Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.'s Blog, page 63

JESUS AND PRETERISM (2)

[image error]PMW 2019-083 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my previous article I began a brief response to Dr. Wayne Briddle of Liberty University regarding his critique of preterism. I recommend reading that article before reading this one. In this article I will briefly respond to various issues in a running, seriatim fashion.

Hyper-Preterism/Extreme Preterism

I do not know of any contemporary proponent of Hyper-Preterism who teaches that history may, in fact, come to an end. In fact, it seems to be a distinctive of this heterodox movement that it holds that the earth has been established “forever.” John Noe’s book drives this point home repeatedly. And as far as I can tell, this is commonly asserted in that movement.

Evangelical Preterism v. Hyper-Preterism

On page two of his paper (in the first paragraph) he (correctly) notes that most partial preterists regard full preterism as heretical. This is certainly true, and important. In fact, Keith A. Mathison has edited a book demonstrating this, When Shall These Things Be?.

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

To fill out his materials in this regard I will cut-and-paste a brief note I provide in my The Beast of Revelation, which points interested in persons to various critiques of Hyper-Preterism:

A view currently gaining a cult-like popularity teaches that the total complex of end time events transpired in the first-century: the Second Advent, the resurrection, the rapture of the saints, and the great judgment. This view is not supported by any creed or any council of the Church in history. A “Foreword” to a book by John Noe from this movement inadvertently highlights the (all too typical) problem:: “John is not a professional theologian. He has had no formal seminary training, but that may be an advantage.” Then again, lacking training in biblical languages, exegetical principles, and formal theology may not be helpful at all. The origins of this modern movement arise out of and are fueled by many either presently or previously within the Church of Christ sect (e.g., Max King, Tim King, and Ed Stevens). Some “hyper-preterists” have even become Unitarians (see: Edward E. Stevens, “Wanda Shirk & PIE,” Kingdom Counsel [April 1994-Sept. 1996]: 3-17).

Others have begun to apply the biblical references to hell to the events of A.D. 70, thereby denying the doctrine of eternal punishment (see: Samuel G. Dawson, Jesus’ Teaching on Hell: A Place or an Event? (Puyallup, Wash.: Gospel Themes, 1997). The theological foundations of the movement appear to be continually mutating, which is expected when the position has no creedal moorings and is adrift on the sea of untrained theologians. For helpful rebuttals see: Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (3d. ed.: Chesnee, SC: Victorious Hope, 1997), App. C: “A Brief Theological Critique of Hyper-Preterism.” Jonathan Seraiah, The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future (Moscow, Ida.: Canon, 1999). R. C. Sproul, “. . . in Like Manner,” Tabletalk 24:12 (December 2000): 4-7. Vern Crisler, “The Eschatological A Priori of the New Testament: A Critique of Hyper-Preterism,” Journal of Christian Reconstruction 15 (Winter, 1998): 225-56. Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1999), App. C.

My reader may be interested to read my article on 1 Corinthians 15, titled: “Christ’s Resurrection and Ours.” In that article I counter the Hyper-Preterist misunderstanding of Paul’s reference to the “spiritual body.” I strongly assert the physical resurrection of the believer at the end of history is demanded by the physical resurrection of Christ in the first century. I provide a running exposition of key points in Paul’s argument.

Gospel Texts Used by Preterists

In Dr. Briddle’s first sentence under this heading (on p. 3), he should restructure hist statement. He states: “I wish to deal primarily with the issue of whether Jesus’ eschatological teaching conforms to the claims of partial preterism.” I believe this should be inverted to say: “I wish to deal primarily with the issue of whether the claims of partial preterism conform to Jesus’ eschatological teaching.” Jesus’ teaching is obviously prior to our teaching, and is certainly absolutely true. So I believe that his task should be to see if our teaching conforms to his. He certainly doesn’t have to answer to us.

[image error]

House Divided: The Break-up of Dispensational Theology

By Greg L. Bahnsen and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This book demonstrates that dispensational theology has been shattered by its own defenders. They are no longer willing to defend the original system, and their drastic modifications have left it a broken shell.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

I would also urge him to consider restructuring his second sentence in that paragraph. He had:

“Three texts in the Gospel of Matthew are most frequently used by preterist proponents in order to show that when Jesus talked about coming back to judge the world and inaugurate his promised kingdom, he always had in mind the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in A.D. 70….”

I (we) do not believe this. For instance, I hold that the Kingdom Parables look to the distant Second Coming of Christ to end history with the judgment and the resurrection of the dead. I also believe that Matthew 25 has Christ dividing and judging the nations at his Second Coming. There are other texts I would urge in this regard, as well.

Consequently, I would recommend that you divide your statement into two sentences and rephrase it as follows:

“Three texts in the Gospel of Matthew are most frequently used by preterist proponents. These are used as evidence to show that in some places where Jesus talked about coming in a ‘cloud-judgment’ and to inaugurate his promised kingdom in power, he had in mind the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in A.D. 70….”

In the next article I will consider some of his observations under the sub-heading on page 3.

To be continued.

JESUS AND PRETERISM (1)

[image error]PMW2019-082 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A few years ago I was privileged to hear Dr. Wayne A. Briddle of Liberty University deliver a cogent, careful, and cordial critique of evangelical preterism (which he designated “partial preterism”). Dr. Briddle graciously allowed me a few moments at the end of his presentation to respond. He also asked if I would mind providing him some sort of critique of his presentation for his better understanding of the issues from my perspective. Here is my reply.

Introduction

In his paper, Dr. Bridle provided a helpful summary statement regarding the nature of and evidence for preterism. His summary was apparently designed for an audience not thoroughly familiar with the debate. I commend him for his careful introduction of the topic. His summary should aid any one interested in the basics of preterism and its variant forms (from heterodox Hyper-Preterism or Full or Extreme Preterism to the Orthodox (“partial”) Preterism of R. C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, and Kenneth Gentry).

I would also want Dr. Briddle to be aware that the preterist movement is not a function of “Reconstructionist” theology. This is evident in that:

(1) Dr. R. J. Rushdoony, the putative founder of modern Christian Reconstruction, was opposed to preterism (see his: Thy Kingdom Come: Studies in Daniel and Revelation). Consequently, his Chalcedon Foundation operates from a non-preterist perspective on eschatological issues. Also opposed to preterism is Andrew Sandlin, former editor of Rushdoony’s The Chalcedon Report and a continuing and influential voice in Reconstructionist circles. These are but two examples.

(2) Preterism antedates the rise of Christian Reconstructionism in the 1960s. Early modern evangelical preterists include Moses Stuart (Commentary on the Apocalypse, 1844), Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (early 1800s), and Milton S. Terry (Biblical Apocalyptics, 1898). Even as late as 1971 J. Marcellus Kik promoted a non-Reconstructionist preterism in his An Eschatology of Victory (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1971). Kik’s book is actually a republication of articles he wrote back in the 1950s.

[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

(3) Preterism is widely current outside of Reconstructionist circles today. For instance, Jay E. Adams is an amillennialist, as was Cornelis Vanderwaal, Search the Scriptures (1979).

In addition, I would urge Dr. Brindle not to assume (as some do) that preterism has arisen as an attempt to shore up postmillennialism by ridding certain “anti-postmillennial” passages from the debate. For instance, on page 64 of Darrell L. Bock, ed., Three Views of the Millennium and Beyond, Robert Strimple responds to me with the following observation: “By means of his preterist reading . . . Gentry tries to assure Christians that the worst days of persecution, apostasy, and the Antichrist are past (except for the brief Satan-led rebellion just before Christ’s second coming, which Rev. 20:7-9 seems to require as an undigested surd in the postmillennial scheme).” Preterism arises as an exegetical issue (dealing with contextually embedded near-time temporal indicators) rather than a theological issue (i.e., as a function of postmillennial theology).

One issue in Briddle’s presentation that I take exception to — and especially since it is a common misperception — is the claim that preterism holds to more than one second coming of Christ (see under his heading “Mild Preterism”; but it appears elsewhere in his paper). We most definitely do not. The Hyper-Preterist obviously believes in only one Second Coming, because he applies it to the singular A.D. 70 episode. But the Evangelical Preterist also denies more than one Second Coming of Christ. Dr. Brindle is probably aware that Reformed and other non-dispensational theologians complain that dispensationalism effectively has two returns of Christ: the Rapture and the later Second Advent. If dispensationalists can divorce the Rapture from the Second Advent in such a way as to not have two Second Comings, we can as well — and we can for clearer reasons (I believe).

In this regard, we must realize the New Testament teaches that Christ “comes” in several ways: (1) Christ comes to us spiritually in the person of the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-18). (2) Christ comes on the clouds to God in heaven to receive His kingdom (Dan. 7:13). (3) Christ will come on the clouds visibly and bodily in the future, bringing about the resurrection and the judgment at his Second Advent (Acts 1:11, 1 Thess. 4:15-17). (4) He comes on the clouds in judicial judgment upon men in history. This fourth “coming on the clouds” is very much like Jehovah’s “coming on the clouds” against Egypt in Isaiah 19:1. That coming was not a real, historical appearance of Jehovah to the Egyptians; rather it is a metaphorical way of declaring that God will judge Egypt in history:

The oracle concerning Egypt.

Behold, the Lord is riding on a swift cloud, and is about to come to Egypt;

The idols of Egypt will tremble at His presence,

And the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them.

[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

As a preterist, I teach that the “Second Coming” is a distinct, unitary, unrepeatable, visible, bodily appearance of Christ to bring history to a conclusion. It is the only Second Coming, and is mentioned in such texts as Acts 1:8-11 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 (to mention but two). The “coming” of Christ in A.D. 70 is really a metaphorical statement declaring that he will judge Israel and destroy her Temple for rejecting him. I doubt Christ actually came down to earth (in spirit or otherwise) and directed the battles. The A.D. 70 coming is a literary image of divine superintendence of earthly judgment (as per Isa. 19:1). It is the same coming alluded to in Matthew 21:40, which is taken by most evangelicals as referring to A.D. 70: “Therefore when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine-growers?”

It is true that the A.D. 70 “judgment-coming” is related to the Second Coming. But it functions only as a preview and warning of the wrath of God that will occur as an actual, history-ending eschatological event. As such, it is like the various Old Testament “Day of the Lord” passages that preview the consummate Second Coming (see Dallas Seminary’s Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament for evidence in this regard).

To be continued.

 

[image error]

AL MOHLER DISSES POSTMILLENNIALISM

[image error]PMW 2019-081 by Gary DeMar (American Vision)

Al Mohler has written “Evolving Standards of Decency? How Progressivism Reshapes Society.” My question: “Where were Christians when the Supreme Court codified “evolving standards of decency”? Mohler writes that we share with progressives a belief “in a linear view of history…. We also believe that history doesn’t go forward and backward in time. But we do not believe as Christians that the world is always getting better and better. That’s actually a deformation of Christian doctrine. The reality is that the biblical worldview is so honest about the power of sin that we come to understand that societies do move forward in some terms economically, politically, certainly technologically, but they don’t move forward uniformly certainly when it comes to morality.”

Mohler admits that there has been some “moral progress,” but in the end, “The kingdom of God is coming in its consummation only by the return of the Lord Jesus Christ.” He then takes a stab at postmillennialism:

“Many mainline, more liberal Protestants in Europe and in the United States, but particularly in Europe were tempted by a postmillennialism. That is a theological form of progressivism, but eschatology comes with consequences, and the consequences of reality meant that World War I and all of its carnage brought catastrophe to that kind of mainline Protestant postmillennialism by the early 20th century.”

What Mohler does not deal with is biblical postmillennialism. It is biblical postmillennialism that led to the greatness of what is, in remnant form, the United States of America. Mohler mistakenly associates postmillennialism with Darwinism and theological liberalism. If he had read Greg L. Bahnsen’s “The Prima Facie Acceptability of Postmillennialism, he would not have made this mistake.

[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

Prior to the rise of dispensationalism, there was a realistic optimism even when persecution was all around them. They followed Paul’s comforting words: “But they will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all… Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim. 3:9, 12). Paul wrote this to Timothy nearly 2000 years ago. Christians didn’t give in to the evils of the day and claim that they would be rescued by something called a “rapture.”

It’s important to keep in mind that during a period of persecution, the Reformers did not outline a prophetic system that predicted the near end of the world. Martin Luther was something of an exception. For example, he “did not believe that the kingdom would triumph on earth and in history. In fact, he expected the world to end soon…. In contrast to Luther, John Calvin believed that the kingdom would ‘have a yet greater triumph in history prior to the consummation [the Second Coming],’”1 so much so that “the kingdom of God . . . [will] be extended to the utmost boundaries of the earth . . . so as to occupy the whole world from one end to the other.”2

It was Calvin’s shared optimistic eschatology that found its way into the notes of the Geneva Bible. To cite just one of scores of examples, the note on Zechariah 9:11 in the Geneva Bible reads, “God showeth that he will deliver his Church out of all dangers, seem they ever so great.” But if the church doesn’t believe this, then the church acquiesces to the advance of evil as normative this side of the Second Coming.

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

There is no reference to an escape hatch for the Church but only the promised claim that God will sustain and maintain His Church even when persecuted, and that includes Christians being burned at the stake for attempting to do something as logical as translating the Bible into English.

Biblical postmillennialists believe in the progress of the gospel and its effect on culture over the course of history when Christians apply the Bible to every area of life. If they don’t do this, it’s a cop-out to appeal to “only by the return of the Lord Jesus Christ” can make things morally right.

With two world wars, the rise of atheistic communism, and a general evangelical disinterest in culture, it’s not surprising that . . . .

To finish article and see footnotes, click: here

THE 144,000 IN REVELATION

[image error]PMW 2019-080 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I have been giving a brief survey of Revelation beginning in Rev. 4. Now we must note that as the wrath of the Lamb against the Jews builds, we will witness a surprising pause in the horrifying drama. Four angels hold back the wind from “the land,” i.e., Israel (Rev. 7:1-3). This act is symbolic imagery, relating what Robert Thomas calls (at another place) “picturesque apocalyptic.” The angels are not holding back literal winds, but the winds of destruction (cp. Jer. 49:36-37; 51:1-2). The first six seals represent the early stage of the Jewish War wherein Vespasian fights his way through Galilee toward Jerusalem. But before he has an opportunity to besiege Jerusalem the action pauses as these angels seal the 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel (Rev. 7:3).

The number 144,000, as most commentators agree, is surely symbolic. In fact, in Revelation perfectly rounded thousands all appear to be symbolic. Ten is the number of quantitative perfection, and one thousand is the cube of ten. Frequently Scripture uses 1000 as a symbolic value, not expressing a literal enumeration (e.g., Ex. 20:6; Deut. 1:11; 7:9; 32:30; Josh. 23:10; Job 9:3; Ps. 50:10; 84:10; 90:4; 105:8; Eccl. 7:28; Isa. 7:23; 30:17; 60:22; 2 Pet. 3:8). Furthermore, in this highly symbolic book we should note that exactly 12,000 people come from each one of the twelve tribes.

[image error]

Keys to the Book of Revelation

(DVDs by Ken Gentry)

Provides the necessary keys for opening Revelation to a deeper and clearer understanding.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

But what does the number symbolize? And who are these people? What is the significance of this episode?

To properly assess these questions we must keep in mind the following facts: (1) The events are occurring in the first century, as John so clearly demands (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10). (2) The judgments are falling upon Israel and moving toward Jerusalem. (3) Apostolic Christianity tends to focus on Jerusalem (Acts 1:4; 1:8; 18:21; 20:16; 24:11 ). (4) John considers non-Christian Jews as only “so-called Jews” and members of the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9; 3:9; cp. John 8:31-47).

Therefore, these “servants of God” from the “twelve tribes of Israel” (Rev. 7:4-8) are racial Jews who accept the Lamb of God (Rev. 5:1) for salvation (they later appear with him on Mount Zion, Rev. 14:1-5). When we compare their specifically defined number (144,000) to the “great multitude that no one could count” (Rev. 7:9), it is relatively small. But they are a perfect number, especially loved of God, and belonging to him (they are true Jews, the remnant, Rom. 2:28-29; 9:6, 27; 11:5). Thus, he places his (spiritual) seal upon them (v. 3, cp. 2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:13; 4:30; 2 Tim. 2:19). In a sense, their sealing is the answer to the question: “Who can stand?” (Rev. 6:17). The answer: only those God protects — precisely as per the Old Testament backdrop (Ezek. 9:4-9).

So before the Jewish War reaches and overwhelms Jerusalem, God providentially causes a brief cessation of hostilities allowing the Jewish Christians in Judea to escape (as Jesus urges in Matt. 24:16-22). This happens when the emperor Nero commits suicide (A.D. 68), causing the Roman generals Vespasian and Titus to cease operations and withdraw for a year due to the turmoil in Rome. We know from the church fathers Eusebius and Epiphanius that Christians flee to Pella before the war overwhelms Jerusalem (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3; Epiphanius, Heresies 29:7).

[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

THE 140,000 IN REVELATION

[image error]PMW 2019-080 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I have been giving a brief survey of Revelation beginning in Rev. 4. Now we must note that as the wrath of the Lamb against the Jews builds, we will witness a surprising pause in the horrifying drama. Four angels hold back the wind from “the land,” i.e., Israel (Rev. 7:1-3). This act is symbolic imagery, relating what Robert Thomas calls (at another place) “picturesque apocalyptic.” The angels are not holding back literal winds, but the winds of destruction (cp. Jer. 49:36-37; 51:1-2). The first six seals represent the early stage of the Jewish War wherein Vespasian fights his way through Galilee toward Jerusalem. But before he has an opportunity to besiege Jerusalem the action pauses as these angels seal the 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel (Rev. 7:3).

The number 144,000, as most commentators agree, is surely symbolic. In fact, in Revelation perfectly rounded thousands all appear to be symbolic. Ten is the number of quantitative perfection, and one thousand is the cube of ten. Frequently Scripture uses 1000 as a symbolic value, not expressing a literal enumeration (e.g., Ex. 20:6; Deut. 1:11; 7:9; 32:30; Josh. 23:10; Job 9:3; Ps. 50:10; 84:10; 90:4; 105:8; Eccl. 7:28; Isa. 7:23; 30:17; 60:22; 2 Pet. 3:8). Furthermore, in this highly symbolic book we should note that exactly 12,000 people come from each one of the twelve tribes.

[image error]

Keys to the Book of Revelation

(DVDs by Ken Gentry)

Provides the necessary keys for opening Revelation to a deeper and clearer understanding.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

But what does the number symbolize? And who are these people? What is the significance of this episode?

To properly assess these questions we must keep in mind the following facts: (1) The events are occurring in the first century, as John so clearly demands (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10). (2) The judgments are falling upon Israel and moving toward Jerusalem. (3) Apostolic Christianity tends to focus on Jerusalem (Acts 1:4; 1:8; 18:21; 20:16; 24:11 ). (4) John considers non-Christian Jews as only “so-called Jews” and members of the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9; 3:9; cp. John 8:31-47).

Therefore, these “servants of God” from the “twelve tribes of Israel” (Rev. 7:4-8) are racial Jews who accept the Lamb of God (Rev. 5:1) for salvation (they later appear with him on Mount Zion, Rev. 14:1-5). When we compare their specifically defined number (144,000) to the “great multitude that no one could count” (Rev. 7:9), it is relatively small. But they are a perfect number, especially loved of God, and belonging to him (they are true Jews, the remnant, Rom. 2:28-29; 9:6, 27; 11:5). Thus, he places his (spiritual) seal upon them (v. 3, cp. 2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:13; 4:30; 2 Tim. 2:19). In a sense, their sealing is the answer to the question: “Who can stand?” (Rev. 6:17). The answer: only those God protects — precisely as per the Old Testament backdrop (Ezek. 9:4-9).

So before the Jewish War reaches and overwhelms Jerusalem, God providentially causes a brief cessation of hostilities allowing the Jewish Christians in Judea to escape (as Jesus urges in Matt. 24:16-22). This happens when the emperor Nero commits suicide (A.D. 68), causing the Roman generals Vespasian and Titus to cease operations and withdraw for a year due to the turmoil in Rome. We know from the church fathers Eusebius and Epiphanius that Christians flee to Pella before the war overwhelms Jerusalem (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3; Epiphanius, Heresies 29:7).

[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

THE SEVEN SEALS OF REVELATION 6

[image error]PMW 2019-079 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In Revelation 6 Christ begins opening the seals. As Robert Thomas, Marvin Pate, and other commentators note, there is a “close parallelism between Jesus’ Olivet Discourse” and the seals of Revelation. And as the preterist reminds them, the contexts of both of these prophecies relate to first century events (cp. Rev. 1:1, 3; Matt. 24:2-3, 34). Interestingly, church father Eusebius (A.D. 260-340) uses Josephus’s history of the Jewish War (A.D. 67-70) to illustrate the fulfilling of the Olivet prophecy (Eccl. Hist. 3:5-9).

The rider on the white horse “bent on conquest” (Rev. 6:2-3) represents the victorious Roman march toward Jerusalem to engage the Jewish War in the Spring of A.D. 67. The rider on the red horse (Rev. 6:4) who takes “the peace from the earth” (Rev. 6:4; cp. Matt. 24:6-7) speaks of the surprising disruption of the famous pax Romana, an enforced peace that prevails throughout the Roman Empire for many years. For example, Epictetus (A.D. 60-140) writes that “Caesar has obtained for us a profound peace. There are neither wars nor battles” (Discourses 3:13:9). The Jewish revolt against Rome temporarily interrupts this famous peace. The red horse especially highlights that civil war occurring in Jerusalem itself (where Jesus utters his prophecy, Matt. 24).

The riders on the black and pale horses represent famine and death issuing from the Jewish War. These tragic factors of the Jewish War are well-documented by Josephus (Wars of the Jews 4-7), the Jewish historian who participates in the war, and by the Roman historians Tacitus (Histories 1) and Suetonius (Vespasian).

[image error]

Survey of the Book of Revelation

(DVDs by Ken Gentry)

Twenty-four careful, down-to-earth lectures provide a basic introduction to and survey of the entire Book of Revelation. Professionally produced lectures of 30-35 minutes length.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

The fifth seal (Rev. 6:9-11) gives a heaven-ward glance once again (cp. Rev. 4), where we hear the martyrs crying for vengeance. God promises to vindicate them, but they must “wait a little longer” (Rev. 6:11; cp. Luke 18:6-8). Martyr vindication is crucial to understanding Israel’s judgment (Matt. 23:34— 24:2). The de-creation language in the sixth seal (Rev. 6:12-17) portrays Israel’s world coming apart under the “wrath of the Lamb” on the “great day of wrath” (Rev. 6:17). Such de-creation language is common prophetic parlance regarding the collapse of God-cursed governments, such as Babylon (Isa. 13:1, 10, 19), Egypt (Ezek. 32:2, 7-8, 16, 18), Idumea (Isa. 34:3-5, and Judah (Jer. 4:14, 23-24). Milton Terry writes of Revelation 6: “the imagery and style of the Old Testament apocalyptists are most appropriately brought into use; sun, moon, and stars, and the heaven itself, are pictured as collapsing, and the crisis of the ages is signaled by voices and thunders and lightnings and earthquake. To insist on literal interpretation of such imagery is to bring prophecy into contempt and ridicule.”

The moving away of “every mountain” may allude to the Roman legions’s construction crews removing mountainous impediments to the progress of the massive army, or to their building banks to the tops of the protective walls surrounding Jewish cities. Josephus notes: “Accordingly [Vespasian] sent both footmen and horsemen to level the road, which was mountainous and rocky, not without difficulty to be traveled over by footmen, but absolutely impracticable for horsemen. Now these workmen accomplished what they were about in four days” (Wars 3:7:3). After describing the mountainous setting of Jotapata and its natural impregnability (Wars 3:7:7), Josephus mentions Vespasian’s decision to “raise a bank against that part of the wall which was practicable” (Wars 3:7:8).

In Revelation 6:15-16 men “hid in caves” and “called to the mountains and rocks, ‘fall on us.’” Josephus frequently mentions that the Jews actually seek refuge underground during the A.D. 67-70 war: “And on this day the Romans slew all the multitude that appeared openly; but on the following days they searched the hiding places, and fell upon those that were underground, and in the caverns” (Wars 3:7:36; see also 3:2:3; 3:7:35; 5:3:1; 6:7:3; 6:9:4; 7:2:1).

The Beast of Revelation[image error]

by Ken Gentry

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

Jesus warns the women watching him carry his cross: “The time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Then they will say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us!’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us!”’ (Luke 23:29-30; cp. Matt. 24:1-2, 19, 34). The fate of the women and children in A.D. 70 is horrible: “Then did the famine widen its progress, and devoured the people by whole houses and families; the upper rooms were full of women and children that were dying by famine; and the lanes of the city were full of the dead bodies of the aged; the children also and the young men wandered about the marketplaces like shadows, all swelled with the famine” (Wars 5:12:3). The relevant fit of first century events with the prophecy of Revelation 6 is so compelling that Marvin Pate admits their connection, though he rejects the preterist conclusions.

THE THRONE AND THE SCROLL IN REV. 4

[image error]PMW 2019-078 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In Revelation 1:12-20 John’s first vision shows Christ in history (spiritually) walking among the churches as their ever-present Protector and Head (cp. Matt. 18:20; 28:18, 20; Acts 18:9-10; Heb. 13:5). The focal judgments of Revelation do not begin until Revelation 6. In Revelation 4 and 5, though, God braces John for those coming fearsome judgment scenes by spiritually transporting him above history to God’s throne room in heaven (Rev. 4:1-2).

The Heavenly Throne

Here in Revelation 4 John sees God sitting on his judicial throne actively ruling over all creation (Rev. 4:2-6, 11). The four “living creatures” closest to the throne seem to be angels of the highest order: they ever watch (they are “full of eyes,” v. 6) over creation (they appear as creatures and sing of creation, vv. 7, 11), ready to do God’s holy bidding (they have six wings to swiftly fly and they sing of God’s holiness, v. 8) in all of creation (their number represents the four points of the compass, v. 7; cp. Rev. 7:1; 21:13). Whatever John witnesses thereafter — however terrifying the judgments, however vicious the opposition — he may rest assured that not only does Christ concern himself with the affairs of his people in history (Rev. 1), but that God is actively controlling all things from above history (Rev. 4; cp. Dan. 2:21; 4:35; Rom. 8:28; Eph. 1:11).

[image error]

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.

For more Christian studies see: www.KennethGentry.com

Interestingly, John mentions God’s “throne” in eighteen of Revelation’s twenty-two chapters. In fact, of the sixty-two appearances of the word “throne” in the New Testament, we find forty-seven of them in Revelation. Strong judicial tendencies characterize Revelation, not only due to this dramatic vision itself but to all the judicial terminology therein (e.g., Rev. 6:10; 11:18; 15:3; 16:5-7; 18:8; 19:2, 11). The temporal judgment-coming of Christ, which dramatically concludes forever the Old Testament typological era (cf. Rev. 11:1-2, 19; 21:22), is directed from the throne of the universe.

In chapter 5 a remarkable claimant to the right to execute God’s judgments appears before the throne: a slain but living lamb. The strongly Judaic (and symbolic) description of Christ’s appearance here underscores the thematic concern of Christ’s coming in cloud-judgment against “they who pierced him” — the Jews (Rev. 1:7). Thus he appears as a sacrificial lamb “looking as if it had been slain” (Rev. 5:6, 9, 12), who is “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (Rev. 5:5). The emphasis on his crucifixion — as in Revelation 1:7 — is unmistakable (“lamb,” “slain”). As Milton Terry observes there is a certain irony in this imagery: “The great trouble with Judaism was that it looked for mighty lion; and was scandalized to behold, instead, a little lamb” (cf. Luke 24:21, 25-27; John 6:15; 19:15).

The Seven-sealed Scroll

But what does the seven-sealed scroll represent? “Then I saw in the right hand of him who sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides and sealed with seven seals” (Rev. 5:1). If we are to discern the proper meaning of this scroll we must bear in mind four interpretive controls: (1) The scroll must apply to first century events, for “the time is at hand” (Rev. 1:3; 22:6, 10, 12; cp. 6:11). (2) The scroll must refer to Israel, for Revelation’s theme refers to “they who pierced him” (Rev. 1:7; 11:8). (3) The scroll should have Old Testament warrant, for as Robert Thomas well notes: “The influence of the OT on Revelation is overwhelming.” (4) The scroll should be consistent with the flow of Revelation, for it is an intricately structured book with all of its numbered series and reappearing images.

In the Old Testament we find a scroll similarly described and in an analogous context. In Ezekiel 1 the prophet sees four living, winged creatures, very much like those John sees (Ezek. 1:5-10; Rev. 4:6-8). Near Ezekiel’s living creatures he sees a crystal-like expanse and a glorious throne overarched by a rainbow, very much like that John sees (Ezek. 1:22-28; Rev. 4:2-6). In Ezekiel 2:9-10 we read: “Then I looked, and I saw a hand stretched out to me. In it was a scroll, which he unrolled before me. On both sides of it were written words of lament and mourning and woe.” This reminds us of John’s experience: “Then I saw in the right hand of him who sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides and sealed with seven seals” (Rev. 5:1). The strong similarities surely are not accidental; John seems to be intentionally following Ezekiel’s pattern.

Now then, what is the point of Ezekiel’s vision? Judgment upon Israel: “He said: ‘Son of man, I am sending you to the Israelites, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against me; they and their fathers have been in revolt against me to this very day’” (Ezek. 2:3). This supports our understanding Revelation’s point, especially when we consider how much greater is first century Israel’s sin in rejecting the Messiah himself (John 1:11; Matt. 21:33-45; 23:32-38; Acts 2:23, 36; cp. Matt. 13:17; 1 Pet. 1:10-12). The seven-fold nature of the judgments upon Israel (represented by the seven seals, trumpets, and bowls) reminds us of the covenantal curse God threatens upon her in the Old Testament: “If after all this you will not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over” (Lev. 26:18, cp. vv. 24, 28).

[image error]

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

When viewed against the backdrop of the theme (Jewish judgment), personages (a harlot and a bride), and flow of Revelation (from the sealed scroll to capital punishment for “adultery” to a “marriage feast” to the taking of a new “bride” as the “new Jerusalem”), the covenantal nature of the transaction suggests that the seven sealed scroll is God’s divorce decree against his Old Testament wife for her spiritual adultery. In the Old Testament God “marries” Israel (note especially: Ezek. 16:8, 31-32); and in several places he threatens her with a “bill of divorce” (Isa. 50:1; Jer. 3:8).

In the New Testament the final and conclusive destruction of the temple accomplishes this. In his divorce of Israel God dis-establishes her: redemptive history is no longer the story of a Jewish-focused, Israel-exalting, geo-political work as in the Old Testament (Matt. 8:11; 21:43; cp. Amos 3:2a; Ps. 147:19-20). God’s work now reaches out to “all nations” (Matt. 28:19; Acts 1:8); Christ makes of two, one new man (Eph. 2:12-22) where there is no longer “Jew nor Greek” (Rom. 10:12; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11).

Interestingly, the “Lion of the Tribe of Judah” reference (Rev. 5:5) harkens back to Genesis 49. There we hear of the universalizing of God’s work beyond the borders of Israel: “Judah is a lion’s whelp . . . to Him shall be the obedience of the people” (Gen. 49:9-10). Furthermore, Christ’s appearing before God’s throne in heaven (Rev. 5:6) reminds us of Daniel’s Messianic vision: When the Son of Man appears before the Ancient of Days, God grants him a kingdom so “that all peoples, nations, and men of every language worshiped him” (Dan. 7:13-14; cp. Rev. 5:9; 7:9; 14:6).

Nevertheless, though God judges the first century Jews and dis-establishes Israel as the unique geo-political focus of his kingdom, we know from other New Testament revelation that the Jews also will eventually return to the kingdom of God in full number, receiving the blessings of salvation (Rom. 11). But God will never exalt them above other blood-bought people (even the Old Testament anticipates such equality, Isa. 19:23-25; Jer. 48:47; 49:6, 39; Zech. 9:7). Jew and gentile merge into one body in Christ forever, forming one tree (Rom. 11:15, 25), one new man (Eph. 2:13-18), one new temple (Eph. 2:19-22), one new creation (Gal. 6:15).

THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND SYMBOLISM

[image error]PMW 2019-077 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

When opening the book of Revelation, the would-be interpreter must understand that it is a highly figurative book that cannot be approached with a simple, straightforward literalism. It constantly amazes me that when I discuss Revelation with many evangelical laymen they are immediately alarmed that I am not taking Revelation “literally”! Perhaps one of our first tasks in convincing laymen of the preterist view of Revelation is to disabuse them of literalism.

The first thing we need to do is to point out that though Revelation is highly symbolic, the preterist view does understand Revelation’s prophecies as strongly reflecting actual historical events in John’s near future. And this is despite their being set in an apocalyptic drama and clothed with poetic hyperbole. As even premillennialist commentator Robert Mounce notes: “That the language of prophecy is highly figurative has nothing to do with the reality of the events predicted. Symbolism is not a denial of historicity but a matter of literary genre.”

Let us note the following impediments to a preconceived literalism:

First, the statement as to content. In his opening statement John informs us Revelation is given “to show” (Gk.: deixai) the message being “signified (Gk.: esemanen) by His angel” (Rev. 1:1, NKJV). As Friedrich Düsterdieck notes: “The deixai occurs in the way peculiar to semainein, i.e., the indication of what is meant by significative figures.” In fact, forty-one times John says he “sees” these prophecies (e.g., 1:12, 20; 5:6; 9:1; 20:1). Furthermore, some of the visions are obviously symbolic, e.g., the slain lamb (Rev. 4-5), the seven-headed beast (Rev. 13 and 17), and the Babylonian prostitute (Rev. 17).

[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

In his Gospel John shows the problem of literalism among Christ’s early hearers: they misconstrue Jesus’s teaching regarding the temple (John 2:19-22), being born again (3:3-10), drinking water (4:10-14), eating his flesh (6:51-56), being free (8:31-36), being blind (5:39-40), falling asleep (11:11-14), and his being king (18:33-37). Such an erroneous approach is magnified if used in John’s Revelation. The visual nature of Revelation’s content — not just the method of its reception — demands symbolic interpretation. That is, except for a very few instances (e.g., Rev. 1:20; 4:5; 5:6, 8; 7:13-14; 12:9; 17:7-10) the symbols are not interpreted for us. And in one of those instances where we do receive an angelic interpretation (Rev. 17:9-12), the seven headed beast is not literally a seven headed beast at all.

Second, the precedent of earlier prophets. Old Testament prophets employ figurative language for one of two purposes: Either (1) to majestically relate spiritual truths or (2) to dramatically symbolize historical events. For instance, God’s riding on a cloud down into Egypt (Isa. 19:) and the de-creation language (Isa. 13:10) speak of the downfall of ancient cities. Milton S. Terry, a noted advocate of the grammatico-historical method of interpretation and a strong preterist, offers many helpful insights in this regard. He notes that “a rigid literal interpretation of apocalyptic language tends to confusion and endless misunderstandings.” Even literalist Robert Thomas admits “the fluidity of metaphorical language in Scripture is undeniable.”

Third, the difficulty of consistent literalism. Some instances of literalism seem to me quite strange, unreasonable, and unnecessary. For example, Robert Thomas holds that the eerie locusts of Revelation 9 and the strange frogs of Revelation 16 are demons who literally take on those peculiar physical forms; that the two prophets of Revelation 11 literally spue fire from their mouths; that every mountain in the world will be abolished during the seventh bowl judgments; that the fiery destruction of the literal city of Babylon will smolder for more than 1000 years; that Christ will return from heaven to earth on a literal horse; and that the new Jerusalem is literally a 1500 mile high cube.

[image error]

Getting the Message

(by Daniel Doriani)

Presents solid principles and clear examples of biblical interpretation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

JOHN’S “MANY WATERS”: ROME OR JERUSALEM? (2)

[image error]PMW 2019-076 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is the second and final part of a brief series arguing that the “many waters” of Rev. 17:1, 15 refer to Jerusalem’s influence over the diaspora Jews, many of whom were proselyte from the nations.

My second observation regarding the Babylonian-harlot’s sitting on many waters represents Jerusalem’s political influence exercised by means of the diaspora — particularly against Christians —- which is exerted throughout the empire and among the “peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues” (17:15).

Remembering the Jewish danger to Christians (Rev. 2:9; 3:9; cp. Acts 4:3; 5:18; 8:3; 9:2; 12:4; 18:6; 22:4; 24:27; 26:10; Rom 15:31; 2 Cor. 11:24; 1 Thess. 2:14-17; Heb. 10:33-34) and the role of the martyrs in Rev (Rev. 6:9-10; see also: Rev 1:9; 2:9-10; 3:9-10; 11:7-8, 11-13, 18; 12:10; 13:10; 14:11-13; 16:5-6; 17:6; 18:20, 24; 19:2; 20:4, 6), this is a quite significant implication of John’s image. After all, we discover “the common reflection of Jewish opposition in the NT writings” (Rick Van de Water, “Reconsidering the Beast from the Sea (Rev 13.1),” 248).

[image error]

Survey of the Book of Revelation

(DVDs by Ken Gentry)

Twenty-four careful, down-to-earth lectures provide a basic introduction to and survey of the entire Book of Revelation. Professionally produced lectures of 30-35 minutes length.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

We read in Acts that the Jews “won over the multitudes [ochlous]” against Paul and stoned him (Ac 14:19; cp. 13:45, 50; 14:2). In Ac 17:5 we read that “the Jews, becoming jealous and taking along some wicked men from the market place, formed a mob [ochlopoiēsantes] and set the city in an uproar.” In Thessalonica they were “agitating and stirring up the crowds [ochlous]” (Ac 17:13). “This regularly established link between Jerusalem and the diaspora was of particular importance during the time of organised hostility to the early church. Concerted plans could be made and consistent action followed in many parts at once” (James Parks, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, 11).

By excommunicating Jewish-Christians and resisting them in the public sphere (see Exc 10 at 11:2), the traditional Jews effectively expose Christians to Roman oppression by removing their status as Jews and the protections of religio licita. “The privileges given by the Romans to the Jews . . . were confined to practising Jews, so that by excommunication the Jewish authorities could deprive a Jews of his legal privileges” with the result that “by this simple act of excommunication they could expel a Christian from these privileges and report against him as an atheist” (James Parks, 62, 64).

But it goes even farther, the Jews specifically charge Christians with resistance to Roman rule. In Ac 17:6-7 they drag Christians before the Thessalonican city authorities charging that “they all act contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus.” This is similar to their actions in the trial of Jesus where they assert “we have no king but Caesar” in demanding Jesus’ death (Jn 19:15, cf. v 15). Parks (1961: 66) notes that “the Jews of Corinth dragged Paul before the Romans. The charge they brought was that Paul was trying to persuade them to ‘worship God contrary to the Law.’ This is certainly a charge with which they could technically have dealt themselves. . . . The Jews preferred to lay the responsibility on the Romans for deciding what to do.”

The Early Date of Revelation and the End Times: An Amillennial Partial Preterist Perspective

By Robert Hillegonds[image error]

This book presents a strong, contemporary case in support of the early dating of Revelation. He builds on Before Jerusalem Fell and brings additional arguments to bear.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Earlier Parks (65) noted that in Acts “Gallio refuses to hear the charge” which shows that for Luke “the Jews were not compelled to bring Paul before the Roman court.” The Jewish community is using the Roman judicial apparatus to stir up trouble for the Christians.

Consequently, I believe a strong and compelling case may be made for the waters of Rev. 17 representing the influence of Jerusalem over her far-flung diaspora.

JOHN’S “MANY WATERS”: ROME OR JERUSALEM? (1)

[image error]PMW 2019-075 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my 9/5/19 post regarding Babylon as an image of Jerusalem in Revelation, Fred V. Squillante responded:

“Revelation 17:1 says that the woman sits on many waters. Verse 15 says The waters where the harlot sits are peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues. The woman is sitting on the beast (many waters). This can only mean the Roman Empire.”

Rev. 17:1 and 15 rare the two texts in question, and they read:

Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and spoke with me, saying, “Come here, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters” (v. 1).

And he said to me, “The waters which you saw where the harlot sits, are peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues” (v. 15).

This is a frequent challenge brought against the Babylon=Jerusalem interpretation. And it certainly offers a reasonable interpretation. In fact, it is a key argument in favor of the identity of the harlot as Rome among standard preterists (as opposed to my Redemptive-historical preterism, which sees the bulk of Revelation as directed against Jerusalem and Israel). Thus, it deserves a response. I will provide a two part response, beginning in this posting and continuing in the next.

[image error]

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

In Rev. 17, the angel states of the “the great harlot” that she “sits on many waters (17:1c). How shall the Redemptive-historical Preterist respond? I believe there is abundant evidence that this can easily apply to Jerusalem. Let’s see how this is so.

It is well-known that John is taking up the mantle of an OT prophet. He intentionally mimics their style, even alluding to their words. That is, he uses Greek grammar that intentionally suffers from Hebrew interference (Hebraisms) and he employs over 400 allusions to the OT (the most of any book in the NT). That being the case, it would appear that he is alluding to Jer 51:12–13 which refers to OT Babylon’s complex network of canals on the Euphrates: “Lift up a signal against the walls of Babylon; / Post a strong guard, / Station sentries, / Place men in ambush! / For the LORD has both purposed and performed / What He spoke concerning the inhabitants of Babylon. / O you who dwell by many waters, / Abundant in treasures, / Your end has come, / The measure of your end.”

But John is not being literal here, for at 17:15 he interprets the waters not as canals or rivers but as “peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.” As already noted, this allusion to the “many waters / peoples” of the great pagan city in the OT leads many quite reasonably to assume he is transferring the image to Rome and her vast empire over many peoples and nations. The fact that she “sits” [kathēmenēs] on these waters speaks of her ruling over them, for elsewhere in Revelation sitting is generally the posture of governance (3:21; 4:2-3; 5:1, 7, 13; 6:16; 7:10, 15; 11:16; 14:15-16; 19:4; 20:4, 11; 21:5). And Revelation’s Babylon does see herself as ruling, for she claims: “I sit [kathēmai] as a queen [basilissa]” (18:7b).

Yet In light of the abundant evidence for Babylon representing Jerusalem in John’s judicial drama against Israel, we should look in another direction for testing these waters, you might say. What is the proper interpretation of her sitting on “many waters” (17:1) representing “peoples [laoi] and multitudes [ochloi] and nations [ethnē] and tongues [glōssai]” (17:15)? These statements signify two significant realities.

Babylon-Jerusalem’s ruling influence is exercised over the vast population of diaspora Jews. If taken in terms of her authority over diaspora Jews derived from many nationalities, Jerusalem eminently qualifies for such a description. This would include its many non-Jewish proselytes, for “in the Graeco-Roman period, there is evidence of many converts to Judaism, as well as of sympathizers, or God-fearers” (Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period, 505).

[image error]

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.

For more Christian studies see: www.KennethGentry.com

In fact, Louis Feldman (in Shanks, Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism, 5) speaks of “the outstanding success of Jewish proselytism.” He notes further that “the vast expansion of Judaism through proselytism may also have made the Romans nervous.”

J. M. G. Barclay (Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 299) mentions that Dio (57:18:5a) “asserts that the expulsion [of Jews from Rome under Tiberius in AD 19] took place because the Jews were converting many Romans to their customs.” Albert Bell (A Guide to the New Testament World, 95) agrees: “throughout the first century or so of the empire the Jews in Rome were numerous and aggressive proselytizers, so aggressive that they were expelled under Tiberius and again under Claudius.” (see: Tac. Ann. 2:85; Hist. 5:5; Suet. Claudius 25).

Josephus states that the Jews “also made proselytes of a great many of the Greeks perpetually” (J.W. 7:3:3 §45). The Mishnah, Talmud, and other rabbinic documents commonly mention the proselytes. Douglas Hare (The Theme of Jewish Persecution of Christians in the Gospel according to St. Matthew, 9) comments: “the eagerness with which proselytes were sought and the success of such efforts are attested by pagan, Jewish and Christian writers of the period.” The ancient Jews saw the diaspora as God’s goodness toward the Gentiles in sowing the Jews among them: “The Holy One, Blessed be He, did righteousness in Israel in that he ‘scattered’ them amongst the nations” (b. Pes. 87b).

We know from abundant literary and archaeological evidence that the diaspora was a powerful minority throughout the empire. Philo (Flacc. 45-46) writes that “no one country can contain the whole Jewish nation, by reason of its populousness; on which account they frequent all the most prosperous and fertile countries of Europe and Asia, whether islands or continents, looking indeed upon the holy city as their metropolis in which is erected the sacred temple of the most high God.” He writes to the emperor Caligula (Embassy 36 §281-284]):

Concerning the holy city I must now say what is necessary. It, as I have already stated, is my native country, and the metropolis, not only of the one country of Judaea, but also of many, by reason of the colonies which it has sent out from time to time into the bordering districts of Egypt, Phoenicia, Syria in general, and especially that part of it which is called Coelo-Syria, and also with those more distant regions of Pamphylia, Cilicia, the greater part of Asia Minor as far as Bithynia, and the furthermost corners of Pontus. and in the same manner into Europe, into Tessaly, and Boeotia, and Macedonia, and Aetolia, and Attica, and Argos, and Corinth and all the most fertile and wealthiest districts of Peloponnesus. And not only the continents full of Jewish colonies, but also all the most celebrated islands are so too; such as Euboea, and Cyprus, and Crete. I say nothing of the countries beyond the Euphrates, for all of them except a very small portion, and Babylon, and all the satrapies around, which have any advantages whatever of soil or climate, have Jews settled in them. So that if my native land is, as it reasonably may be, looked upon as entitled to a share in your favour, it is not one city only that would then be benefited by you, but ten thousand of them in every region of the habitable world, in Europe, in Asia, and in Africa, on the continent, in the islands, on the coasts, and in the inland parts, And it corresponds well to the greatness of your good fortune, that, by conferring benefits on one city, you should also benefit ten thousand others, so that your renown may be celebrated in every part of the habitable world, and many praises of you may be combined with thanksgiving.

When writing of the Jews who come to the temple feasts, Philo speaks of “innumerable companies of men from a countless variety of cities” (Spec. Laws 1:12 (§69-70).

Josephus records Agrippa’s speech attempting to quell the growing revolt against Rome. Agrippa states that “there is not a people in the world [epi tēs oikumenēs] which does not contain a portion of our race” (J.W. 2:16:4 §398; cp. Ap. 2:282). Josephus (J.W. 7:3:3 §43) himself states: “For as the Jewish nation is widely dispersed over all the habitable earth among its inhabitants, so it is very much intermingled with Syria by reason of its neighborhood, and had the greatest multitudes in Antioch by reason of the largeness of the city.” He mentions “a great multitude of Jews who dwelt in their [Ionian] cities” (Ant. 16:2:3 §27–28). Strabo of Cappadocia complains: “Now these Jews are already gotten into all cities; and it is hard to find a place in the habitable earth that hath not admitted this tribe of men, and is not possessed by them” (Ant. 14:7:2 §115) We should not be surprised, since God promises that Abraham will be a “father of many nations [ethnōn]” (Ge 17:5; Ro 4:17-18).

John’s image well fits the NT witness elsewhere, for in Ac 2:5 we read that at Pentecost there are “Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation [pantos ethnous] under heaven.” In addition, Luke’s description of their surprise at the phenomenon of tongues highlights the matter: “how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born? Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs — we hear them in our own tongues [glōssais] speaking of the mighty deeds of God” (Acts 2:8-11). Ac 4:27 speaks of “the peoples [laois] of Israel” who were “gathered together against Thy holy servant Jesus.”

To be continued.