gradualism built into it. We may see that on at least two lines of evidence. (1) As the prophecy opens Israel is lying in destruction and despair under the dominion of Assyria. Yet Isaiah promises her that God will renew the stump-stem of Jesse. This promised renewal speaks of the future (first century) coming of Christ several hundred years later. Thus, this prophecy is not fulfilled all at once and catastrophically for the people who originally hear it as a word of encouragement. (2) The language of the prophecy in Isa 11:1 suggests gradualism. It speaks of a root branch that “will bear fruit.” And fruit production from a felled tree naturally takes time.

But what of the statement about his striking the earth and slaying the wicked (Isa 11:4)? The dramatic destruction pictured here speaks of its certainty rather than its suddenness. The just order Christ brings in will have power and will gain the victory. Mighty Assyria exercised power by the sword, but the Branch of Jesse has such power that he can destroy with the mere breath of his mouth, i.e., by his mere word. Christ’s kingdom does not need sharp arrows, bent bows, flint-like hooves of horses, or chariot wheels like a whirlwind (Isa 5:28).

In the dramatic image of Isa 11:4b the prophet is not concerned with the question of the development or timing of Christ’s kingdom, but with the certainty of its victory — whenever and however it does come. He is comparing and contrasting the present status of the Davidic line with its future glory. As Hengstenberg puts it: “Before those who were filled with cares and fears lest the Davidic Kingdom should be overturned by the Assyrian kingdom, he holds up the bright image of the Kingdom of David, in its last completion” (Christology of the Old Testament, 1:458).

In this comparison he holds up the great glory of Christ’s kingdom as he pictures it in its earthly fulness. Though this is not emphasized in this passage (such is not Isaiah’s concern), postmillennialists believe that this comes gradually over time, like fruit slowly growing up out of felled tree’s root.

CREEDS OVER EXEGESIS?

PMT 2015-084 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A gentleman recently wrote me about my chapter in Mathison’s book. He was asking if the creedal argument precludes exegetical arguments. He was concerned that dealing with creeds side-steps the fundamental issue of exegesis. I will not publish his email, but from the following you will be able to see what he was asking.

Here is my answer:

(1) Contrary to your concern, it is simply a naive and grandiose overstatement to say that I argue that Christians “must” reject hyper-preterism “before” they can consider it. After all, how would you know whether it should be rejected if you do not first consider it? Your friend’s argument simply does not make sense! Whoever your friend is, he is simply not thinking clearly if he surmises that I (and the other men in Mathison’s book) hold such an obscurantist position.

(2) What is worse, your friend has grossly misread my chapter in Mathison’s book. And I would even suspect he has NOT read it at all (this problem is a constant frustration among many who have interacted with hyper-preterists: HPs too often fail to carefully analyze arguments). I do NOT argue as your friend thinks I do, as anyone reading my chapter should understand. Ironically, I have written hundreds of pages in numerous books arguing the exegetico-theological case for my eschatological views. I have only engaged the historico-creedal argument in a few places (Mathison’s book being the most voluminous and obvious case). In addition, I was asked to provide ONE chapter in a multi-chapter book which was to offer other arguments.

Faith of Our Fathers (DVDs by Ken Gentry)

Explains the point of creeds for those not familiar with their rationale.

Also defends their biblical warrant and practical usefulness.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(3) Your friend should note that my chapter is replete with documentation from NUMEROUS Christian scholars regarding the role of creedal orthodoxy in framing the faith of the church. I cannot understand why your friend presents my position as if it is unique to me. In fact, some criticisms of my chapter have noted that I engage in documentary over-kill by proving what everyone knows: Christianity has a long established a creedally-framed orthodoxy. I feel that I am caught between a rock and a hard head by such complaints.

(4) The careful reader should note that in my “Introduction” on the second page of my presentation I forthrightly contradict your friend’s assertion. There I state: “We open with the creedal argument, not as the FINAL word in the debate, but as the FIRST word – – – not as our ONLY concern, but as a CRUCIAL concern.” (Italics in the original have been replaced by caps).

Please note that I am simply setting the context of the debate: historic, Christian orthodoxy v. Nouveau unorthodoxy. I am OPENING the argument; I am not CONCLUDING it or CLOSING IT DOWN. Orthodox Christians simply want unorthodox men to know where they are coming from. In fact, I did not even write the chapter for hyper-preterists, but for young Christians who may be subjected to the tempting lure of hyper-preterism: “Come, join with us: We are starting a New Reformation! Get in on the ground floor of a new church!” Sounds exciting. But the young Christian needs to realize what he is leaving behind if he succumbs.

(5) Actually what I was saying was: The universal, historic, corporate Christian church has a biblically-based, exegetically-derived, systematically-organized, clearly-enunciated, publicly-stated, creedally-secured, theology that affirms (for instance) a future, bodily resurrection and a future, visible Second Coming of Christ. Whether or not any individual wants to adopt the faith of our fathers is his own decision to make. What I argue in my chapter is: When a person adopts an historically unorthodox position he MUST understand that he is placing himself outside of the faith of the historic Christian church. Hyper-preterists should simply declare: “We know what the historic Christian faith affirms, but we simply do not believe it and we do not care whether we are outside of orthodoxy.”

My chapter notes that by slipping loose from the anchor of historic orthodoxy, hyper-preterists are adrift on the tides of wholesale theological change. I note by way of introduction that many great doctrines of the faith are gradually being eroded by the relentless tides of hyper-preterist experimentation.

Nourishment from the Word

(by Ken Gentry)

Reformed studies covering baptism, creation, creeds, tongues,

God’s law, apologetics, and Revelation

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

We all know that hyper-preterism is a NEW movement. I am simply calling upon Christians to recognize that it is new and potentially dangerous. In my “Conclusion” I state: “A critique of any new theological construct or religious movement must consider it on the basis of the historic creeds of orthodox Christianity as an important FIRST step.” My chapter should not be interpreted to be the ONLY step in theological reflection; I expressly affirm the opposite position. I argue there that we must “get our bearings” and note our “theological orientation” as we move into a consideration of a new theology.

OBAMA, SIN, AND POSTMILLENNIALISM

PMT 2013:017 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Most evangelical Christians recognize and lament the widescale cultural collapse America is witnessing. This seems to better fit the dispensationalist’s gloomy outlook on the future. How can one hold to the postmillennial hope while witnessing the demise of the Christian influence in America?

But this question has a deeper significance. A leading objection against the postmillennial hope of gospel conquest is the fact of man’s inborn total depravity. In this blog posting I will explain how postmillennialism may offer an optimistic outlook on history even though we live in a world of depraved sinners.

Samples from Objectors

J. Dwight Pentecost’s objects to postmillennialism along these lines. In his Things to Come (387) he speaks of “the new trend toward realism in theology and philosophy, seen in neo-orthodoxy, which admits man is a sinner, and can not bring about the new age anticipated by postmillennialism.”

Despite Postmillennialism being dominated by Calvinists today, Hal Lindsey has asserted that postmillennialism believes in “the inherent goodness of man” (The Late Great Planet Earth, 176).

God Gave Wine

(by Kenneth Gentry)

A biblical defense of moderate alcohol consumption.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Strong Calvinist amillennialist, Herman Hanko, is convinced that “from the fall on, the world develops the sin of our first parents. This development continues throughout history. . . . More and more that kingdom of darkness comes to manifestation as time progresses” (“An Exegetical Refutation of Postmillennialism,” 25). Indeed, in his view postmillennialism “is a mirage, therefore, a false hope, because it fails to reckon properly with the fact of sin” and “cannot take sin as seriously as do the Scriptures” (“The Illusory Hope of Postmillennialism,” 159).

Responses from Optimists

Our cultural collapse and Obama’s antipathy to the Christian faith and Christian principles is certainly a serious matter. Especially when it seems to reflect the underlying reality of the inherent sinfulness of man. This is truly a significant theological matter that must be answered by postmillennialists, if the system is to have any hope of surviving in our current climate. And I as a Calvinist certainly hold to the total depravity of man. But I would offer the following response to Pentecost, Lindsey, Hanko, and others:

We must note that despite the presence of sin, sinners are nevertheless converted to Christ. We must remember that each and every convert to Christ was at one time a totally depraved sinner. And yet we have hundreds of millions of Christians in the world today. Salvation comes by the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation.

How can we deny the gospel’s power that has already saved millions of depraved sinners? What God can do for one sinner he can do for another. This is evident in the apostolic era (Ac 2:41; 4:4), as well as in biblical prophecy (Isa 2:3–4; Psa 86:9; Rev 5:9; 7:9).

The Christian should recognize that power of God to save sinners greatly overshadows the power of sin to destroy men. In the ultimate analysis, the issue is not the power of sin, but the power of God.

Political Christianity (book)

(by Christian Citizen)

Christian principles appliend to practical political issues, including “lesser-of-evils” voting.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

The Christian should ask himself: “Have I ever seen a lost man become saved?” The answer is: Yes. This being the case, it is evident that grace is stronger than sin. The Christian should then ask a follow up question: “Does the Bible teach that a saved man can lose his salvation?” Here the answer is: No. In both cases, we see the superior power of God’s grace over man’s sin.

Postmillennialists do not believe in the inherent goodness of man, but opponents of postmillennialism seem to believe in the inherent weakness of the gospel. They believe that man’s sin successfully resists the gospel even to the end of history. Jonah also had a concern regarding the power of the gospel: he feared its power to save wicked, powerful Nineveh (Jon 1:2–3, 10; 3:2; 4:1–4).

Though the “heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jer 17:9), the postmillennialist firmly believes that “God is greater than our heart” (1Jn 3:20). We are confident that “He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world” (1Jn 4:4). After Christ’s resurrection the church receives the Spirit’s outpouring (Jn 7:39; Ac 2:33). And God promises that historical power is “not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit” (Zec 4:6).

The postmillennial hope is not in any way, shape, or form rooted in any effort by man. We cannot have a high estimation of our future based on man himself, for “the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Ro 8:7–8). When left to himself man’s world is corrupted and destroyed — a classic illustration being in the days of Noah (Ge 6:5). But God refuses to leave man to himself.

But neither does the hope for the man’s progress under the gospel relate to the Christian’s self-generated strength, wisdom, or cleverness. Left to our own efforts, we Christians too quickly learn that “apart from Me you can do nothing” (Jn 15:5). Were our future outlook rooted in the unaided power even of redeemed man, all would be hopeless. But our hope is in the resurrected Christ. The labor is ours; the subduing is His.”

Obama and his policies certainly cast a great shadow over our Christian labors. And the damage he has done to our heritage is very real and quite serious. But Christ is king. And Christ’s redemptive labors can overcome the ineptitude of world leaders and the sinfulness of fallen men. Indeed, it will do so as the positive argument for postmillennialism amply demonstrates.

Hang in their postmillennialists: this too will pass. The Christ who saved you is still on the throne. His word is still true.

THE SEVEN “LAST” PLAGUES?

PMT 2015-082 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Rev 15:1 opens a scene in heaven which introduces the seven plagues. John’s opening statement is: “Then I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous, seven angels who had seven plagues, which are the last, because in them the wrath of God is finished” (Rev 15:1).

His statement that these are “the last” because “the wrath of God is finished” leads some commentators — especially futurists — to see these as occurring in our distant future, at the end of history. While I believe history does have an end, I don’t believe that John’s vision looks to that consummate end. Rather something else is going on here.

In this heavenly vision John sees seven angels who had seven plagues (15:1b). As with the previous seven-step vision, this is strongly influenced by Lev 26 where God’s warns of his seven-fold covenant curses on Israel (Lev 26:18, 21, 24, 28). There the Lord warns four times: “‘If also after these things you do not obey Me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.” Embedded in this judgment warning is the maxim: to whom much is given, much is required (Lk 12:48; Mt 13:12). And Israel certainly received much from God (Dt 4:7–8; Ps 147:19–20; Am 3:2; Ro 3:1–2; 9:4–5) by way of “the covenants of promise” (Eph 2:12).

The focus on Israel in this passage is evident in that the saints pictured above the fray sing the “song of Moses” (15:3), the actions result in the opening of the “tabernacle of testimony” (15:5), and the judgments fall on “the Land” (16:1). Brink (182) states that the overthrow of Babylon [which this eventually effects] in the second half of the book is, in many ways, similar to the fall of Jerusalem in first half.” but I would argue that this is so because it is the fall of Jerusalem.

Four Views on the Book of Revelation

(ed. by Marvin Pate)

Helpful presentation of four approaches to Revelation.

Ken Gentry writes the chapter on the preterist approach to Revelation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

These angels have the seven plagues which are the last (15:1c). G. K. Beale argues that the reference to “the last” (tas eschatas) simply gives us “the order in which John saw the visions and not necessarily the chronological order of their occurrence in history.” Stephen Smalley and Ian Boxall agree. Beale is surely correct that these do not portray the consummation events concluding earth history (contra Grant Osborne and G. R. Beasley-Murray, for instance). After all, the events are close in John’s time (1:1, 3; 22:6, 10) and will answer the cry of the pleading saints who were told to wait only “a little while longer” (6:11). And he is correct that this is the last formal series, since the seals and trumpets have preceded them and no numbered series follows.

That John designates these as the “last” plagues suggests the finality of the wrath of God upon Israel, for in them the wrath of God is finished (etelesth , aor. pass. functioning as a prophetic perf., 15:1c). That is, God’s wrath is completed upon those for whom it is intended (cf. 1:7; cp. Mt 23:32, 38; 24:2; 1Th 2:16c). In that Israel’s special role in redemptive history finally and forever ends in AD 70, these plagues are her last as God’s unique people. With her demise, the kingdom of God has been “taken away” from her and “given to a nation producing the fruit of it” (Mt 21:43). The final destruction of the temple accomplishes this.

Jesus appears to teach this also in Mt 8:10–12: “Now when Jesus heard this, He marveled and said to those who were following, ‘Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’” (cp. Mt 22:1–7).

As Osborne observes (but misapplies), this imagery of divine wrath speaks of a “divine lawsuit” and “in the OT the ‘wrath of God’ usually has covenant implications.” In Rev’s forensic drama, this represents the covenantal wrath of God upon his apostate people Israel (his old covenant wife), who are deemed “a synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9), an “Egypt” (11:8), a land beast (13:11ff) in the employ of Satan and the Roman sea beast (13:1ff). Soon her capital city will be presented as a Babylonian harlot (17:1ff; cf. 16:19; 18:2ff), reminding us of the first temple’s destruction by Old Testament Babylon.

The Glory of Christ (book by R. C. Sproul)

From the angels’ revelation of Jesus’ glory to the shepherds outside Bethlehem,

to Jesus’ life-changing revelation of His glory to Paul on the Damascus road,

Sproul guides us to a deeper understanding of Christ’s glory.

For more study materials: www.KennethGentry.com

In this and the next verses the exodus motif will arise once again, for the “plagues” remind us of the Egyptian plagues (15:1; cp. 16:1ff), the “victorious” ones standing at the sea (15:2) remind us of the Red Sea, and they sing the song of Moses (15:3).　The remnant of Israel (14:1; cp. 7:4–8), which is the true Israel, departs out of fallen Israel and appears with God (cf. 18:4).

So then, these “seven plagues, which are the last” picture the final eruption of God’s wrath upon old covenant Israel in AD 70. This vision does not present us with the last plagues in history.

THE HEAVENS FLEE AWAY

PMT 2015-081 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In Revelation 20 we have the one section of Revelation that extends beyond the near-time indicators. John speaks of the “thousand years” in which Christ reigns with his martyred saints (Rev 20:4–7). In 20:11 we read of the Great White Throne of God. John informs us that “the heaven and earth fled away” at the setting of the judgment scene.

But what does the fleeing away of the heaven and earth mean? This is the question I will answer in this blog article.

In Rev 20:11 John adds a description regarding the enthroned one. He states that he is the one “from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them.” According to Scripture, the physical universe will be physically transformed through fiery cleansing to make way for the consummate new heavens and new earth (2Pe 3:10–12; cp. Ps 102:25–27; Isa 51:6; Mt 5:18; 24:35).

Yet John is not speaking of that physical re-composition here. Rather his imagery dramatically presents the “awful impression of the majesty of the judge” (Terry 456), the “terrifying” presence of God (Boxall 289; cp. Beasley-Murray 300), as if “the natural creation shrinks back with awe and seeks to hide itself” (Stuart 2:370). For dramatic effect only, John represents the heavens and the earth as fleeing the scene, leaving only God’s glorious throne to dominate the picture of judgment day: “the great white throne stands alone, with nothing to challenge, to qualify, or even to mediate its sole supremacy” (Caird 258). This is an image of God’s terrifying majesty, an image that ultimately arises from Adam and Eve’s attempt to hide themselves from their offended God in Eden (Ge 3:8). I would argue this for the following reasons:

First, this only speaks of the fleeing away of heaven and earth so that “no place was found for them” (20:11b). In a book containing so much fiery catastrophe as Rev, we would expect a more dramatic picture of catastrophic removal if that were John’s intention. In fact, the impression left is that they flee away vainly, for despite their flight “no place was found for them” to hide from God. Elsewhere men hope to escape God’s judgment, but fail (6:16; 9:6).

Blessed Is He Who Reads: A Primer on the Book of Revelation

By Larry E. Ball

A basic survey of Revelation from the preterist perspective.

It sees John as focusing on the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Beale (1032) is surely mistaken when he states: “the climactic nature of the punishment is also expressed by the following cosmic conflagration imagery: ‘from whose face heaven and earth fled, and a place was not found for them.’” But “conflagration” speaks of fiery destruction (L. conflagare: con [with] + flagro [blaze]). No such image appears in 20:11, even though John was not apprehensive about using fire language. In the other two samples Beale cites, while the fleeing away appears in judgment contexts, it seems to magnify the majesty of God who judges: 6:14 (see vv 15–17, where men try to hide from “the presence of Him who sits on the throne”) and 16:20 (see v 19, where Babylon is remembered “before God”). And as I argue in my commentary and on this blogsite elsewhere, both of those refer to God’s judgment on Israel in AD 70.

Second, if the heavens and earth disappear at this judgment, heaven would not remain for the great white throne (20:11a), the small and great stand would have no where to stand (20:12), and there would be no sea to give up the dead (20:13a).

Third, John’s attention here is not on the consummate new heavens and new earth brought about through his renovating power. Rather he is highlighting the judgment that befalls the unrighteous. We almost have to strain to recognize believers at this judgment, partly because the passage has such a condemnatory cast. This judgment is being portrayed as so terrifying that the universe seeks to hide from God’s wrath.

But now what happens in this terrifying scene? John continues:

“And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne” (20:12a). John’s primary focus here appears to be on the unrighteous dead, who will be thrown into the lake of fire (20:15). A few verses before this we can see the judgment of Satan and the destruction of Gog and Magog. Nevertheless, “final salvation is secondarily included” (Beale 1033; cp. Stuart 2:371; Swete 271; Beasley-Murray 301; Kistemaker 545, 546; Smalley 519; Osborne 722). This seems to be the case because:

The Climax of the Book of Revelation (Rev 19-22)

Six lectures on six DVDs that introduce Revelation as a whole,

then focuses on its glorious conclusion.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

First, “the great and small” is an inclusive image, which John sometimes applies to believers (11:18; 13:16; 19:5, 18), though he can apply it to unbelievers alone (19:18).

Second, the book of life is one of the books opened, and it only only the names of believers (20:12, 15; cp. 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 21:27; cf. Ex 32:32; Ps 69:28; Da 12:1; Lk 10:20; Php 4:3). After he mentions both “the books” and “the book of life,” we hear that “the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, which seems to include “the book of life.”

Third, this fits the consistent NT witness of a general judgment of all men (Mt 13:26–30, 47, 50; 25:32–33; Jn 5:28–29; Ac 24:15).