Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.'s Blog, page 66

PROHIBITING BLOOD EATING?

PMW 2019-055 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

[image error]Genesis 9:4 reads: “You shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.” This command is not a ritual directive confined to old covenant symbolism, but a moral one constraining mankind’s conduct. We may see this and its fundamental meaning from the following lines of evidence, which will incrementally build the case step-by-step.

(1) This is a Noahic commandment for the entire world (Gen. 9:9–11). It is not a command given to Israel as a distinctive people, for she will not exist until several hundred years later (after Abraham, Gen. 12), as we can see from the genealogy connecting Noah to Abram (Gen. 11:10–26).

(2) We must understand that verses 5 and 6 are united in expressing one complete thought. Verse 6 is re-iterating, expanding on, and therefore emphasizing the idea already stated in v. 5. This can be seen not only in the inter-relationship of the elements of the idea involved, but in the Hebrew grammar. The statements in both v. 4 and vv. 5-6 begin with the restrictive (untranslatable) Hebrew particle ak. Thus both begin with a negation, though in the English translation this is not grammatically clear. So then, in vv. 4–6 we have two negations presented: the one in v. 4 (regarding animals) and the other in vv. 5-6 (regarding humans). Consequently, both thoughts are commanding, “you shall not kill” (except in qualified instances).

[image error]Consider the Lilies

A Plea for Creational Theology

by T. M. Moore

Moore calls us to examine the biblical doctrine of general revelation from the perspective of what he calls creational theology. In this artful introduction to creational theology, Moore helps us develop the skills and disciplines for doing theology as we look upon and interact with the world around us.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(3) Now we should note that the flowing context of the textual unit in Gen. 9:1–17 is dealing with fundamentally moral issues relating to the protection of life. It is not presenting symbolic issues securing the practice of ritual. We see the context’s disinterest in ritual issues in that God states “every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you” (v. 3). And this is stated even though Noah understood the distinction between “clean” and “unclean” animals for sacrificial purposes (Gen. 7:2, 8; 8:20). This does, however, serve as the foundation for the future Levitical ritual that goes a step further (cf. Lev. 17:14; Deut. 12:23)

(4) More particularly, note that in the concept found in vv. 5-6, human life is being protected from dangerous animals (v. 5; cp. Exo. 21:28–32) and wanton murder (v. 6) by God’s ordaining the killing of dangerous animals and capital punishment of murderers. And this appears immediately after v. 4, which also deals with a life issue, though v. 4 is speaking of animal life.

(5) The prohibition against eating animal “flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (v. 4) is actually prohibiting eating animals while they are still alive. Life is not present in the blood as a substance, but in pulsating, flowing blood that maintains and shows the presence of life. Blood drained out shows that death has occurred (cf. Num. 23:24; 1 Kgs. 22:35; Jer. 26:15; Eze. 3:18; 18:13). The Hebrew word for “flesh” is basar which appears to present the animal’s body as a whole, not in consumable pieces.

Thus, this prohibition does not speak of a dead animal butchered for eating, but ones that are complete and intact, therefore still alive. This prohibition, then, is protecting animal life from human brutality and needless cruelty, as seen in the manner of eating by carnivorous animals such as wild dogs. This serves as the explanation of why later in Israel animal’s killed for food must have their blood drained (Deut. 12:23–24): to ensure that they are dead, and not suffering.

[image error]Christian Theistic Ethics (29 mp3 downloads)

by Ken Gentry

Formal Christ College course on Christian Theistic Ethics. Explains and defends theonomic ethics from the Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments. Helpful for introducing theonomy to Christians living in our secular times and desiring to understand biblical ethics.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(6) This law not only prohibits animal cruelty (which is a worthy law in Christian cultures), but serves an additional moral function. It recognizes that animal cruelty can lead to human blood-lust, killing for killing’s sake alone, thrill-seeking through murder.

(7) The two prohibitions in vv. 4–6 place restrictions on the taking of life by both animals and man. In v. 5 God declares that be ordaining these restrictions he alone has the right over life: “I will require” is stated two times. God does allow certain, restricted acts of life-taking, but he does so by concession since man is sinful from his youth (Gen. 8:21). This sort of concession is clearly seen in God’s allowing divorce (Deut. 4:1–4) even though marriage was designed to be permanent (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:6). Jesus explained to the Pharisees: “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way” (Matt. 19:8) Thus, here in Gen. 9 man’s God-given dominion over the creatures (Gen. 9:2; cp. Gen. 1:28) is restricted.

WHAT IS THE IMAGE OF GOD?

[image error]PMW 2019-054 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The postmillennial hope involves a holistic worldview, not a piecemeal approach to life. Hence, the title to this blog: PostmillennialWorldview. One of the most important worldview questions today regards the identity and meaning of man. Unfortunately, evolutionary science and philosophy prevail in modern culture, teaching that man is ultimately a random, chance collection of molecules that has developed from fish through apes to modern man.

But here in the very foundational book of all of Scripture we learn that man has from the very beginning existed as a high and noble creature. He was created as the very “image of God” (Gen. 1:26–27; 5:1), being distinguished from and exalted over the animal kingdom over which he reigns (Gen. 1:28).

The concept of God’s image is not given any specific definition in the text. But though the term itself appears abruptly, the concept flows naturally out of the creation revelation in Genesis 1. The idea is deep and multi-faceted though we may note several textual indicators for its meaning.

First, the image of God involves personality. Since man is the image “of God” who reflects God, we may note that God himself is a personality. God is a person who speaks and acts throughout Genesis 1. And he speaks about and communicates with man whom we well know is a personality. He speaks about man in our text (Gen. 1:26), assigns him a task (Gen. 1:28), then speaks to him (Gen. 1:29–30). Then in the next chapter (which is a return to and a narrow focus on day six when man is created) God commands him and assigns him further tasks (Gen. 2:7–8, 15–17).

Second, the image of God involves rationality. As God’s image man also reflects the rationality of God. Not only does God speak as a person in the creation account, but he reasons as a person. He communicates within his innermost being when he determines to make man (Gen. 1:26). This reasoning process is a rational activity. Chapter 2 notes that God evaluates man’s initial situation and observes a lack in his situation then determines to fill that lack (Gen. 2:18).

[image error]

As It Is Written: The Genesis Account Literal or Literary?

Book by Ken Gentry

Presents the exegetical evidence for Six-day Creation and against the Framework Hypothesis. Strong presentation and rebuttal to the Framework Hypothesis, while demonstrating and defending the Six-day Creation interpretation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Third, the image of God involves authority. In the creation process God assigns names to features of creation, which demonstrates his authority over them. Just as a parent has the authority to name his child, so God exercises his authority in giving names to various parts of creation. For instance, in Genesis 1:5 “God called the light day, and the darkness He called night” (cp. Gen. 1:8, 10). In Genesis 1:28 God assigned man authority over the animal world. We see Adam actually beginning to exercise authority over the animal kingdom when hdse assigns the animals names (Gen. 2:19). Adam is acting as God acted; that is, he is functioning as the image of God.

Fourth, the image of God involves creativity. The whole thrust of Genesis 1 emphasizes God’s wonderful creative capacity. In fact, the creation account opens: “in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1), then all through the passage we see him creating (Gen. 1:20, 21, 27; 2:3) and making (Gen. 1:7, 16, 25, 26, 31; 2:3). After he creates man he places him in the Garden of Eden commanding him to cultivate it (Gen. 2:15). Planting, hoeing, and harvesting involve a creative capacity. This creative activity is unlike that which animals can do. We soon learn that man begins creating human culture in building cities, working with iron, creating music, and so forth (Gen. 4:20–22).

Fifth, the image of God involves morality. God creates a perfect world that he declares “very good” (Gen. 1:31). In this good creation God tests Adam with the obligation to obey his word (Gen. 2:16–17). Moral issues are not extraneous to the created order, and Adam was originally created upright (Eccl. 7:29). Nor does man create his own morality: he was created a moral being subject to God’s moral character (Deut. 32:4; Isa. 45:21; Rev. 15:3).

[image error]Understanding the Creation Account

DVD set by Ken Gentry

Formal conference lectures presenting important information for properly approaching the Creation Account in Genesis. Presents and defends Six-day Creation exegesis, while presenting and rebutting the Framework Hypothesis.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Sixth, the image of God entails man’s existence as a social creature. God is one being uniquely existing in three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; cp. John 10:30). We see this strongly suggested by the plural expressions God uses in speaking of himself: “Let us make” (Gen. 1:26; cp. Gen. 3:22). God is a self-contained society and therefore his image will reflect that for “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Gen. 1:27). Thus, before Eve was created God declared: “It is not good for the man to be alone” (Gen. 2:18).

POSTMILLENNIALISM’S THEOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS

[image error]PMW 2019-053 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Postmillennialism expects the vast majority of the world’s population to convert to Christ as a consequence of the Spirit-blessed proclamation of the gospel. In light of present world conditions, though, many Christians are surprised at the resilience of the postmillennial hope. In this article I will briefly show that though the hope of gospel victory sounds strange to the modern evangelical, the basic theology of Scripture is quite congenial to it. Indeed, these factors suggest the prima facie plausibility of postmillennialism.

God’s Creational Purpose

In Genesis 1 we find the record of God’s creation of the universe in the space of six days. As a result of God’s purposeful creative power, all is originally “very good” (Gen. 1:31). Of course, we expect this in that God creates the world for his own glory: “For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen” (Rom. 11:36). “All things were created by him and for him” (Col. 1:16b). Frequently, Scripture reaffirms God’s love of his created order and his ownership claim over all things: “The earth is the LORD’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it” (Psa. 24:1; cp. Exo. 9:29; 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Deut. 10:14; 1 Sam. 2:8; 1 Chron. 29:11, 14; Job 41:11; Psa. 50:12; 89:11; 115:16; 1 Cor. 10:26, 28). The postmillennialist holds that God’s love for his creation prompts his concern to bring it back to its original purpose of bringing positive glory to Him. Thus, the postmillennialist’s hope-filled expectation is rooted in creational reality.

[image error]

Postmillennialism Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)

Basic introduction to postmillennialism. Presents the essence of the postmillennial argument and answers the leading objections. And all in a succinct, introductory fashion.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

God’s Sovereign Power

Our evangelistic task in God’s world should be emboldened by the certainty that God “works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Eph. 1:11). We confidently believe that God controls history by means of his decree, whereby he determines “the end from the beginning” (Isa. 46:10). Consequently, postmillennialists assert that God’s Word, as he says, “shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it” (Isa. 55:11), irrespective of the opposition of men or of demons, despite natural phenomena or historical circumstances.

The Christian, then, ought not use past historical factors or present cultural circumstances to pre-judge the prospects for future gospel success. Rather, he should evaluate its possibilities solely on the basis of the revelation of God in Scripture — for the success of the gospel is “not by might, not by power, but by my Spirit” (Zech. 4:6). Thus, the postmillennialist’s ultimate confidence is in the sovereign God.

God’s Blessed Provision

In addition, the Lord of lords amply equips his church for the task of world evangelistic success. Among the abundant divine provisions for the church are the following:

(1) We have the very presence of the Risen Christ with us. He is the One who commands us to “go and make disciples of all nations,” while promising to be with us to the end (Matt. 28:19-20). “Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:6).

[image error]Your Hope in God’s World (Kenneth Gentry)

5 DVDs; 5 lectures

This series of lectures presents the theological and exegetical argument for the postmillennial hope in our fallen world. The last lecture answers the major practical, theological, and exegetical objections to postmillennialism. An excellent series for both introducing and refreshing one’s understanding of postmillennialism.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

(2) We are indwelt by the Holy Spirit from on high. Thus, we believe that “the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world” (1 John 4:4b). Among his many ministries he causes the new birth, empowers believers for righteous living, and blesses their gospel proclamation in bringing sinners to salvation (John 3:3-8; 1 Cor. 6:11; Tit. 3:5; 1 Pet. 1:11-12, 22.).

(3) The Father delights in saving sinners (Eze. 18:23; 33:11; Luke 15:10; 2 Cor. 5:19; 1 Tim. 1:15; 2:5). In fact, the Father “did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him” (John 3:17).

(4) We have the gospel which is the very “power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16; 15:19; 16:25; 1 Cor. 1:18, 24; 1 Thess. 1:5). We also wield the powerful word of God as our spiritual weapon: “The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ” (2 Cor. 10:4-5; cp. 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:17; 1 Thess. 2:13; Heb. 4:12).

(5) To undergird and empower us to gospel victory, we have full access to God in prayer (Matt. 7:7-11; 21:22; Eph. 2:18; Phil. 4:6; Heb. 4:16; 10:19-22; 1 John 3:22; 5:14-15) through Jesus’s name (John 14:13, 14; 15:7, 16; 16:23, 24, 26; 1 John 3:22; 5:14, 15). Christ even directs us to pray to the Father: “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10).

(6) Though we have supernatural opposition in Satan, he is a defeated foe as a result of the first advent of Christ. “Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death — that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14; cp. Matt. 12:28-29; Luke 10:18; John 12:31; 16:11; 17:15; Acts 26:18; Rom. 16:20; Col. 2:15; 1 John 3:8; 4:3-4; 5:18). Consequently, we can so resist him that he will flee from us (Jms. 4:7; 1 Pet. 5:9); we can crush him under our feet (Rom. 16:20). Indeed, our God-given mission is to turn men “from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God” (Acts 26:18). Thus, the church’s ample equipment is given by a gracious Savior.

Therefore, since God creates the world for his glory, governs it by his almighty power, and equips his people to overcome the Enemy, the postmillennialist asks: “If God be for us, who can be against us?” (Rom. 8:31). Our confidence is in the service of the Lord Jesus Christ, “the ruler of the kings of the earth” (Rev. 1:5). He sits at God’s “right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church” (Eph. 1:20-22). We have confidence that the resurrection of Christ is more powerful than the fall of Adam.

HOW DID JOHN MEASURE THE TEMPLE?

[image error]PMW 2019-052 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my last article I noted that John measure the temple in Rev. 11:1–2. There we read of John’smeasuring the temple in the holy city.

11:1 Then there was given me a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, “Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar, and those who worship in it. 2 Leave out the court which is outside the temple and do not measure it, for it has been given to the nations; and they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months.”

In the last article we saw the significance of this. But now we should ask, “How could he do this?”

It is helpful to note that this material lacks any customary vision-formula markers, opening simply with the word “then” (kai) thereby directly linking this vision with the preceding one. As Terry (364) observes, in the previous vision:

“the appearance of Christ as the light of the world and the angel of the covenant announced the near end of the old age, and commissioned his disciples to proclaim his word to all the nations. . . . This was immediately followed by that apostolic ministry which gathered out of the Israelitish people the ‘remnant according to the election of grace,’ but was a ministry so hateful to the great body of the Jewish people that their testimony was despised and rejected, and they were persecuted unto death.”

Thus, here in Rev. 11 John provides important details regarding the end of the old covenant’s temple which involves Christ’s judgment upon Israel (1:7) — as well as the preservation of believing Jews pictured as true worshipers in the temple.

[image error]

The Book of Revelation Made Easy

(by Ken Gentry)

Helpful introduction to Revelation presenting keys for interpreting. Also provides studies of basic issues in Revelation’s story-line.|

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

John states that “there was given” to him a measuring rod (11:1a), though he does not identify who gives it. Frequently in Rev, edothē is a divine passive (as in 6:4; 7:2; 8:3; 9:1; etc.), so that this reception may represent either God or Christ giving it to him. In fact, v 3 seems to seal the giver’s identity, for the voice continues: “And I will grant authority to my two witnesses” (11:3). This is surely Christ speaking.

Here John (spiritually) enters onto the prophetic judgment scene for the first time, for he is given “a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, ‘Get up and measure’” (11:1a–b). John’s commanded action involves a form of prophetic theater (an acted prophecy). His primary model for the whole of Rev is Ezekiel, who himself frequently engages in this type of prophetic activity. For instance, the OT prophet acts out several of his prophecies, such as eating a scroll (Eze 3:2–3); laying on his sides for a specified number of days (4:4–8); cutting his hair, burning a third of it, and letting it the rest blow to the winds (5:1–17); packing a bag, digging a hole through a wall, and leaving (12:1–16); eating bread and water with anxiety (12:17–19); and so forth (cp. Eze 24:1–7, 16–18; 37:15–23). In fact, John’s OT backdrop for measuring the temple is Eze 40–43, which it resembles in several respects, and in that prophecy an angel measures the ideal temple (cf. Eze 40:5–15; in Rev 21:15–16 an angel measures the heavenly Jerusalem with a gold rod).

Nothing in the context informs us of how John would get to the temple to measure it. Since he is physically on Patmos his action must occur “in the Spirit.” That is, his measuring must transpire spiritually in a vision rather than physically in a public action, unlike Christ’s driving the moneychangers from the temple (Mt 21:12//). Since elsewhere we see John carried “in the Spirit” to other locations (17:1–3; 21:9–10), perhaps we should understand the same here. He probably does not use the “in Spirit” formula because he reserves this as a narrative-structuring device. In fact, this interpretation may be suggested to us by John’s OT backdrop, for in Eze 40:1–2 “the hand of the Lord . . . brought” Ezekiel to “a very high mountain,” which likely is a case of spiritual transport. In Ezekiel the Spirit of God is associated with God’s hand (Eze 3:14; 37:1) and Ezekiel’s transport is in a vision (8:3; 11:24).

[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

Surprisingly though, John never states that he carries out this task of measuring, though we must assume he does so for two reasons: (1) He is submissive to heavenly authority, even fearfully falling before an angel to worship him (19:20; 22:9). (2) The action seems necessary for effecting the vision’s point: otherwise, why would it be commanded?

This spiritual call to symbolically measure expects his action to engage earthly matters rather than heavenly ones. This is evident for two reasons: In the first place, in the narrative flow the strong angel (Christ) in the preceding vision dramatically draws our attention down from heaven to the earth: “I saw another strong angel coming down out of heaven” and “He placed his right foot on the sea and his left on the land” (10:1, 2) which is where John must prophesy to the nations (10:11). Secondly, in the present vision we hear of the nations treading down the holy city (11:2) and then in the second part of this two vision set, the two witnesses prophesy on earth, only to be slain (11:3–13). Neither of these visionary actions could possibly be in heaven. Thus, John’s spiritual action is on earth.

WHY DID JOHN MEASURE THE TEMPLE?

PMW 2019-051 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The measuring of the temple in Rev. 11:1–2 is an important episode in Revelation. Here we clearly see Revelation’s focus on Israel: this “holy city” with a “temple” must be Jerusalem (Neh. 11:1; Isa. 48:2; 52:1; 64:10; Matt. 4:5; 27:53). In verse 8 John unmasks this “holy city” for what she becomes: an Egypt, a Sodom, the slayer of Christ: “Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord wa[image error]s crucified.” Indeed, second century Christians call Jews “Christ-killers” and “murderers of the Lord” (e.g., Ignatius, Magnesians 11; Justin Martyr, First Apology 35; Irenaeus, i 3:12:2)

Significantly this passage strongly reflects Jesus’s prophecy in the Olivet Discourse (compare the italicized words):

Luke 21:24b: “Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”

Revelation 11:2: “But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.”

These twin passages inform us that the “holy city/Jerusalem” will be “trampled” by the “gentiles” until the “times of the gentiles are fulfilled,” i.e., after “forty-two months.”

[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

Evidently Revelation 11:1-2 prophesies the impending destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, for its source Luke 21:24 (and its parallels in Matt. 24 and Mark 13) prophesies that very event. Note the context: (1) Jesus particularly speaks of the first century temple (Luke 21:5-7; cp. Matt. 23:38—24:3; Mark 13:1-4) and (2) he ties his prophecy to his own generation (Luke 21:32; cp. Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30). And again, the events of Revelation are “soon” (Rev. 1:1) and “near” (Rev. 1:3).

What of “the times of the gentiles”? Daniel 2 prophesies that four successive gentile empires (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome) will dominate God’s people: they are able to do so because they can strike at the material temple in the specifically defined land. Now after one final period of rage the gentiles will no longer be able to trample God’s kingdom, for it becomes universal and disassociated from a central temple (Eph. 2:19-21), localized city (Gal. 4:25-26), circumscribed land (Matt. 28:19; Acts 1:8), and distinguishable race (Gal. 3:9, 29). As Jesus puts it: “A time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem,” but everywhere (John 4:21).

The trampling of the temple in A.D. 70 (Dan. 9:26-27) after its “abomination” (Dan. 9:27; Matt. 24:15-16; Luke 21:20-21) ends the gentiles’s ability to stamp out the worship of God. In Daniel 9:24-27, Matthew 23:38—24:2, and Revelation 11:1-2 the “holy city” and its temple end in destruction.

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

But how do the “times of the gentiles” relate to the forty-two months (Rev. 11:2)? In late A.D. 66 Israel revolts against her oppressive Roman procurator Gessius Florus. By November the Roman governor of the Syrian province, Cestius Gallus, attempts to put down the uprising, but withdraws prematurely for reasons that are unclear (Josephus, Wars 2:17-22; Tacitus, Histories 5:10). A few months later Vespasian is “sent to Judea by Nero early in 67 to put down the revolt.” By August of A.D. 70 the Romans breach the inner wall of Jerusalem, transforming the temple and city into a raging inferno. From Spring of A.D. 67 to August of A.D. 70, the time of formal imperial engagement against Jerusalem, is a period right at forty-two months.

John “measures” for protection (Ezek. 22:26; Zech. 2:1-5) the inner temple (Gk., naos), altar, and worshipers (Rev. 11:1); the “outer court” is “cast out” for destruction (Rev. 11:2). The imagery here involves the protecting of the essence of the temple, its heart (appearing as the worshiping of God by his faithful people), while the externalities of the temple (the husk, the actual material property itself) perish. This mix of physical and spiritual is rooted in the very idea of the temple. For instance, in Hebrews 8:5a we read of an earthly “sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven.” The earthly, external is a copy/shadow of the heavenly spiritual reality. The “man-made sanctuary” is a “copy of the true one” (Heb. 9:24). In Revelation 11 God removes the shadow-copy so that the essential-real remains, which John here portrays as the worshipers in the heart of the temple.

This is much like Paul’s imagery in Galatians 4:22-26 where he contrasts “Jerusalem below” (literal, historical Jerusalem) with the “Jerusalem above” (the heavenly city of God). Or like the writer of Hebrews comparing historical Mt. Sinai that can be touched (Heb. 12:18-21) with spiritual Mt. Zion, the home of “the spirits of men” that “cannot be shaken” (Heb. 12:22-27). This mixture of literal and figurative should not alarm us, for all interpreters find such necessary from time to time. Literalist Robert Thomas, for instance, understands Revelation 19 to teach the return of Christ on a literal horse while urging that his sword and the rod are figurative (Thomas, Revelation 8-22, 387-389). And everyone sees a mixing of physical eating and spiritual eating in John 6:49-50 and physical resurrection and spiritual resurrection in John 5:25-29.

JESUS’ VICTORY AND FALSE PROPHETS

[image error]PMW 2019-050 by Chris Hume (The Reformed Hope)

We may be surprised by many things when we reach heaven. I dare not contend with J.C. Ryle who said that the thing which will surprise us most is how much more we ought to have loved Christ while on earth. But I think there is another reality which will also greatly surprise us when we reach heaven. And that is this: the depths of the spiritual battle that was waged for the souls of men and women during our lifetime. Take any saint—whether in the first century under the persecution of Nero, or suffering under Rome during the Inquisition in the 13th century, or faced with oppression by the secular government in China today—and behind the scenes in his life, the spiritual battle is of the intensest kind.

I think we will be surprised to finally understand the depth of the conflict which was introduced to us in Genesis 3:15, where we are told that God “put enmity between” the serpent’s seed and the seed of the woman (whom many commentators consider to be Christ). Commenting on this verse, John Gill notes that Christ “has been implacably hated by Satan and his angels, and by wicked men, so he has opposed himself to all them that hate and persecute his people.” I think we will be surprised to realize the depth of the battle that has raged—of which Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness gave us a glimpse of the craftiness, subtlety, and desperation of the enemy of our souls. I think we will be surprised to realize the skirmishes and clashes that have occurred in the spiritual realm, and of which we perhaps unknowingly participated in via prayer, discipleship, evangelism, loving our brothers and sisters in Christ, a word of encouragement, a word of rebuke, sharing a gospel tract, speaking up for the weak, not giving in to sin. I think when we reach heaven, we will be like the servant of Elisha, who had his eyes opened to see the fiery angelic army encamped around Dothan.

Do you remember that story? The king of Syria is ticked off because Elisha keeps warning the king of Israel about his battle plans. Finally, the king of Syria has enough and basically says, “That’s it. I am going after this prophet Elisha.” A massive Syrian army comes at night and surrounds the city of Dothan, where Elisha was. In the morning, Elisha’s servant is afraid and says, “Alas, my master! What shall we do?” (2 Kings 6:15). Elisha says—and doesn’t this remind you of what John says in 1 John 4:4?—”Do not be afraid, for those who are with us are more than those who are with them” (2 Kings 6:16). What he prays next is what I believe happens every time the Holy Spirit, through the Word, reveals to us an aspect of the spiritual battle that is occurring—he prays: “O LORD, please open his eyes that he may see” (2 Kings 6:17). The Lord opens his eyes and he saw that the “mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire all around” (2 Kings 6:17).

[image error]

Christianity and the World Religions:

By Derek CooperCooper. Examines the rival worldviews found in Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism, Judaism, Islam, and irreligion. He engages these worldviews from a Christian perspective.

See more study materials: www.KennethGentry.com

In this article, I want to pull back that veil and give us a glimpse of the spiritual reality that is occurring in the world today. I can assure you of this: the spiritual battle that is raging now is no less intense than when those chariots of fire rallied around the prophet of God against the Syrian army. The New Testament contains vivid imagery of warfare (Ephesians 6:10-20, 1 Timothy 1:18). This imagery points us to the spiritual reality of a great warfare between Christ and Satan. One text in particular shows us the reality of spiritual warfare: 1 John 4:1-6.

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. Little children, you are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are from the world; therefore they speak from the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error.”

The Command of 1 John 4:1

The book of 1 John contains only a handful of explicit commands. Based on my count, there are about 8-12 commands in total. Compare this with Paul’s letter to the Ephesians or Colossians, which can contain over a dozen mandates in each paragraph. Or consider 1 Peter, which contains about one command every three verses. 1 John is different.

Now, every single command given in God’s Word ought to be something you take very seriously. Psalm 119:47 says: “For I find my delight in your commandments, which I love.” We can sing that song and yet not live it out. Let’s state an obvious but often overlooked reality: if you don’t know the commands of God, then you cannot find your delight in them, love them, or obey them. There is a story I heard probably eight years ago, I still remember it quite well. It was John MacArthur talking about a man who, on one occasion, was up into the early hours of the morning, reading, reading, reading the Bible. His companion asked him what he was doing. And he said something to this effect: “I am rereading the New Testament to make sure that I haven’t missed any command from my Lord.” That story stuck with me because of the seriousness and passion that man had for his Lord and for obeying his commands. But that man was simply doing what Jesus said. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” 1 John is full of tests to see if you are in the faith. Here’s one: don’t claim to love Jesus Christ if you don’t even know his commandments.

All the commands in 1 John, I believe, can be broken down into four categories. These categories can be remembered by the acronym FLAT. Faith commands. Love commands. Abide commands. And Testing commands. I encourage you, like that diligent Christian in that story did, to take some time to go through 1 John. Noting the commands the Spirit of Christ gives through the Apostle John. And I think you will be able to see how each one fits within this structure.

[image error]1 John: Salvation, Heresy, Assurance

20 downloadable mp3 sermons by Ken Gentry

First John is a much neglected epistle that deals with crucial issues: it explains salvation, warns against heresy, and demonstrates the assurance of salvation. Very helpful, especially for new Christians.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

So here’s the list of commandments I found in 1 John. Some are repeated, so I will only list the first reference—and there may be one or two more depending on how you read the sentence. Nevertheless, these are the main ones I found:

Do not love the world (2:15)

Abide in him (2:27)

Let no one deceive you (3:7)

Love in deed and in truth (3:18)

Believe in Christ (3:23)

Love one another (4:7)

Keep yourselves from idols (5:21)

Do not believe every spirit (4:1)

The text of 1 John 4:1 is not a suggestion, it is not an opinion, it is a command that is to be obeyed. This is not optional. If you love Jesus, you will delight in knowing and doing his commands. The command given here is this, 1 John 4:1a: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God.”

Here’s what John does: he gives the command (v. 1a), he gives the reason for the command (v. 1b), he gives an example of how to obey this command (v. 2-4), and then he ends with encouragement for obeying this command (v. 5-6).

So let’s follow John’s logic here. First of all, understand this command. The command could be summarized as this: Don’t believe everything you hear—think critically about everything! We are called to (1) not uncritically believe every spirit and (2) to test the spirits.

Now, why does John use the term spirits? This could throw you off if you do not understand what he is getting at. You may think, I am not an exorcist or shaman priest, how in the world do I test a spirit? To understand this, we have to understand the context of John’s letter. John, perhaps a very old man at this point, is writing this letter to a group of Christians living in Asia Minor. In fact, John may have been in Ephesus when he wrote this letter. Ephesus was a highly idolatrous city. John wasn’t ministering in the “Bible Belt” in the 1950’s (not that there weren’t problems then). He was ministering to a small group of Christians living among various pagan religions that did not acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord. In this letter John has to correct various false teachings that have arisen in the very early church. Errors that you have no doubt noticed if you’ve studied 1 John:

the teaching that man can be free from sin this side of eternity

the teaching that someone can be truly converted and yet be characterized by sin

the teaching that someone can love God and yet not love his brothers and sisters in Christ

Behind all these doctrines (or teachings), John says, there is a spirit. There are two ways to look at this, both of which could be true methinks. (1) There is a literal evil spirit behind every false doctrine. And (2) the ethos or essence of any teaching is described as the “spirit” of the teaching. I believe John is saying, behind every teaching, every idea, every worldview, there is a spiritual entity. Whether it is a literal spirit for every false doctrine, or an army of spirits that constantly work to spit out false doctrines into the world, I don’t know. Ultimately, these spirits that influence mankind come from one of only two sources: God or Satan. Thus John says examine, test, try, analyze every spirit, every doctrine, every teaching, everything to see its source. Does this come from God or does it come from Satan?

If you want to break it down, the negative part of the command is to not be simple minded and believe everything. Proverbs 14:15a: “The simple believes everything.” The positive part of the command is to test the spirits. That means you are critically thinking about any teaching, any idea, any movement, any action. Proverbs 14:15 again: “The simple believes everything, but the prudent (or the wise) gives thought to his steps.” Friends, if your Christianity is a thoughtless Christianity, then I have no doubt that it is a dangerous place you are in.

We are here given two errors to avoid: one is being simple minded and believing whatever is in style—an error younger people may be prone to fall into. The other error is to not believe anything that isn’t already a part of our established thinking. . . .

To finish the article: click

IMPRISONED GANGS CONVERTED TO CHRIST

[image error]PMW 2019-049 Caleb Parke (Fox News)

A Texas megachurch has seen incredible things happen since planting a church inside the state’s largest maximum-security prison six months ago.

But what happened last week was a first in the history of the prison.

The warden at Coffield Unit in Anderson County, which is located about 90 minutes outside of the Dallas/Fort Worth area and houses roughly 4,200 criminal offenders, invited Gateway Church to baptize a handful of inmates in administrative segregation, or solitary confinement, where they spend 23 hours of their day behind solid, steel doors with air holes in them because of how dangerous they are.

Niles Holsinger, Gateway Coffield Prison campus pastor, told Fox News what he witnessed last Wednesday was “mind-blowing.”

Five of the men – confirmed gang or cartel members – were brought into the gymnasium, shackled hand and foot and around the waist, and they had to clear the prison because of safety concerns.

Lord of the Saved[image error]

(by Ken Gentry)

A critique of easy believism and affirmation of Lordship salvation. Shows the necessity of true, repentant faith to salvation.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

“They couldn’t lift their arms above their waist, each one has a guard on each arm, and wouldn’t leave their side until they were in the water,” Holsinger said.

Three of them were placed on one side. Two men on the other. A field guard told the pastor it was because they were from rival gangs and the only way for them to leave the gangs or cartels is death.

Holsinger spoke to each one of the guys in solitary confinement, each with a violent history.

“I have tried it my way my whole life and it’s gotten me here,” one of the prisoners told the campus pastor. “I want to try it God’s way…we’re going to come out of the water as new men.”

One by one the men were baptized.

These guys from two different gangs professed the same Lord and were baptized in the same water together and they walked out together, guards not holding onto their arms anymore because God had done something in their life,” Holsinger said.

But it was what he saw afterward that shocked him.

To read full article: click

IRANIAN CHURCH IS THE FASTEST GROWING

[image error]It’s a simple story that can be summarized in just two sentences: Persecution threatened to wipe out Iran’s tiny church. Instead, the Iran church has become the fastest growing in the world, and it is influencing the region for Christ.

Everyone loves a good story. As Christians, we especially love stories that tell us how, when all seems lost, God makes a way.

One such story is about the church in Iran—and it’s one of the greatest stories in the world today.

As simple as it is, such an amazing story is worth examining deeper.

Growth Amid Persecution

The Iranian revolution of 1979 established a hard-line Islamic regime. Over the next two decades, Christians faced increasing opposition and persecution: All missionaries were kicked out, evangelism was outlawed, Bibles in Persian were banned and soon became scarce, and several pastors were killed. The church came under tremendous pressure. Many feared the small Iranian church would soon wither away and die.

[image error]

Greatness of the Great Commission (by Ken Gentry)

An insightful analysis of the full implications of the great commission. Impacts postmillennialism as well as the whole Christian worldview.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

But the exact opposite has happened. Despite continued hostility from the late 1970s until now, Iranians have become the Muslim people most open to the gospel in the Middle East.

Despite continued hostility from the late 1970s until now, Iranians have become the Muslim people most open to the gospel in the Middle East.

How did this happen? Two factors have contributed to this openness.

First, violence in the name of Islam has caused widespread disillusionment with the regime and led many Iranians to question their beliefs.

Second, many Iranian Christians have continued to boldly and faithfully tell others about Christ, in the face of persecution.

As a result, more Iranians have become Christians in the last 20 years than in the previous 13 centuries put together since Islam came to Iran. In 1979, there were an estimated 500 Christians from a Muslim background in Iran. Today, there are hundreds of thousands—some say more than 1 million. Whatever the exact number, many Iranians are turning to Jesus as Lord and Savior.

More Iranians have become Christians in the last 20 years than in the previous 13 centuries put together.

In fact, last year the mission research organization Operation World named Iran as having the fastest-growing evangelical church in the world. According to the same organization, the second-fastest growing church is in Afghanistan—and Afghans are being reached in part by Iranians, since their languages are similar.

Three Changed Lives

The testimonies of Iranian men and women who’ve come to Christ are powerful.

Kamran was a violent man who used to sell drugs and weapons. One day, a friend gave him a New Testament. After reading for five consecutive days, Kamran gave his life to Jesus. When his family and friends saw his transformed life over the ensuing months, many of them also came to faith. A church now meets in Kamran’s house.

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

Reza was a mullah (a Muslim scholar) who hoped to become an ayatollah (a Shiite leader). One day, while studying at an Islamic seminary in Iran, he found a New Testament that had been boldly left in the library. Out of curiosity, he picked it up and was deeply shaken. Over time, he fell in love with Jesus. Today Reza is a trained church planter serving in the Iran region.

Fatemah’s earliest memories were of being raped by her brothers. At age 11, she was sold in marriage to a young drug addict who abused her and then divorced her when she was 17. Upon returning home she was raped again, until she decided to leave. On the streets she heard the gospel preached, and she trusted Jesus. In time, she married a Christian man. As they were receiving training in evangelism and church planting, Fatemah felt called to go back home and witness to her family. Her entire family repented and gave their lives to the Lord. The first church Fatemah and her husband planted was in her childhood home.

Fatemah felt called to go back home and witness to her family. Her entire family repented and gave their lives to the Lord.

I’ve had the privilege of hearing Kamran, Reza and Fatemah share their stories. I’ve heard countless other testimonies that are equally remarkable. Each one is a painful and yet marvelous celebration of the gospel’s beauty. Each one is a powerful reminder that despite trials and persecution—perhaps because of the suffering—the gospel of Jesus shines and the church of Jesus grows.

Story God Is Writing

We’re living in a time when many Christians are suffering for their faith, particularly in Islamic contexts. . . . To finish article: click

[image error]

MATTHEW 24:3 AND OLIVET’S STRUCTURE

[image error]PMW 2019-047 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Matthew’s version of the Olivet Discourse is significantly different from Mark’s. It does not differ, however, through contradiction, but by supplementation. Thus, it does not conflict with Mark’s version, but augments it.

This is not unusual in the Gospels. For we know that in the Gospels, recorded sermons do not appear verbatim in word-for-word fullness, but are summaries. Otherwise, Jesus would be traveling from place-to-place delivering one-minute messages, as in Matt. 11:20–24; Matt. 11:25–30; and 13:1–9. And sometimes after crowds were with him for three days (Matt. 15:32)! Furthermore, John the Baptist would have people coming from all over Judea (Matt. 3:5) to hear a sermon that lasted for only two sentences (Matt. 3:2–3).

We must note that Matthew’s additions in the Olivet Discourse are not created by Matthew out of whole cloth. Rather, they are his fuller summary of Jesus’ own words (which he himself heard, Matt. 24:3). And they are important for better understanding this dramatic discourse, which is the Lord’s closing major discourse.

The Olivet Discourse differences

The differences between Matthew and Mark’s versions of Olivet are quite obvious. For instance, Matthew’s version requires two full chapters of ninety-seven verses (Matt. 24:1–25:46). Whereas Mark’s is found in only one chapter containing just thirty-seven verses (Mark 13:1–37).

This size differential results from Matthew also including several parables not found in Mark’s version. This additional material includes the parables of the thief (Matt. 24:42–44), the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1–13), and the talents (Matt. 25:14–29). He also includes Jesus’ extended discussion (not parabolic presentation!) of the Final Judgment (Matt. 25:31–46). Many further differences could be listed.

[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

However, one other crucial — and vitally important — variation is Matthew’s recording an alternative version of the disciples’ question that sparked the whole discourse. Matthew’s record of their question does not differ so much in its length (as is the case for the Olivet Discourse itself). For it has sixteen words in Greek while Mark’s has fourteen. But it does use different words, presenting a different angle on their concerns. Notice the different versions of their question:

Mark 13:4 reads: “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?”

Matt. 24:3b reads: “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

But what is the significance of these differences?

The disciples’ question differences

Two key issues Matthew includes in his version of the disciples’ question anticipate the fundamental structure of the whole discourse. Both Matthew and Mark have a transition passage that draws a distinction between AD 70 and the Final Judgment (Matt. 24:34–36; Mark 13:30–32). This is important in that AD 70 is a pointer to, a harbinger of the Final Judgment rather than the Final Judgment itself. Thus, Matthew’s version is clearer and leads to a fuller insight into their concerns.

The disciples’ actual question was apparently longer than either recorded version, as well as being summarized differently by Matthew and Mark. Such a practice is common in the Gospel record. For instance, this is much like the several Gospel versions of the inscription Pilate orders to be placed above Jesus on the cross (cp. Matt. 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; John 19:19). We have to read all four inscriptions in order to discover the full statement. There is also an apparent “contradiction” between Mark’s version of Jesus’ statement on divorce (Mark 10:11–12) and Matthew’s version (Matt. 19:19). Mark’s seems to forbid all divorce, whereas Matthew’s allows divorce on certain grounds. However, these can be read together in a complementary way that does not involve contradiction. The same is true in the disciples’ question leading to the Olivet Discourse.

[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 Matthew’s version of the disciples’ Olivet question we see that they are actually asking two distinct questions. And they are doing this based on their mistaken understanding of Jesus’ recent comments (those in Matt. 23:1–24:2). [1] Their confusion leads to Jesus’ repeated warnings for them not to be deceived (Matt. 24:4, 6, 8, 11, 23, 26, 36). They wrongly believe that their two questions refer to the same historical event: the temple’s destruction. Their first question is “when will these things be?” Their second is: “what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” [2]

Their first question clearly responds to the Lord’s prophecy of the temple’s destruction, which he has just stated (Matt. 24:2). But the second is rooted in their confusion regarding his teaching. They wrongly import into their question a reference to the Second Advent and the consummation of history, which Jesus has not mentioned in the foregoing context. Thus, they erroneously assume that the temple’s destruction occurs at the end of history.

Their second question is my concern in this article. The first of the two phrases in this question employs the word parousia (“coming”). This is not a always technical theological term in the New Testament, for it can speak of the coming of men to a certain region (cf. 1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6, 7; Phil. 1:26). But it is a word that is often invested with special theological significance in several New Testament passages. In those it speaks of the Second Coming (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess. 2:19; 3:13; 2 Pet. 1:16). Significantly, Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term — and he uses it only four times, with each one appearing solely in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:3, 27, 37, 39). He seems to record it here to help the disciples see a distinction between his AD 70 judgment-coming (a metaphor for the destruction of the temple) and his Final Judgment coming (a literal event concluding history).

The second phrase refers to the consummation of history: “the end of the age.” The word for “end” is sunteleia, which appears only once in the whole discourse (here in Matt. 24:3). However, Matthew uses it elsewhere in important final-eschatological passages that speak of the end of history (e.g., Matt. 13:39, 40, 49; 28:20). Another word translated “end” in the discourse is telos, which in this context refers to the end of the temple (Matt. 24:6, 14). [3] This, of course, is the very issue that prompts the disciples’ question (Matt. 24:2).

The Apostle’s record’s significance

Thus, the Apostle Matthew’s version of the disciples’ question is not only lexically distinct from but theologically deeper than Mark’s version. By his recording both their use of the word parousia and their concern with “the end of the age,” he is showing their confusion of the destruction of the temple with the end of history. Though the destruction of the temple in AD 70 is theologically-linked to the Second Coming and Final Judgment at the end of history, it is historically distinct. This is just as types and antitypes are theologically-linked while being historically distinct.

Consequently, the way that Matthew presents the disciples’ question prepares his reader for the coming transition-passage in vv. 34–36. The disciples’ error requires Christ to deal with both issues, while keeping them distinct. To properly understand Jesus’ discourse, we must understand its structure.

Notes

1. Their confusion and general tendency to being mistaken (see PMW 2019-002, 003, 004, 005) leads to Jesus’ beginning the discourse with a warning not to be deceived (Matt. 24:4–8). Then, because of his deep concern for his stumbling disciples, he repeats this later for emphasis (vv. 24–26). And after his initially warning his disciples against possible deception, he states that they will clearly see the temple’s fast-approaching destruction (v. 15), which should have the practical effect of prompting them to flee the area (vv. 16–20). Calvin well notes on Matt. 24:3: “since they had considered from childhood that the temple would stand to the end of time and had the idea deeply rooted in their minds, that they had not thought that the temple could fall down as long as the world’s created order stood. So as soon as Christ said the temple would perish, at once their minds turned to the consummation of the age…. They link the coming of Christ and the end of the world with the overthrow of the temple as inseparable events.”

2. The two interrogative particles in Greek (pote, “when” and ti “what”) show that two questions are being asked, not three. And the second question has three features that show that it is only one additional question that is being asked: (1) The second particle (ti) governs the remainder of the sentence (“what will be the sign of Your-coming-and-of-the-end-of-the-age”). (2) The singular form of the word “sign” (semeion) applies to two aspects of one event: “the sign … of Your coming and of the end.” (3) And the feminine singular genitive definite article tēs controls both the words parousia and sunteleias (“the … sign of Your coming and of the end”), with the second term sunteleias lacking a resumptive article. Thus, Jesus’ parousia is linked with “the end of the age,” i.e., the end of temporal history, which gives way to the “age to come” (the eternal, consummate state).

3. Telos also appears in v. 13. But there it is probably used in the mundane sense of “finally.” That is, there it speaks of enduring to the end of one’s period of suffering, which may or may not end with the temple’s destruction. After all, some disciples will die before that event (v. 9; cp. Matt. 16:28). We see similar mundane uses of the Greek phrase eis telos in Luke 18:5; John 13:1; 1 Thess. 2:16.

[image error]Would you like to donate to GoodBirth Ministries? GoodBirth Ministries was established in order to expound, apply, advance, and defend conservative, evangelical Reformed theology in the modern world by supporting Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. in his research and writing ministry. Your support is appreciated.

THE NATURE OF THE RESURRECTION

[image error]PMW 2019-046 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The Scripture teaches that Christ arises from the dead in the same body in which he dies, though with certain super-added spiritual powers.1 His resurrection does not merely revivify a lifeless cadaver; but neither is it the creation of a new body. Just as he prophesies, the very body which dies also comes forth from the tomb (Jn 2:19, 22). As such, it miraculously attests the truth of his divine mission on earth (Jn 2:18–21; cp. Mt 12:39–41; 16:1–4; Lk 11:29.

This is why the tomb and burial clothing are empty: his physical body departs from them (Mt 28:6; Jn 20:4–11, 15). After the resurrection the Gospels show Christ in a material body that people can touch and handle (Lk 24:39), and which still has the wounds of the cross (Jn 20:27; cf. Rev 5:6). On other occasions he bids Mary Magdalene to quit clinging (haptomai) to him (Jn 20:17). The women who meet the Lord later “held [krateo] him by the feet, and worshiped” (Mt 28:9). He even eats food, while in his resurrection body (Lk 24:42–43; Jn 21:11–14). The record of his friends not recognizing him is due either to their vision being distorted by tears (Jn 20:11–16) or by supernatural intervention (Lk 24:16), not by a radical morphological change.

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

Likewise is it with the final resurrection. The general resurrection raises the body (Job 19:23–27; Isa 26:19; 1Th 4:16), which is why it occurs at the place of burial (Da 12:2; Jn 5:28).2 Scripture calls Christ “the first fruits of them that slept” (1Co 15:23) and “the firstborn of the dead” (Col 1:18; Rev 1:5; cf. Ro 8:29). Yet we know that others physically arose from the dead prior to him, some during his own ministry (1Ki 17:17–23; 2Ki 4:24–37; Mt 27:52; Heb 11:35). We should also see Christ’s miracles in Mt 9:18–26; 10:8; Mk 5:22–23, 35–42; Lk 7:12–15; and Jn 11:14–44.

Thus, Christ’s resurrection is of a different order, an order making him a “first” in that respect. That difference distinguishes his resurrection as eschatological: unlike other resurrections (miraculous revivifications), his body possesses elevated powers of the Spirit that would render it incapable of dissolution (1Co 15:28, 41–42), thus suited for the eternal order (see response to hyper-preterists below for more information).3

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

The future, consummate physical resurrection prepares us for our eternal existence in the New Earth, which is established at Christ’s future return. This is taught in Matt. 25:14–30, as argued by D. A. Carson, J. R. Middleton, Jeffrey A. Gibbs, and others. God created us with physical bodies, not as immaterial angels (Gen. 2:7). Thus, our “natural” estate is corporeal; consequently, our final estate will be corporeal, though forever separated from sin. Christ sanctified the physical estate when he himself became incarnate and when he returned to his physical body at his resurrection.

Notes

1. Tragically, there is a renewed debate among evangelicals as to whether “Christ arose from the dead in the same material body of flesh and bones in which He died.” Stackhouse, “Evangelical Fratricide,” 64–66. Geisler, The Battle for the Resurrection (1991). Harris, From Grave to Glory (1990). Pinnock, “Toward an Evangelical Theology of Religions” (Sept. 1990). See also the liberal international “Jesus Seminar” conducted in the first half of the 1990s

2. Although Da 12:2 seems to be presenting a metaphor regarding Israel’s resurrection, it bases it on the concept of a physical resurrection.

3. For some of the unusual functions of his resurrected body, see: Lk 24:31ff; Jn 20:13ff; 21:7; Ac 1:9–11. For discussions of this concept see: Gaffin, Jr., Resurrection and Redemption, passim. Vos, Pauline Eschatology, ch. 8. Warfield, Biblical and Theological Studies, 478–85.

[image error]