Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.'s Blog, page 55

MORE ON THE DISCIPLES’ CONFUSION

[image error]PMW 2020-056 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Over the past few months I have written several articles on the disciples’ questions to Jesus in Matthew 24:3. Their two questions are: “Tell us, [1] when will these things happen, and [2] what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” Thus, their two questions are asking “when” (Gk. pote) and “what” (Gk. ti). Understanding their questions and their state-of-mind is important for us if we ourselves want to understand the Olivet Discourse (known in academia as the “Eschatological Discourse”).

In those earlier articles I pointed out that the disciples were frequently confused at Jesus’ teaching, which often caused them to misunderstand it. I noted that their tendency to confusion explains why they ask him about his “coming [Gk.: parousia] and the end of the age [Gk.: sunteleias tou aiōnos],” when he prophesies the destruction of the temple (Matt. 24:2). They obviously assumed that the temple’s destruction would occur at his Second Advent at the end of history. And they were mistaken in this Jew-centric supposition.

As I am working on my commentary titled Olivet in Context: A Commentary on Matthew 21–25, I am employing insights from Narrative Criticism to help flesh out the exposition. Narrative Criticism is a method for understanding the Gospels that focuses on each Gospel as a whole. It recognizes that each Gospel writer has a story to tell and has particular issues he wants to present. Thus, to understand any given verse or pericope (smaller text-unit) we must understand how it fits in with the story-flow of the particular Gospel in which it is found. The Gospels are not simply collections of interesting stories organized in generally chronological fashion (in fact, sometimes their organization is topical rather than chronological).

Introducing Dr. Brown

I have just begun reading a helpful book by a scholar who holds to what we would call an orthodox preterist view of the Olivet Discourse. That book is The Gospels as Stories: A Narrative Approach to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (BakerAcademic, 2020) by Jeannine K. Brown (Ph.D., Professor of New Testament at Bethel Seminary). Though this book does not focus on Olivet, several of her other writings do — and follow rather closely the arguments of R. T. France, Jeffrey A. Gibbs, David Garland, and Alistair I. Wilson. All four of these scholars are invaluable resources for my orthodox preterist understanding of the Olivet Discourse. And now I have added Brown to my list of favorite authors on Olivet.

[image error]

Olivet Discourse Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)

Verse-by-verse analysis of Christ’s teaching on Jerusalem’s destruction in Matt 24. Shows the great tribulation is past, having occurred in AD 70, and is distinct from the Second Advent at the end of history.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Two of Dr. Brown’s books that I am using in my Olivet in Context research are:

Matthew (Teach the Text Commentary) (Baker, 2015)

Matthew (The Two Horizons New Testament Commentary) (Eerdmans 2018)

I highly recommend these two works for an orthodox preterist analysis, along with those by France, Gibbs, Garland, and Wilson.

Introducing Narrative Criticism

In Brown’s The Gospels as Stories she is explaining the mechanics and usefulness of Narrative Criticism for Gospel interpretation. I found her comments on the disciples frequent misunderstanding of Jesus to be very helpful — since I had already come to that conclusion before reading her work on the topic.

In this article I will basically be citing a few paragraphs of Brown’s comments to show how this particular scholar sees the disciples’ confusion functioning in Matthew’s narrative. Narrative Criticism is very interested in plot development and character presentation as a means to better understanding each Gospel writer’s point in presenting Jesus as he does. The disciples’ confusion is a key element in their character presentation in Matthew.

I will just cite a few passages from Brown hoping that these might whet your appetite for reading more on Narrative Criticism — and more of Brown’s works. (Though I don’t agree with everything she says. For instance, I hold to Matthean Priority rather than Marcan Priority.)

Characterizing the Disciples

Chapter 5 in The Gospels as Stories was right down my alley. That chapter is titled: “Matthew’s Characterization of the Disciples.” Consider Brown’s observations:

“Their worship of [Christ[ (14:33; 28:17) confirms they truly grasp at key moments his identity as the Messiah and Son to whom God has granted all authority (28:18). Yet Matthew also portrays the disciples as very often misunderstanding the teachings of Jesus. Their less-than-adequate comprehension surfaces in their frequent questions, requests for an explanation, and actions or statements that are subsequently corrected by Jesus” (p. 92).

[image error]An Eschatology of Victory

by J. Marcellus Kik

This book presents a strong, succinct case for both optimistic postmillennialism and for orthodox preterism. An early proponent in the late Twentieth-century revival of postmillennialism. One of the better non-technical studies of Matt. 24. It even includes a strong argument for a division between AD 70 and the Second Advent beginning at Matt. 24:36.

For more Christian educational materials: www.KennethGentry.com

Brown provides a chart titled “Disciples’ Words Showing Their Inadequate Understanding” (pp. 92–93). In this list she has Matthew 24:3 as one area where they are confused. And her two commentaries on Matthew (mentioned above) show how this is so.

After the chart, Brown writes: “Even if we as readers might consider one or more of these questions legitimate or even helpful, the cumulative effect of their questions and Jesus’ frequent teachings to set them straight paints the disciples as prone to misunderstand Jesus’ teachings” (p. 93).

On p. 94 she writes:

“The disciples’ propensity to misunderstand is especially apparent when Jesus teaches the disciples about his mission to go to Jerusalem, suffer, and be killed. . . . . Their preoccupation with their own status in the coming kingdom (e.g., 18:1; 19:27; 20:20–24) provides a vivid contrast to Jesus, who renounces any status or power he could assert — he comes as a Messiah who serves (20:25–28). Andrew Trotter sums up this part of the disciples’ characterization: ‘Virtually everything [the disciples] ‘understand’ in the Gospel is understood with a grain of salt; Jesus has taught them clearly and well, but their own dullness and especially their over-riding misunderstanding of the nature of his messiahship clouds their understanding.’”

On p. 95 we read:

“A first area for exploration involves the sheer amount of teaching that Jesus provides his disciples. Matthew is known for the five great discourses containing Jesus’ teachings, and each of these has the disciples as its audience either exclusively (the Mission Discourse, Matt. 10; the Community Discourse, Matt. 18; the Eschatological Discourse, Matt. 24–25) or in concert with the Galilean crowds (the Sermon on the Mount, Matt. 5–7; the Parables Discourse, Matt. 13). . . . Yet as we’ve already seen, the disciples struggle to understand, and some of Jesus’ words to them diagnose their lack of understanding.”

On p. 97 we read: “Matthew does not give us explicit statements of being for the disciples (i.e., attributes), such as ‘they were people of great faith,’ or even summations of their state of mind, such as ‘the disciples routinely misunderstood Jesus and his mission.’ Yet we can infer from the narrative that the first of these generalization is untrue while the second is quite accurate.”

On p. 99 we read: “the disciples’ own words and actions, as well as Jesus’ descriptions of them, point to their ongoing misunderstanding of Jesus’ teachings and his messianic mission.”

On p. 103 we come to Brown’s analysis of the function of the disciples for Matthew’s readers:

“Early on Matthew encourages the reader to identify with the disciples. He does so by their initial positive characterization: they leave their livelihoods to follow Jesus (Matt. 4:!8–22; 9:9). Readers will also align themselves with the disciples if they identify with the disciples’ commitments and situation…. As the narrative moves along, the disciples’ characterization becomes more varied, with positive qualities, such as commitment to and presence with Jesus, intermingling with negative traits, like frequent misunderstanding and little faith. This increasingly negative portrait has an effect on the reader…. The reader will evaluate more closely the disciples’ words and behavior, especially as they contrast with the values of the narrator [Matthew] and of Jesus. The reader will be drawn toward the latter, with the disciples’ negative qualities acting as a foil, ‘challenging the reader to follow Jesus more faithfully than the disciples do.’”

She continues (pp. 104–04): “Yet the disciples — even at their lowest points — are not abandoned by Jesus. So the reader can still feel some sense of identification with the disciples, even when they are negatively portrayed, because of Jesus’ positive stance toward them and toward their future. This continued experience of a certain level of identification creates hope in the reader. That hope finds its source, in part, in Jesus’ presence with his follower (Matt. 28:20).”

Thus, Brown shows us Matthew’s point in focusing on the disciples’ misunderstanding. It is to ward us off from such as we are encouraged to seek a better understanding of Jesus and his mission.

Consequently, we can see how the disciples could be so confused at Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:3. This, unfortunately, is not “out of character” for the disciples. We should carefully study Matthew’s record and learn how to be better disciples.

[image error]

 

J. S. RUSSELL & MILTON TERRY: “FUTURISTS”?

[image error]PMW 2020-054 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The Hyper-preterist movement has gained a small foothold among some evangelical Christians. Unfortunately, this aberrant movement makes the same sort of error as Hyper-Calvinism: it takes certain biblical teachings and presses them beyond their Scriptural warrant. By using actual biblical truths and specific Scripture verses, the Hyper-Calvinist can make a doctrinal error sound quite persuasive, as can the Hyper-preterist.

For instance, Hyper-Calvinism recognizes the biblical teaching regarding the absolute sovereignty of God. But they then push the “logic” of this truth beyond its biblical constraints. Curt Daniel defines Hyper-Calvinism as “that school of supralapsarian Five Point Calvinism which so stresses the sovereignty of God by overemphasizing the secret [will of God] over the revealed will [of God] and eternity over time, that it minimizes the responsibility of Man, notably with respect to the denial of the word ‘offer’ in relation to the preaching of the Gospel of a finished and limited atonement, thus undermining the universal duty of sinners to believe savingly with assurance that the Lord Jesus Christ died for them.”

Similarly, Hyper-preterism employs actual biblical truths and a few specific Scripture verses to promote their faulty doctrines. As a consequence, many Christians are frightened away from a preterist analysis of certain passages of Scripture because they fear the end result of unorthodox theology.

Hyper-preterism is especially dangerous for two key reasons: (1) It has taken a hermeneutical tool (preterism) and transformed it into a theological system. And (2) the resulting theological system is contrary to the historic, corporate, public, universal, systematic Christian faith, being outside of the main stream of Christian doctrinal orthodoxy.

[image error]

When Shall These Things Be?

(ed. by Keith Mathison)

A Reformed response to the aberrant HyperPreterist theolgy.

Gentry’s chapter critiques HyperPreterism from an historical and creedal perspective.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Thus, Hyper-preterists denounce orthodox (partial) preterists as “futurists” because we hold to a future Second Coming, Resurrection, and Final Judgment — as has the Church throughout its history. This rejection of orthodox preterism as “futurism” shows their wholesale commitment to their new theology: it can allow no future, unfulfilled elements in prophecy. But this causes the Hyper-preterist to shoot himself in the foot.

J. Stuart Russell

By way of illustration, I would point to J. Stuart Russell, who wrote a book in the late 1800s that has been something of a “Bible” for the Hyper-preterist religion: The Parousia: A Study of the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming. Surprisingly though, he holds that there are still some unfulfilled prophecies, thereby breaching the Hyper-preterist theology that demands we understand all biblical prophecy as being fulfilled by AD 70. Consider the following.

Regarding the millennium in Revelation 20, Russell follows orthodox preterist Moses Stuart in recognizing that the thousand year reign of Christ moves way beyond AD 70 and into the distant future. Russell writes regarding Stuart’s observation:

“We believe … that this is the solitary example which the whole book contains of this excursion beyond the limits of ‘shortly;’ and we agree with Stuart that no reasonable difficulty can be made on account of this single exception to the rule. We shall also find as we proceed that the event referred to as taking place after the termination of the thousand years are predicted as in a prophecy” (p. 514).

This to the Hyper-preterist is heresy! For they believe all prophecy was fulfilled by AD 70.

Russell states this again on p. 522:

“It is evident that the prediction of what is to take place at the close of a thousand years [i.e., Rev. 20:7–10] does not come within what we have ventured to call ‘apocalyptic limits.’ These limits, as we are again and again warned in the book itself, are rigidly confined with a very narrow compass; the things shown are ‘shortly to come to pass.’ It would have been an abuse of language to say that events at the distance of a thousand years were to come to pass shortly; we are therefore compelled to regard this predication as lying outside the apocalyptic limits altogether.”

According to Hyper-preterist doctrine, this is futurism, a form of heresy to them that must be scorned.

But Russell continues (p. 522):

“We must consequently regard this prediction of the loosing of Satan, and the events which follow, as still future, and therefore unfulfilled. We know of nothing recorded in history which can be adduced as in any way a probable fulfillment of this prophecy.”

[image error]

In the Days of These Kings: The Book of Daniel in Preterist Perspective

by Jay Rogers

This orthodox preterist analysis of Daniel is not a book, but a library. Extremely helpful for the postmillennial orthodox preterist.

For more study materials, go to: KennethGentry.com/

Then he adds (p. 523): “This we believe to be the sole instance in the whole book of an excursion into distant futurity; and we are disposed to regard the whole parenthesis as relating to matters still future and unfulfilled.” Has the man no shame!? He must be a dispensationalist!

Elsewhere he even writes as a postmillennialist holding to a future prophetic development of God’s kingdom on earth (p. 553–54): “Surely, it was not in vain that Jesus said, ‘I am the Light of the World.’ ‘God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.’ ‘I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself.’” He continues:

Paul “does not hesitate to affirm that the restorative work of Christ will ultimately more than repair the ruin wrought by sin…. It does not fall within the scope of this discussion to argue on philosophical grounds the natural probability of a reign of truth and righteousness on the earth; we are happy to be assured of the consummation on higher and safer grounds, even the promises of Him who has taught us to pray, ‘Thy will be done in earth, as it is done in heaven.’ For every God-taught prayer contains a prophecy, and conveys a promise. This world belongs no more to the devil, but to God. Christ has redeemed it, and will recover it, and draw all men unto Him.”

It is good to see that Russell holds to some futurist elements in his otherwise “full” preterist system. Unfortunately, his new theological paradigm undercuts major eschatological positions the Church has long held: a future, visible, physical Second Advent; a future, bodily resurrection of the dead; and a future Final Judgment of all men.

As an aside, it is unfortunate that some of Russell’s “futurism” allows for continued divine revelation: “There is no presumption against further revelations. Why should it be thought that God has spoken His last word to men?” (p. 552). This is one area in which he should not have allowed a futurist element.

Milton S. Terry

Interestingly, the futurist charge can be levied against Milton Terry, as well. Despite the very strong preterist stance he takes, he nevertheless holds a postmillennial eschatology that looks forward to future blessings. In his Biblical Apocalyptics Terry writes:

“It may require a thousand times the number of years Christianity has been already operating in the world, but ultimately the psalmist’s ideal is to be realized, and Jehovah will give his Son ‘the nations for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession’ (Psalm ii, 8).”

Regarding the loosing of Satan in Revelation 20, Terry declares on p. 451:

“The thousand years is to be understood as a symbolical number, denoting a long period. It is a round number, but stands for an indefinite period, an aeon whose duration it would be a folly to attempt to compute. Its beginning dates from the great catastrophe of this book, the fall of the mystic Babylon. It is the aeon which opens with the going forth of the great Conqueror of xix, 11-16, and continues until he shall have put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor. xv, 25)…. How long the King of kings will continue his battle against evil and defer the last decisive blow, when Satan shall be ‘loosed for a little time,’ no man can even approximately judge. It may require a million years.”

Thus, he also holds, with Russell and Stuart, that the thousand year reign of Christ extends far beyond the near-term reaches of Revelation’s primary concern. He states (p. 453) that:

“the great events symbolized are not sharply separated from each other in time. Most of them, if not all, are coetaneous, and extend through the entire period of the Messianic era, the symbolical thousand years. Through what historic stages the conflict is to pass; what particular forms of  government may arise and exhibit more or less of the spirit of the beast and the dragon; what mysteries of iniquity may work against Jehovah and against his Anointed during the thousand years — these and such like are not written, and their details do not seem to come within the scope of prophetic revelation. But the millennial era of conflict and triumph is prophetically presented in one great field of view. …. The millennial era is to end with the utter defeat and destruction of the old serpent, the Devil, thus fulfilling at the last the prediction of  Gen. iii, 15.”

Terry also writes of Satan’s defeat recorded in Revelation 20:7-10 that “the final victory is in the far future, at the close of the Messianic age, and it is here simply outline in apocalyptic symbols” (p. 455).

Hyper-preterists should quit citing these futurists!

[image error]

For more information, see: https://www.cruciformministries.org/a-purchased-victory

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (7)

[image error]PMW 2020-053 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is my final installment in this series on the great tribulation as understood within postmillennialism. We come now to a few more difficult texts.

Christ’s coming

In Matthew 24:27 Jesus states: “For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be.” This is the sort of language we expect regarding the second coming of Christ, when he comes publicly and gloriously to conclude world history. Did Christ come like lightning in AD 70: How can this sort of language apply to AD 70?

We must understand this declaration in terms of the context. The Lord had just cautioned his disciples: “If therefore they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them” (Matt 24:26). We must recall Josephus’ report in Jewish Wars 2:13:5 [261–62] cited above that records an episode in which an Egyptian false prophet arose in the wilderness claiming a great deliverance.

Jesus dismisses such by stating that when he physically comes again to the earth, it will be an unmistakable event: “For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be” (Matt 24:27). The “for” (gar) here shows that he is giving the reason why his disciples should not think he is off in some wilderness or in an inner room somewhere. When he does return in his second coming, it will be as visible and dramatic as a lightning flashing.

[image error]

He Shall Have Dominion

(paperback by Kenneth Gentry)

A classic, thorough explanation and defense of postmillennialism (600+ pages). Complete with several chapters answering specific objections.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

So again, we see how the prophecies of Matthew 24 find fulfillment in the first century. In that these prophecies are for that era (Matt 24:34), why should we opt for a futurist approach to the matter?

The stars will fall

As the Lord continues in detailing the dramatic events, he states in Matthew 24:29: “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.” This sounds like the universe is collapsing. Did such literally occur in AD 70?

Once again we are facing apocalyptic, hyperbolic language. Consider Isaiah 13:10–13 which as instructive for this point:

“For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not flash forth their light; the sun will be dark when it rises, and the moon will not shed its light. Thus I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; I will also put an end to the arrogance of the proud, and abase the haughtiness of the ruthless. I will make mortal man scarcer than pure gold, and mankind than the gold of Ophir. Therefore I shall make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken from its place at the fury of the Lord of hosts in the day of His burning anger.”

Despite the initial appearance, Isaiah is not referring to the end of history. In the context he clearly identifies historical, Old Testament Babylon as the object of this judgment: “The oracle concerning Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw” (Isa 13:1). In verse 17 he also mentions the Medes as an element of God’s judgment against them: “Behold, I am going to stir up the Medes against them.” Not only are the Medes an Old Testament era people who no longer exist, but they would be meaningless if the preceding language speaks of some sort of cosmic catastrophe. Indeed, they themselves would fall under such catastrophic events.

This prophecy refers to Old Testament Babylon’s overthrow, with the Median invasion securing that overthrow. The God of the universe is acting by his providential superintendence; metaphorically he is darkening the light of heaven on this might nation. The same imagery applies to the collapse of Jerusalem in AD 70 — which will occur “in this generation” (Matt 24:34) as the temple is destroyed (Matt 24:2).

Coming on the clouds

In Matthew 24:30 the Lord makes a remarkable statement. Unfortunately, the NASB, which I have been using throughout this series, is poorly translated here. So we will cite both the King James Version and the English Standard Version to better capture the meaning of the text.

In this verse we read a statement that sounds very much like the second coming of Christ. The KJV reads: “Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” The ESV reads: “Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Did Christ come on the clouds in AD 70?

Tongues-speaking: Meaning, Purpose, and Cessation

[image error]by Ken Gentry

The position presented within is that tongues-speaking allowed the gift person to speak in a known human language without previously knowing it; tongues brought inspired revelation from God; the gift was a sign confirming the apostolic witness and warning of the coming destruction of Jerusalem; and therefore the gift ceased in the first century.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

This language certainly could be used of the second advent. But once again, just three verses later Jesus states very clearly and forcefully: “Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (Matt 24:34). Thus, we must recognize this as referring to the AD 70 event. A similarity of language between AD 70 and the second advent should not surprise us. After all, AD 70 is a distant reflection of that future, literal coming. Therefore the same dramatic language can apply to it, as well.

According to Jesus’ prophecy there will be a “sign of the Son of Man in heaven.” He is speaking of some sort of sign that he is at the right hand of God rather than in the cold hard ground. They will learn by some judgment sign that he is high and exalted, the one causing their judgment and anguish. This sign is (apparently) the smoke of the temple being destroyed. This will be the sign to the Jews that the Son of Man is no longer dead but in heaven at God’s throne, where he will moves against them in judgment. He warned the Jews that this would happen (Matt 26:64). After all, he promised his disciples: “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power” (Mark 9:1).

Gathering the elect

Another confusing feature of Christ’s prophecy is found in Matthew 24:31: “And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.” Is this speaking of the rapture? Did it occur in AD 70? Whatever this verse means, we must recall once again that Jesus affirms only three verses later that “all these things” will take place in “this generation” (Matt 24:34).

Actually it is important to understand that the word “angel” (Gk.: aggelos) can be (and often is) translated: “messenger.” In Scripture it frequently refers to human messengers. We find this usage in Matthew 11:10; Mark 1:10; Luke 7:24 and 27. For instance, Jesus cites Malachi 3:1 as referring to John the Baptist: “This is the one about whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger [aggelos] ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you’” (Matt 11:10).

Here Jesus is speaking of sending forth his messengers to trumpet the gospel of salvation. The collapse of the old covenant economy in the destruction of the temple is the sign that the gospel of God’s saving grace is spreading to all the world. The messengers are overflowing the boundaries of Old Testament Israel (cp. Psa 147:19–20; Amos 3:2; Eph 2:11–12). God is finished with sacrifices and human priests (Heb 8:13); he will no longer confine his grace to a single nation (John 4:20–24). Now the gospel will go to all nations (Matt 28:18–20).

When the messengers go forth and declare the gospel, they go “from one end of the sky to the other,” which means from one horizon (where the sky “touches” the ground) to the other, that is, in all directions (cp. Deut 4:32). They call people and gather them into a new body, the new covenant church of Christ. In fact, this “gathering” language appears in a very significant passage in Hebrews 10:25, where the Jews are commanded to “gather together” as Christians, and not to fall back into Judaism: “Not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more, as you see the day drawing near.”

Conclusion

As we have seen in this analysis of Jesus’ teaching on the great tribulation, a strong case can be made that the tribulation is already past in that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70 is that great tribulation. The great tribulation ends the old covenant economy and establishes the new covenant order. As the writer of Hebrews expresses it: “When He said, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear” (Heb 8:13).

Therefore, the great tribulation lies in our past, not in our future. Postmillennialism does have a place for the great tribulation — at the beginning of Christian history, not at the end. The postmillennial outlook is not undermined by Christ’s teaching on this time of terrible judgment.

[image error]

For more information, see: https://www.cruciformministries.org/a-purchased-victory

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (6)

[image error]PMW 2020-052 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

We are nearing the end of our series on the great tribulation in postmillennialism. if you endure to the end, you surely must be saved! Let us know consider the verse that directly mentions “the great tribulation.”

In Matthew 24:21 the Lord states that

“then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall.”

Was AD 70 the worst catastrophe ever? What about World Wars I and II? Surely they were much worse than the first-century Jewish War with Rome. How can we explain this statement of Jesus while maintaining our first-century interpretation?

Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond[image error]

(ed. by Darrell Bock)

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

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

When we consider this in its biblical context, however, ample information supports my conclusion that A. D. 70 is in view. Note the following points.

First, Matthew 24:34 states that “all these things” shall occur in “this generation.” We must notice that verse 34 appears just thirteen verses after verse 21. Therefore, “the great tribulation” must be one of “these things” to occur in “this generation.”

Second, more catastrophic than our recent World Wars was Noah’s Flood. And it must even be worse than the supposed future great tribulation. For in Noah’s Flood the entire human population perished, except for one family (1 Pet 3:20; 2 Pet 2:5). And yet Jesus mentions Noah’s Flood in his context (Matt 24:37–39). So something else must be going on here.

Third, to interpret Jesus properly we must understand the use of hyperbole in Old Testament prophetic language. Very often we find that judgment language in prophecy is formulaic, stock-in-trade, highly stylized, poetic language. For instance, in Exodus 11:6 we read these words regarding the tenth plague on Egypt: “’Moreover, there shall be a great cry in all the land of Egypt, such as there has not been before and such as shall never be again.” Which is it? Is the great tribulation the worst judgment, as per Matthew 24:21? Or is the tenth plague upon Egypt the worst, as per Exodus 11:6?

In Ezekiel 5:9 we read of the Old Testament destruction of the temple by the Babylonians: “Because of all your abominations, I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of which I will never do again.” But in Matthew 24 it happens again. This is apocalyptic, poetic, dramatic imagery.

In fact, Josephus evaluates the Jewish War similarly to Christ:

“Whereas the war which the Jews made with the Romans has been the greatest of all those, not only that have been in our time, but, in a manner, of those that ever were hear of, both of those wherein cities have fought against cities, or nations against nations” (Jewish Wars, Preface 1 §1).

“The misfortunes of all men, from the beginning of the world, if they be compared to these of the Jews, are not considerable as they were” (Jewish Wars, Preface, 4 §12).

“Neither did any other city ever suffer such miseries. . . from the beginning of the world” (Jewish Wars 5:10:5 §442).

Have We Missed the Second Coming:[image error]

A Critique of the Hyper-preterist Error

by Ken Gentry

This book offers a brief introduction, summary, and critique of Hyper-preterism. Don’t let your church and Christian friends be blindfolded to this new error. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

For more Christian educational materials: www.KennethGentry.com

Such comparative language is even used in more mundane, less dramatic circumstances in Scripture. Consider the sterling, high praise of both Hezekiah and Josiah — from the same book! Both are declared to be the best ever:

2 Kings 18:5 (regarding Hezekiah):

“He trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel; so that after him there was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among those who were before him.”

2 Kings 23:25 (regarding Josiah):

“Before him there was no king like him who turned to the LORD with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; nor did any like him arise after him.”

We even tend to use language in a similar, boldly exaggerated manner. This is like our saying to our child: “Haven’t I told you a million times not to do this?” Or: “I have a ton of work to do.” Or: “This will take me forever to straighten out.”

Thus, Jesus’ declaration in verse 21 is dramatic speech emphasizing the remarkable nature of this event. It is not meant to be literally understood.

Just one more article to go! Please join me next time.

[image error]

For more information, see: https://www.cruciformministries.org/a-purchased-victory

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (5)

[image error]PMW 2020-051 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

As I offer my fifth contribution in this series on the role of the great tribulation in postmillennialism, we come now to consider several interpretive difficulties. At least, verses that seem difficult to apply in the first century.

Jesus expressly states that all these things shall occur in “this generation” (Matt 24:34). Regardless of how difficult a first-century fulfillment may seem for some of Jesus’ statements, his clear time frame statement control our interpretation of the passage. Let us consider the troublesome issues that arise in the remaining prophecies.

Gospel proclamation

Many opponents of the first-century analysis point first of all to Jesus’ statement regarding the preaching of the gospel: “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations, and then the end shall come” (Matt 24:14). How can we explain this statement? The “whole world” heard the gospel? This looks like a formidable objection against a first-century fulfillment. But looks are deceiving.

Actually, the meaning of the Greek word oikumene (“world”) here does not necessarily refer to the entire planet. We may glean many examples of a more restricted meaning from various Scriptures. For instance, in Acts 24:5 Luke records the Jewish opposition against Paul in that they charge him with causing dissension among the Jews “throughout the whole world.” Surely this means their world, the world of their experience, the Roman empire.

But even more significantly the New Testament informs us that the gospel is preached throughout the entire known world of that day: “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, because your faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world” (Rom 1:8). Paul even writes that “the gospel . . . has come to you, just as in all the world” (Col 1:6, cp. v 23). Interestingly, in this statement he uses the word kosmos which can and often does speak of the entire world. Yet he declares that the gospel has come “in all the world.”

Thus, in the Matthew 24:14 Jesus simply states that the gospel will be preached in the entire known world of that day before these events reach their climax. That is, it will not be limited to Israel, as was his ministry (Matt 10:6; 15:24).

Abomination of desolation

What are we to make of his statement regarding the dreaded “abomination of desolation?” In Matthew 24:15 the Lord states: “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place.” This prophecy is often associated with a world-ruling Antichrist in the future.

Four Views on the Book of Revelation[image error]

(ed. by Marvin Pate)

Helpful presentation of four approaches to Revelation. Ken Gentry writes the chapter on the preterist approach to Revelation, which provides a 50 page survey of Revelation .

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Contrary to popular opinion, though, this must also occur in the first century. We see this from the following evidence: (1) This “abomination” stands in the “holy place,” i.e., the temple standing immediately before them (cp. Matt 23:38—24:2). (2) His audience could imagine no other locality, for Jerusalem is the “holy city” (Neh 11:1, 18; Isa 48:2; 52:1; Dan 9:24; Matt 4:5; 27:53) (3) Christ is responding to questions pertaining to that very temple (cf. Matt 24:1). He even points to the temple as he answers (Matt 24:2). That holy place will be dismantled by the Roman soldiers within forty years, a generation.

The “abomination of desolation” is the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by pagan Roman armies. Luke’s parallel account makes this clear. He takes Matthew’s Hebraic language and interprets it for his Gentile audience: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is at hand” (Luke 21:20). He tells us what the abomination is: Jerusalem being surrounded by Roman armies for the purpose of decimating her temple.

The Romans encircle Jerusalem on at least two occasions: under Vespasian in the initial siege and later under Titus not long before the Temple’s final destruction. Of Vespasian’s siege Josephus comments:

“And now the war having gone through all the mountainous country, and all the plain country also, those that were at Jerusalem were deprived of the liberty of going out of the city; for as to such as had a mind to desert, they were watched by the zealots; and as to such as were not yet on the side of the Romans, their army kept them in, by encompassing the city round about on all sides.” (Jewish War 4:9:1 §490)

He writes that later Titus builds “a wall round about the whole city” (Jewish War 5:12:1 §499).

After the first surrounding, the Christians are to flee from Judea. In God’s providence, Vespasian withdraws from the siege when Nero dies; the Christians then had the opportunity to escape. The early church father Eusebius notes that:

“The people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. And when those that believed in Christ had come thither from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men.” (Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3; cp. Matt 24:16; Epiphanius, Of Weights and Measures, 15)

[image error]Great Tribulation: Past or Future?

(Thomas Ice v. Ken 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

When the Roman soldiers finally obtain the upper hand in the temple, Josephus records how they raise their ensigns in the temple, bow to their to pagan deity, and offer incense to Caesar:

“The Romans upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings lying round about it, brought their ensigns to the Temple, and set them over against its eastern gate; and there did they offer sacrifices to them, and there did they make Titus imperator, with the greatest acclamations of joy.” (Jewish War 6:6:1 §316)

Thus, we see what the Lord means by “the abomination of desolation.” We are now ready to focus on the direct statement mentioning “the great tribulation.” But I am weary. So I will offer that study next time!

[image error]

For more information see: https://www.cruciformministries.org/a-purchased-victory

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (4)

[image error]PMW 2020-050 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is our fourth installment on the great tribulation in postmillennial eschatology. We are currently surveying Matthew 24 and its prepartory signs to the great tribulation, showing that these signs occurred historically in the first century.

We come now to Matthew 24:7b where he declares that “in various places there will be famines.” Famines are easy to document in biblical world of the first century where they were particularly devastating. For instance, in Acts 11:28 we read of Agabus’ prophecy of a “great famine” that occurs during the reign of Claudius (AD 50s): “There stood up one of them named Agabus and signified by the Spirit that there should be great famine throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.” This is probably the famine Josephus mentions as striking Jerusalem: “A famine did oppress them at that time, and many people died for want of what was necessary to procure food withal” (Antiquities 20:2:5 §51).

Classical writers testify to the widespread, recurring famines in the AD 50s and into the 60s. We discover these in the works of Suetonius, Dio Cassius, Eusebius, and Orosius. For instance, speaking of Rome in AD 51 Tacitus writes: “This year witnessed many prodigies . . . . Further portents were seen in a shortage of corn, resulting in famine. . . . It was established that there was no more than fifteen days’ supply of food in the city.” (Annals 12:43)

As noted above Josephus speaks of the famine in Jerusalem (Antiquities 20:2:5) which he later calls “the great famine” (Antiquities 20:5:2 §101). He mentions others (Antiquities 20:5:2 §101; Jewish War 3:7:11 §180; 4:1:9 §62; 6:3:3).

Matthew 24:7c adds: “in various places there will be famines and earthquakes.” A particularly dreadful quake shakes Jerusalem in AD 67. Josephus records this frightful catastrophe: “There broke out a prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost violence, and very strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, and continual lightnings, terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions and bellowings of the earth, that was in an earthquake” (Jewish War 4:4:5 §286).

[image error]

Olivet Discourse Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)

Verse-by-verse analysis of Christ’s teaching on Jerusalem’s destruction in Matt 24. Shows the great tribulation is past, having occurred in AD 70, and is distinct from the Second Advent at the end of history.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Tacitus mentions earthquakes in Crete, Rome, Apamea, Phrygia, Campania, Laodicea (of Revelation fame) and Pompeii during the time just before Jerusalem’s destruction. Severe earthquakes plague the reigns of the Emperors Caligula (AD 37–41) and Claudius (AD 41–54). According to Seneca (ca. 4 BC—AD 65), others occur in Asia, Achaia, Syria, and Macedonia. Of this era, Ellicott’s commentary observes: “Perhaps no period in the world’s history has ever been so marked by these convulsions as that which intervenes between the Crucifixion and the destruction of Jerusalem.”

Persecution and apostasy

In Matthew 24:9 and 10 Jesus warns of persecution and apostasy:

“Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations on account of My name. And at that time many will fall away and will deliver up one another and hate one

another.”

Almost every chapter of Acts details the persecutions the church endures in those early years: “And on that day a great persecution arose against the church in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles” (Acts 8:1; cp. Acts 4:27; 16:20; 17:7; 18:12; 21:11; 24:1–9; 25:1–2).

[image error]

Perilous Times: A Study in Eschatological Evil (by Ken Gentry)

Technical studies on Daniel’s Seventy Weeks, the great tribulation, Paul’s Man of Sin, and John’s Revelation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Quite naturally a result of severe persecution is apostasy. John writes of apostasy in the first century: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us” (1 John 2:19; cp. 2 and 3 John). The Epistle to the Hebrews indicates a sizeable apostasy from among Jewish converts to Christianity (cf. Heb 2:1–4; 6:1–6; 10:26–31). Tacitus even alludes to apostasy during the Neronic persecution: “First, Nero had self-acknowledged Christians arrested. Then, on their information, large numbers of others were condemned” (Tacitus, Annals 15).

Conclusion

Thus, a quick survey of the biblical and the historical records show that many of the prophecies in Matthew 24 come to pass in the first century. This fits perfectly with the time-frame of Matthew 24:34 where our Lord asserts: “this generation shall not pass until all these things take place.” Therefore, we see that postmillennialism is not negatively impacted by the great tribulation passage — thus far.

But problems arise in other texts within Matthew 24. So next we must consider the difficulties facing this first-century interpretation. These seem to be quite a bit more difficult to apply to the first century, and are often used to counter the preterist analysis made thus far. So, see you next time!

[image error]

For more information see: https://www.cruciformministries.org/a-purchased-victory

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (3)

[image error]PMW 2020-049 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The great tribulation is deemed by many to destroy an possibility of a long-range hope for history, such as is in postmillennialism. In this ongoing series I am explaining how the postmillennialist can explain the great tribulation, while maintaining his historical hope for the long run. This is the third article in this series. So, let’s get to work.

As per my last article, Jesus forthrightly declares that the great tribulation events will occur in the first century. That being the case, we should expect to find evidence that they did in fact occur then. And we do! Let us survey a few of these. We will see the first-century historical fulfillment of several of his statements in Matthew 24.

False prophets

In Matthew 24:5 and 11 Jesus warns about false christs and prophets. That is, he is warning about the danger of false religious enthusiasts who will arise in an attempt to distract and disturb his disciples.

False religious leaders are an abundant problem in that day, as we see in the examples of Theudas (Acts 5:36), Simon (Acts 8:9, 10), and Paul’s general warning to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:29–30). For instance, Paul expresses his fear for the Ephesian church: “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them” (Acts 20:29–30).

The historical record of the first-century Jewish historian and priest Josephus (ca. AD 37–101) also documents false religious leaders who operated during the Jewish War with Rome which brought about the destruction of the temple: “such men deceived and deluded the people under pretense of divine inspiration” (Jewish Wars 2:13:4 §259). He speaks of others as “impostors and deceivers [who] persuaded the multitude to follow them into the wilderness and pretended that they would exhibit manifest wonders and signs” (Antiquities 20:8:6 §167–68).

Clearly, Scripture and contemporary historical records testify of the very real danger of false religious teachers leading the Jews astray shortly after Christ dies.

Wars and rumors of wars

Matthew 24:6 and 7 speaks of “wars and rumors of wars.” This is a sign that we constantly hear about today in eschatological discussions. Since there have always been wars, to which ones is Jesus referring? How is this rather broad sign helpful?

To understand the significance of this sign we must consider an important political fact of first-century history. When the Lord gave this sign to his audience they were experiencing the famous pax Romana (Latin for “the peace of Rome”). But what is this “peace of Rome”? And how is it significant for understanding Jesus’ prophecy?

By military conquests and political savvy, the Emperor Augustus Caesar established this period of remarkable peace shortly before Christ was born (he was the reigning emperor when Jesus was born, Luke 2:1). This was an impressive time of widespread peace that enjoyed freedom from war. The first-century Jewish philosopher Philo (ca. 29 BC–AD 50) speaks of the Roman empire being “free from all sedition, and regulated by and obedient to admirable laws” (Embassy to Gaius 2:8). Roman naturalist and writer Pliny the Elder (who died in the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79) describes “the immeasurable majesty of the Roman peace” (Natural History 27:3). The third-century church father Origen (ca. 182– 254) mentions the “abundance of peace that began at the birth of Christ” (Against Celsus 2:30).

The Beast of Revelation (Kindle version) by Ken Gentry[image error]

A popularly written antidote to dispensational sensationalism and newspaper exegesis. Convincing biblical and historical evidence showing that the Beast was the Roman Emperor Nero Caesar, the first civil persecutor of the Church. The second half of the book shows Revelation’s date of writing, proving its composition as prior to the Fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. A thought-provoking treatment of a fascinating and confusing topic.

For more study materials, go to: KennethGentry.com

New Testament scholar, Bo Reicke, notes that “in the Roman Empire proper, the period of peace remains comparably undisturbed until the time of Nero.” The emperor Nero breached the pax Romana by engaging the Jewish War that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple. Consequently, the Lord’s prophecy offers a significant sign that warns Christians that despite the pax Romana, they will hear of “wars and rumors of wars” when “nation would rise up against nation.”

When the Jewish War erupted in the late AD 60s, it broke the famous pax Romana. In this important war, Rome victoriously marched across Israel and mercilessly crushed that restive state. Though the Jewish Revolt initially flares up in late AD 66, the resulting formal war began in the Spring of AD 67. That was when Nero formally commissioned his general Vespasian to crush the revolt. As Josephus puts it: “Nero upon Cestius’s defeat, was in fear of the entire event of the war, and thereupon made Vespasian general in this war” (Jewish War Pref., 8 §21; cp. 3:1:1–3 §1–8).

In that war Syria, Arabia, Egypt, and other nations aligned themselves against Israel. Josephus notes that Vespasian secured “a considerable number of auxiliaries from the kings in that neighborhood” (Jewish War 3:1:3 §8). He later writes:

“there were also a considerable number of auxiliaries got together, that came from the kings Antiochus, and Agrippa, and Sohemus, each of them contributing one thousand footmen that were archers, and a thousand horsemen. Malchus also, the king of Arabia, sent a thousand horsemen, besides five thousand footmen, the greatest part of which were archers; so that the whole army, including the auxiliaries sent by the kings, as well horsemen as footmen.” (Jewish War 3:4:2 §68)

Before Jerusalem Fell (Kindle version) (by Ken Gentry)[image error]

Doctoral dissertation defending a pre-AD 70 date for Revelation’s writing. Thoroughly covers internal evidence from Revelation, external evidence from history, and objections to the early date by scholars.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

When Vespasian’s son Titus took over the fight, Josephus mentions the greatly increased number of foreign national troops engaged in the siege of Jerusalem: “those auxiliaries that came from the kings, being now more in number than before, together with a considerable number that came to his assistance from Syria” (Josephus, Jewish War 5:1:6 §42).

But not only does this era experience the Jewish War, but it also resulted in a great and destructive civil war in Rome itself. In June of AD 68 Nero committed suicide as Rome erupts into civil upheaval and military strife (Josephus, Jewish War Pref., 9 §23). Britain, Germany, and Gaul revolt against Rome and seek to break out of the empire. Rome feared that the Parthians from the East would mobilize because of the Empire’s disarray during that time.

Roman historian Tacitus (AD 56–117) writes: “The history on which I am entering is that of a period rich in disasters, terrible with battles, torn by civil struggles, horrible even in peace. Four emperors failed by the sword; there were three civil wars, more foreign wars and often both at the same time” (Histories 1:2). He laments that “Rome and Italy are thoroughly wasted by intestine war” (Hist. 4:75). Josephus reports similarly that: “all was in disorder after the death of Nero” (Jewish War Pref. 1:2 §5).

Thus, both Jerusalem and Rome were experiencing nation arising against nation (Matt 24:7). These “wars and rumors of wars” (Matt 24:6) were truly signs for that first-century generation.

The historical facts are fitting our exegetical understanding of the Olivet Discourse and its emphasis on the great tribulation. But there is more. Much more. Please join my in my next article.

OLIVET IN CONTEXT: A Commentary on Matthew 21–25[image error]

I am currently researching a commentary on Matthew 21–25, the literary context of the Olivet Discourse from Matthew’s perspective. My research will demonstrate that Matthew’s presentation demands that the Olivet Discourse refer to AD 70 (Matt. 24:3–35) as an event that anticipates the Final Judgment at the Second Advent (Matt. 24:36–25:46). This will explode the myth that Jesus was a Jewish sage focusing only on Israel. The commentary will be about 250 pages in length.

If you would like to support me in my research, I invite you to consider giving a tax-deductible contribution to my research and writing ministry: GoodBirth Ministries. Your help is much appreciated!

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (2)

[image error]PMW 2020-048 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is my second in a multi-part series explaining how we can believe in postmillennialism, even though Jesus teaches about “the great tribulation” that is to come. In this series of articles we will learn a remarkable fact: The great tribulation is past. Indeed, it occurred long ago in the first century and was concerned with the destruction of the temple in AD 70.

Obviously, if this is so, then the great tribulation punctuated the beginning of Christianity (as the new covenant-phase of God’s kingdom) and has no direct bearing on the end of the Church Age (supposedly lying in our near future). Thus, it does not contradict postmillennialism’s historical optimism. Let us consider the evidence.

Most evangelicals focus on the remarkable judgments in the Matthew 24. And they do so to such an extent that they overlook important contextual clues that go against the popular conception of the great tribulation. And they do this despite the fact that these clues are quite clear and compelling.

These clues revolve around Matthew 24:34 which involves the key observation for a proper understanding of the great tribulation. This is the text we must focus upon; it will be our guiding star shedding light on our pathway through this dark and frightening passage. Let us note:

Literary setting

First, this verse links the great tribulation to the first century. Indeed, Christ specifically declares that the great tribulation will occur within the lifetime of his original audience. He clearly establishes the time frame in which it will come to pass: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (Matt 24:34).

[image error]

Matthew 24 Debate: Past or Future?

(DVD by Ken Gentry and Thomas Ice)

Two hour public debate between Ken Gentry and Thomas Ice on the Olivet Discourse.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

We find important interpretive evidence in the historical and contextual setting of Matthew 24 that helps us understand this statement. We must analyze Jesus’ statement in its own historical and literary setting. That is, we must look back to Matthew 23 as the lead-in to Matthew 24. Let us see how this context helps our understanding.

In Matthew 23 Jesus calls down woes upon the scribes and Pharisees of his generation (Matt 23:13, 14, 15, 16, 23, 25, 27, 29). They are his antagonists; they are the backdrop against which his prophecy must be understood. As he concludes his woes section, he solemnly prophesies in Matthew 23:32: “Fill up, then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers.” In other words, they are guilty; now they will fill up their final guilt.

An important reason motivates Jesus’ denunciation of the Pharisees: they would be filling up the measure of the guilt of their fathers by attacking Christians. Notice Matthew 23:34–36:

“Behold, I am sending you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, some of them you will kill and crucify, some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on the earth. Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.”

The very setting in which Christ is delivering the Olivet Discourse is one of impending judgment upon first-century Jerusalem.

We must understand that the scribes and Pharisees live in a very important generation. Theirs was the time in which the Messiah comes. Tragically, “he came unto his own, and his own received him not” (John 1:11). First-century Israel lived in “the fullness of time” (Mark 1:15), but they missed its opportunity. They experienced the very era that “many prophets and righteous men desired to see” (Matt 13:17; cp. John 8:36), but were blind to it. They lived through “the time of your visitation,” but “did not recognize” it (Luke 19:44). Indeed, Jesus “wanted to gather” them together in his care, but they “were unwilling” (Matt 23:37).

Thus, in Matthew 24:34, Jesus warns: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” The ones to whom he is speaking (his first-century disciples, Matt 24:1–2) will recognize the judgments in the Lord’s great tribulation proclamation. This is a very clear and dogmatic statement.

We must note that he states here that this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. That includes the great tribulation mentioned in Matthew 24:21. Matthew 24:34 employs virtually identical language to the Matthew 23:36 statement regarding the soon-coming persecution of Christians: “Truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation.”

Historical setting

Second, this prophecy specifically focuses on the first-century temple toward which Jesus is physically facing. Let us notice what prompted the Olivet Discourse. In Matthew 23:37, 38, we read of a broken-hearted Savior lamenting:

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her, how often I wanted to gather her children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. Behold, your house is being left to you desolate.”

[image error]An Eschatology of Victory

by J. Marcellus Kik

This book presents a strong, succinct case for both optimistic postmillennialism and for orthodox preterism. An early proponent in the late Twentieth-century revival of postmillennialism. One of the better non-technical studies of Matt. 24. It even includes a strong argument for a division between AD 70 and the Second Advent beginning at Matt. 24:36.

For more Christian educational materials: www.KennethGentry.com

The very Jerusalem sprawling before him (Matt 23:37a), the land where the prophets were killed while openly defying God (Matt 23:31), those people who had rejected his loving overtures (Matt 23:37b), that temple now being left desolate (Matt 23:38) — these are in Jesus’ mind and upon his heart as he prophesies the great tribulation.

Notice his own disciples’ response to his solemn declaration against the temple. Moments after his warning that their holy house was being left desolate, we read: “Jesus came out from the temple” (Matt 24:1). That was the very temple he had just declared is being left desolate (Matt 23:38). Then as he “was going away” from that first-century temple, his disciples “came up to point out the temple buildings to him” (Matt 24:1b). Then we read in Matthew 24:2:

“Do you not see all these things? Truly I say unto you, not one stone here shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down. And as he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately saying, ‘Tell us when shall these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age?’”

As a matter of historical and archaeological fact, that temple to which Jesus refers is destroyed in AD 70. No temple has existed in Jerusalem since that time. The Lord’s prophecy relates to a temple that was actually destroyed just forty years later — a “generation” later (forty years = a generation; Num 32:13; Psa 95:10).

Specific command

Third, Jesus commands those particular people before him to do something. In Matthew 24:15 he discusses the “abomination of desolation” preparing his disciples for “the great tribulation” (Matt 24:21): “Let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.” Clearly this is not a worldwide phenomenon for he limits it to Jerusalem and Judea — because that is where the temple is located.

We know from history that the Jerusalem church heeded Christ’s warning. They fled Jerusalem and went to Pella as the Jewish War with Rome broke out. The early church historian Eusebius (ca. AD 263–339) records this historical event:

“The people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. And when those that believed in Christ had come thither from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men.” (Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3)

In these three major lines of evidence we see that the focus of the great tribulation prophecy is on first-century Jerusalem and the temple. Regardless of contemporary “prophecy experts,” the Lord locates the time of the great tribulation in a first-century event. Thus, in this one major argument we see that “the great tribulation” lies in our past. But there is more.

But there is more! So I hope you will join me by reading my third article in this series.

OLIVET IN CONTEXT: A Commentary on Matthew 21–25[image error]

I am currently researching a commentary on Matthew 21–25, the literary context of the Olivet Discourse from Matthew’s perspective. My research will demonstrate that Matthew’s presentation demands that the Olivet Discourse refer to AD 70 (Matt. 24:3–35) as an event that anticipates the Final Judgment at the Second Advent (Matt. 24:36–25:46). This will explode the myth that Jesus was a Jewish sage focusing only on Israel. The commentary will be about 250 pages in length.

If you would like to support me in my research, I invite you to consider giving a tax-deductible contribution to my research and writing ministry: GoodBirth Ministries. Your help is much appreciated!

POSTMILLENNIALISM & THE GREAT TRIBULATION (1)

[image error]PMW 2020-047 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

With this article, I am beginning a series on how contemporary postmillennialism deals with the great tribulation. This will basically be a survey of much of Matthew 24. This series ought to provide the interested reader with a basic understanding of how postmillennialism answers the complaint that Jesus’ prophecy of “the great tribulation” undermines our historical hope. As such, I am hoping postmillennial readers might share these studies with their non-postmillennial friends — especially if they really don’t need friends anymore.

This series is significant in that American evangelical Christians are intensely interested in what the New Testament calls “the great tribulation.” Many enormously popular, best-selling books have been written on this phenomenon, including The Late Great Planet Earth (30 million copies sold) and the Left Behind series (65 million copies).

The great tribulation is significant and merits careful consideration. This is not only because of its influence on contemporary evangelical thought, but (more importantly) because of its large presence in Scripture. The Bible touches on this theme in many contexts in both the Old and New Testaments. Furthermore, it seems to contradict postmillennialism’s historical optimism. Consequently, it will be crucial for us to study it in light of our presentation of the postmillennial hope.

The two most significant portions of Scripture treating the great tribulation are found in Jesus’ teaching and John’s Revelation. It appears prominently in one of Christ’s major recorded discourses: the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24–25 (cp. Mark 13; Luke 21:5–36). The first thirty-four verses of Matthew 24 focus on the great tribulation, even employing the phrase in verse 21.

[image error]

Olivet Discourse Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)

Verse-by-verse analysis of Christ’s teaching on Jerusalem’s destruction in Matt 24. Shows the great tribulation is past, having occurred in AD 70, and is distinct from the Second Advent at the end of history.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

As pessimistic systems, the non-postmillennial eschatological positions see our future in the bleakest terms. And this largely due to the biblical teaching on the great tribulation. For instance, amillennial theologian Herman Hanko notes that postmillennialism “stands in sharp contrast with that whole body of biblical data which describes the days prior to the coming of Christ as days in which lawlessness abounds (Matthew 24:12)” and “Matthew 24 itself is strong proof of all this.” Premillennialist Wayne Grudem agrees: “Matthew 24 is such a difficult passage from the postmillennialist perspective.”

Any biblical eschatological system must be able to explain the great tribulation if it is to gain a hearing. But this is an especially important matter for postmillennialism due to its long-term, historical optimism. How can the postmillennialist propose an optimistic outlook for history if Christ, John, and other biblical writers warn of a time of great tribulation? The very idea of a great tribulation seems to conflict with the victorious outlook of postmillennialism.

In this series I will engage a brief overview of the Olivet Discourse. This overview will serve two purposes: (1) It will interpret this large and important issue in biblical prophecy. (2) It will demonstrate how the great tribulation fits within the optimistic outlook of postmillennialism.

The long-standing debate over Matthew 24 is unfortunate. When we look carefully at the prophecy it is not so difficult to comprehend it within a postmillennial scheme. One problem that modern evangelical laymen face is that Jesus’ discourse is solidly rooted in the Old Testament. Unfortunately, they tend to be so New Testament oriented that they do not properly understand the Old Testament backdrop. We must remember that Jesus was speaking to a first-century Jewish audience steeped in the old covenant revelation (the Old Testament itself).

For our purposes in this series I will focus on the portion of the Olivet Discourse that relates to “the great tribulation.” Undoubtedly, in our modern evangelical context of popular apocalypticism and interest in all things eschatological, this passage comes to people’s mind as they ask: “Are we living in the last days?” “Is our day about to witness the fulfillment of these prophecies?”

This passage is familiar to most Christians. Who has not heard the dreadful prophecy of “wars and rumors of wars”? Or of “earthquakes in various places”? Or the alarming prospect of the “abomination of desolation”? Who has not feared the sound of “the great tribulation” reverberating from the lips of our Lord Jesus Christ? Unfortunately, though Matthew 24 is familiar to most, it is understood by few.

Most Christians in our generation and especially within modern evangelicalism, believe that we have just recently entered into the “last days.” They often point to Matthew 24 as a signal to the beginning of the last days. They believe this text even offers signs indicating the great tribulation is about to explode on the scene, punctuating the end of the Church Age.

[image error]Dispensational Distortions (3 downloadable mp3s)

by Ken Gentry

Reformed introduction to classic dispensationalism, with analysis of leading flaws regarding the Church, kingdom, redemptive history, and Christ. Helpful for demonstrating errors to dispensationalists.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Book distributors and websites across America today are filled with end time scenarios that warn that the great tribulation in Matthew 24 and the events of the Book of Revelation are about to erupt all around us. They urge Christians to expect the imminent rapture of the Lord’s people so that the great tribulation and Revelation’s judgments might break forth. Books such as:

• Tim LaHaye and Craig Parshall, Brink of Chaos (2012) and Edge of Apocalypse (2010)

• Joel C. Rosenberg, Damascus Countdown (2013)

• Grant R. Jeffrey, The New Temple and the Second Coming: The Prophecy That Points to Christ’s Return in Your Generation (2007) and Countdown to the Apocalypse (2008)

• Ron Rhodes, The End Times in Chronological Order: A Complete Overview to Understanding Bible Prophecy (2012)

• Ron Rhodes, New Babylon Rising: The Emerging End Times World Order (2019)

• John Hagee, Four Blood Moons: Something Is about to Change (2013).

These are only a few of the titles crowding the shelves of Christian bookstores and alarming Christians today. All of these books draw abundantly from the prophecies in Matthew 24 and, of course, related passages in the Book of Revelation.

How are we to understand this crucial discourse? What is “the great tribulation” of which Christ speaks in verse 21: “Then, there will be a great tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world, until now, nor ever shall be”?

Stay tuned! I will be answering these questions.

OLIVET IN CONTEXT: A Commentary on Matthew 21–25[image error]

I am currently researching a commentary on Matthew 21–25, the literary context of the Olivet Discourse from Matthew’s perspective. My research will demonstrate that Matthew’s presentation demands that the Olivet Discourse refer to AD 70 (Matt. 24:3–35) as an event that anticipates the Final Judgment at the Second Advent (Matt. 24:36–25:46). This will explode the myth that Jesus was a Jewish sage focusing only on Israel. The commentary will be about 250 pages in length.

If you would like to support me in my research, I invite you to consider giving a tax-deductible contribution to my research and writing ministry: GoodBirth Ministries. Your help is much appreciated!

MATT 24:3 AND THE SECOND ADVENT. AGAIN.

[image error]PMW 2020-046 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In response to my published views on Matthew 24:3 and its influence on the structure and interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, a reader has sent me a question. I argue that the Discourse speaks to both AD 70 and the Second Advent. This is partly based on the Disciples’ question in v. 3, which (I argue) has them confusing the AD 70 judgment with the Final Judgment. Let me present then respond to his concern.

Reader:

In the light of Matthew, until that moment the Lord had not spoken of another “coming” but that of AD 70. The few texts (before Matthew 24) that speak of his coming or his return (Matt. 10.23; 16.27-28) are clearly connected with AD 70; this being so, why should the disciples ask about another “advent” unknown to themselves? And why should Jesus answer them about something that he never taught them before?

Gentry:

Actually your concern is mistaken. To answer your question, we need to keep several things in mind:

(1) We have to recognize that the Gospels do not record everything that Jesus did and taught (e.g., John 21:25). And if this is so, then your statement that “until that moment the Lord had not spoken of another ‘coming’ but that of AD 70″ could be (and I believe is!) mistaken. How do we know he never taught about his Second Coming to Final Judgment before then? After all, some of his recorded messages can be read in two or three minutes, whereas they must have had much more content than has been preserved for us in the Gospels. We should suspect their larger size in light of several issues:

For instance, in Matt. 23:37, Jesus says to Jerusalem: “How often I wanted to gather your children together.” This shows that he had been in Jerusalem on several occasions (which John actually records; John 2:23; 4:45; 5:1; 7:25), where he undoubtedly taught many things. However, Matthew only records this one visit at the very end of his ministry.

[image error]Why I Left Full-Preterism (by Samuel M. Frost)

Former leader in Full Preterist movement, Samuel M. Frost, gives his testimony and theological reasoning as to why he left the heretical movement. Good warning to others tempted to leave orthodox Christianity.

See more study materials at: KennethGentry.com

Furthermore, Matthew does not mention the temple cleansing at the beginning of his ministry, as does John (John 2:16ff). He only mentions one occurring at the end (Matt. 21:12ff). This does not mean that the earlier cleansing did not occur. In addition, Paul even quotes a statement from Jesus not found in any of the Gospels: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). Thus again, we see that Jesus taught more than is recorded for us. So over his three and one-half years of ministry, the disciples would have heard a lot more than we have recorded in the Gospels.

Yet, (2) during his ministry Jesus does teach about the eschatological complex involving the Second Coming and Final Judgment. And he does so before the Olivet Discourse. For instance, in John 6 he speaks of the last day and the resurrection (John 6:39, 40, 44, 54).

Of course, it is true that he had not been teaching on this topic when the Disciples assumed he must have meant such here. But we must understand that the Disciples are often confused at his teaching (see PMW 2019-002).

The latter portion of the disciples’ question in response to Jesus’ temple-destruction prophecy is: “What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” (Matt. 24:3b). Nothing in the preceding context has mentioned either his “coming” (i.e., his parousia) or “the end of the age.” He says nothing about a “coming” to judge in his lengthy rebuke of the Pharisees (Matt. 23:1–36) and of the Jerusalemites (Matt. 23:37–38). Nor does he mention a “coming” in his prophecy of the temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:2). Nor does he mention the arrival of “the end of the age” in either context.

Nevertheless, the disciples are so Israel-focused and Judaically-oriented that they assume “the end of the age” (involving the bodily resurrection of all men and the Final Judgment) must come about at the collapse of the temple.

But actually, (3) earlier in Matthew’s Gospel Jesus had in fact taught about his Second Advent/Final Judgment. He referred to that time as “the end of the age” which would experience the resurrection and judgment (Matt. 13:39–41). Elsewhere he links it with the AD 70 judgment: in Matthew 16:27–28, AD 70 serves as a pointer to the Final Judgment (see PMW 2018-061 and PMW 2018-062).

[image error]Special Eschatology Studies (3 MP3 downloads)

by Ken Gentry

Includes: (1) Radio interview on the Beast and Daniel 9: WMCA Radio (New York). (2) “The Beast is an Eighth,” a study on the tricky verse Rev 17:11 that is sometimes used to rebut the Neronic date for the writing of Revelation. (3) “The New Creation in Rev 21,” which presents a picture of the glory of the Christian faith as the spiritual phase of the New Creation that anticipates the consummate New Creation. See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(4) In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus will carefully draw a distinction between the sign-filled era (Matt. 24:4ff) leading up to AD 70 and the no-sign era (Matt. 24:36ff) of the Second Advent. See PMW 2019-047.

Then (5) later in Matt 25:31ff he will speak of his Second Coming, which initiates the Final Judgment.

But with the first-century Jewish conviction that the temple will stand until the end of history (as noted in Philo and other early Jewish writings), the Disciples make an understandable error in connecting the temple’s destruction with the coming of the end and the Final Judgment.

As George Beasley-Murray notes regarding Matt. 24:3: “every Jew assumed that that temple would be the centre of the earth in the kingdom of God; its ruin then could only be in connection with the end of the age and the coming of the final kingdom.” Or as Donald Hagner explains the Disciples’ thoughts: “the thought of the destruction of the second temple could …. only signal the time of final judgment.” Thus, their first-century cultural and historical setting prompts them to (wrongly) associate the temple’s destruction with the Second Coming/Final Judgment.