What do you think?
Rate this book
He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology
In this greatly expanded and wholly updated version of Dr. Gentry's classic study of postmillennialism, you will sense anew the powerful message of Psalm 72 that Christ "shall have dominion from sea to sea" (Psa 72:8). You will learn that God's word promises that "the whole earth will be filled with his glory" (72:19) so that "all nations will call him blessed" (72:17) before Christ returns.
Many evangelicals today are concerned about those being Left Behind on this Late Great Planet Earth as it collapses into absolute chaos. But the postmillennialist optimistically believes that He Shall Have Dominion throughout the earth. In this book you will find the whole biblical rationale for the postmillennial hope, from its incipient beginning in Genesis to its glorious conclusion in Revelation. Your faith will be re-invigorated as you begin to recognize that "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation" (Rom 1:16) and that our Lord Jesus really meant it when he commanded us to "go and make disciples of all the nations" (Matt 28:19).
The Third edition includes an enlarged appendix on the Errors of Hyper-preterism; both theological and exegetical.
Many evangelicals today are concerned about those being Left Behind on this Late Great Planet Earth as it collapses into absolute chaos. But the postmillennialist optimistically believes that He Shall Have Dominion throughout the earth. In this book you will find the whole biblical rationale for the postmillennial hope, from its incipient beginning in Genesis to its glorious conclusion in Revelation. Your faith will be re-invigorated as you begin to recognize that "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation" (Rom 1:16) and that our Lord Jesus really meant it when he commanded us to "go and make disciples of all the nations" (Matt 28:19).
The Third edition includes an enlarged appendix on the Errors of Hyper-preterism; both theological and exegetical.
619 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
44 people are currently reading
567 people want to read
About the author
Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.
49 books88 followersKenneth L. Gentry, Jr. is a Reformed theologian, and an ordained minister in the Reformed Presbyterian Church General Assembly (RPCGA). He is particularly known for his support for and publication on the topics of orthodox preterism and postmillennialism in Christian eschatology, as well as for theonomy and six day creation. He holds that each of these theological distinctives are logical and theological extensions of his foundational theology, which is Calvinistic and Reformed.
Facebook pages:
Public Figure
https://www.facebook.com/KennethLGent...
He Shall Have Dominion (Book)
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...
Good Birth Ministries
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...
Facebook pages:
Public Figure
https://www.facebook.com/KennethLGent...
He Shall Have Dominion (Book)
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...
Good Birth Ministries
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
October 14, 2013
He Shall Have Dominion is the most recent attempt at articulating a thorough, ‘irrefutable’ argument for postmillennialism. Gentry attempts to make his case so airtight that critics will have to either ignore his work or answer his arguments. I’ve not read much on eschatology, outside of the postmillennial tradition, having grown up in the premill/amill mold. So I can’t speak to the persuasiveness of the argument with much sophistication.
Based on my experience reading the postmillenialists, the argument really boils down to a few things: the outright rejection of dispensationalism, the rejection of a pessimistic historical reading of Scripture, and what I would call the ‘original audience’ hermeneutic. The ‘original audience’ hermeneutic seeks to understand Scripture as primarily as the original audience would have understood it. This means, in the context of eschatology; first, a deep understanding of the Old Testament and its use of prophesy and apocalyptic language, and second, understanding the context of the early church. This is the core of He Shall Have Dominion.
Gary North, took the liberty of providing a forty(!) page foreword to the book, in his typically caustic manner, warns his readers of the potency of Gentry’s argument. Like Gentry, he argues that premills and amills see the triumph of the gospel as ‘discontinuous’ from history. It is an eschatology of defeat—a matter of “getting out of life alive.” Of course, framed this way, it seems a little ridiculous and contrary to the nature of God. North, essentially outlines Gentry’s whole argument in the foreword and anticipates the responses of the critics. But, like Gentry’s arguments, North’s are solid and difficult to refute in ‘spirit.’ By this, I mean that to critique the postmillennial case, one must do so from a position that sees the church and the gospel as weak in the future ‘as we know it.’
Gentry rightfully begins his argument for postmillennialism in Genesis. Premills and Amills surely attempt to do the same, but they do so anticipating the triumph of the gospel outside of history, whereas the postmillennialist does so within history. This makes all the difference in the world to one’s understanding of Scripture. When North and Gentry write of “pessimillenarians” they does so because they are pessimistic of the outcome of the church in history, not at the eschaton. So the heart of the debate is in understanding the “end of history.”
Naturally, one’s understanding of history has profound impact upon how one lives in the world and one’s goals for one’s own life as well as the church. This is particularly significant for dispensationalists as Gentry states they are “alarmed at the thought of Christian cultural transformation” because it “calls necessarily for the adopting of means that are unauthorized, and the setting of a goal that is unattainable as it is unscriptural.” (p. 20) For the postmillennialist, he “expects the gradual, developmental expansion of the kingdom of Christ in time and on earth” and thus labors toward that goal.
Gentry sums up the differing views and offers the well-known names of the proponents of each view. He then sums up the Reformation doctrines of sin, providence, revelation, ethics, and hermeneutics. He spends a great deal of time on the law, because theonomy is a critical component of postmillennialism, as it undergirds the continuity of the covenants and the covenantal purposes.
One of the primary differences that Gentry perceives in eschatological positions is the way pessimists see the power of sin as greater than the power of redemption in the church age. (p. 182)
This is a critical distinction that seems almost incomprehensible in light of Scripture. Is the power of Christ so muffled that it cannot overcome the power of sin? Hasn’t that battle already been fought and the outcome made plain? Yet there is disagreement here, with the pessimists maintaining that Christ will only be triumphant in the second coming.
Yet here, again, in understanding, “Christ’s coming” is a source of misunderstanding. Gentry notes that there are different ways in which “Christ ‘comes.’” (p. 271ff) The ways pessimists understanding Christ’s presence at the right hand of the Father in heaven, removes him from the earthly realm in a meaningful way. They believe that Christ cannot reign on earth from heaven, that he must be present in bodily form on earth to reign.
Gentry gets specific and deals with the key texts offering both the premill, amill, and postmill interpretations. One can go as deeply here as one desires, interacting with the biblical texts and the various interpretative options, but Gentry keeps things moving and doesn’t quote all the passages at length. So one doesn’t necessarily find oneself bogged down in the source texts. Yet Gentry is persuasive and answers the questions in a convincing manner.
The postmillennial hermeneutic is fundamentally a preterist one, meaning “past.” Most of the prophesies in the Bible—specifically in the New Testament have already taken place. Matthew 24 and Revelation, are thus primarily about historical events, not future ones. Though Gentry doesn’t say this, one must wonder at the way in which most people read the Bible for what it says to them, rather than what it actually says. This narcissistic hermeneutic seems the most likely source misunderstanding in eschatological questions. We are far too quick to seek to interpret the Bible with self as the referent, rather than God. This is a human trait, not merely one that premill and amill readers suffer from.
Gentry is a little more gentle with his reader. He writes, “When interpreting any book of the Bible, it is important to understand the audience to which it was originally directed. The concern of the evangelical interpreter is to understand the grammar of a passage in light of its historic context, not despite that context. There are at least three factors in Revelation that emphasize the original audience and their circumstances.” (p. 395) He argues that rather than seeking to understand a text in our own context, to do so in what I’ve called the ‘original-audience’ hermeneutic. When one does this, one can see the preterist interpretation is not only plausible, but natural to the text. We see this especially in the “expectancy” of John in Revelation. (p. 396)
Gentry evaluates the texts using his stated hermeneutic and the reading is a natural and convincing one. The bulk of the book is here in the exegesis, but the interpretive battle was already waged in the hermeneutics—not the exegesis. One’s interpretive grid will either bias one to a preterist or idealist/futurist position. I lump the last two because they are both in firm disagreement against the preterist position, not because they are the same position. One will not likely change positions based on the exegetical arguments that Gentry lays out, but due to the interpretative principles established earlier.
Once Gentry concludes his exegesis, he answers the standard objections raised against postmillennialism. He continues his exegesis here, where necessary and deftly handles the criticisms leveled against postmillennialism.
My only criticism of the book, and it is a minor one, is Gentry's preoccupation with dispensationalism. It is clearly a bunch of hokum, yet he spends a great deal of time answering them. This is naturally a very easy criticism for me to make in 2013, as dispensationalism long ago began a slow death. I suppose Gentry played a part in that, and I ought not to hold it against him today.
When one understands the power of the gospel in history, the Bible is transformed from a book written for a defeated, but “right” people, to a book of promises for those who “fight the good fight.” This changes everything. Read Gentry and get a taste for the transforming power of the gospel.
Based on my experience reading the postmillenialists, the argument really boils down to a few things: the outright rejection of dispensationalism, the rejection of a pessimistic historical reading of Scripture, and what I would call the ‘original audience’ hermeneutic. The ‘original audience’ hermeneutic seeks to understand Scripture as primarily as the original audience would have understood it. This means, in the context of eschatology; first, a deep understanding of the Old Testament and its use of prophesy and apocalyptic language, and second, understanding the context of the early church. This is the core of He Shall Have Dominion.
Gary North, took the liberty of providing a forty(!) page foreword to the book, in his typically caustic manner, warns his readers of the potency of Gentry’s argument. Like Gentry, he argues that premills and amills see the triumph of the gospel as ‘discontinuous’ from history. It is an eschatology of defeat—a matter of “getting out of life alive.” Of course, framed this way, it seems a little ridiculous and contrary to the nature of God. North, essentially outlines Gentry’s whole argument in the foreword and anticipates the responses of the critics. But, like Gentry’s arguments, North’s are solid and difficult to refute in ‘spirit.’ By this, I mean that to critique the postmillennial case, one must do so from a position that sees the church and the gospel as weak in the future ‘as we know it.’
Gentry rightfully begins his argument for postmillennialism in Genesis. Premills and Amills surely attempt to do the same, but they do so anticipating the triumph of the gospel outside of history, whereas the postmillennialist does so within history. This makes all the difference in the world to one’s understanding of Scripture. When North and Gentry write of “pessimillenarians” they does so because they are pessimistic of the outcome of the church in history, not at the eschaton. So the heart of the debate is in understanding the “end of history.”
Naturally, one’s understanding of history has profound impact upon how one lives in the world and one’s goals for one’s own life as well as the church. This is particularly significant for dispensationalists as Gentry states they are “alarmed at the thought of Christian cultural transformation” because it “calls necessarily for the adopting of means that are unauthorized, and the setting of a goal that is unattainable as it is unscriptural.” (p. 20) For the postmillennialist, he “expects the gradual, developmental expansion of the kingdom of Christ in time and on earth” and thus labors toward that goal.
Gentry sums up the differing views and offers the well-known names of the proponents of each view. He then sums up the Reformation doctrines of sin, providence, revelation, ethics, and hermeneutics. He spends a great deal of time on the law, because theonomy is a critical component of postmillennialism, as it undergirds the continuity of the covenants and the covenantal purposes.
One of the primary differences that Gentry perceives in eschatological positions is the way pessimists see the power of sin as greater than the power of redemption in the church age. (p. 182)
This is a critical distinction that seems almost incomprehensible in light of Scripture. Is the power of Christ so muffled that it cannot overcome the power of sin? Hasn’t that battle already been fought and the outcome made plain? Yet there is disagreement here, with the pessimists maintaining that Christ will only be triumphant in the second coming.
Yet here, again, in understanding, “Christ’s coming” is a source of misunderstanding. Gentry notes that there are different ways in which “Christ ‘comes.’” (p. 271ff) The ways pessimists understanding Christ’s presence at the right hand of the Father in heaven, removes him from the earthly realm in a meaningful way. They believe that Christ cannot reign on earth from heaven, that he must be present in bodily form on earth to reign.
Gentry gets specific and deals with the key texts offering both the premill, amill, and postmill interpretations. One can go as deeply here as one desires, interacting with the biblical texts and the various interpretative options, but Gentry keeps things moving and doesn’t quote all the passages at length. So one doesn’t necessarily find oneself bogged down in the source texts. Yet Gentry is persuasive and answers the questions in a convincing manner.
The postmillennial hermeneutic is fundamentally a preterist one, meaning “past.” Most of the prophesies in the Bible—specifically in the New Testament have already taken place. Matthew 24 and Revelation, are thus primarily about historical events, not future ones. Though Gentry doesn’t say this, one must wonder at the way in which most people read the Bible for what it says to them, rather than what it actually says. This narcissistic hermeneutic seems the most likely source misunderstanding in eschatological questions. We are far too quick to seek to interpret the Bible with self as the referent, rather than God. This is a human trait, not merely one that premill and amill readers suffer from.
Gentry is a little more gentle with his reader. He writes, “When interpreting any book of the Bible, it is important to understand the audience to which it was originally directed. The concern of the evangelical interpreter is to understand the grammar of a passage in light of its historic context, not despite that context. There are at least three factors in Revelation that emphasize the original audience and their circumstances.” (p. 395) He argues that rather than seeking to understand a text in our own context, to do so in what I’ve called the ‘original-audience’ hermeneutic. When one does this, one can see the preterist interpretation is not only plausible, but natural to the text. We see this especially in the “expectancy” of John in Revelation. (p. 396)
Gentry evaluates the texts using his stated hermeneutic and the reading is a natural and convincing one. The bulk of the book is here in the exegesis, but the interpretive battle was already waged in the hermeneutics—not the exegesis. One’s interpretive grid will either bias one to a preterist or idealist/futurist position. I lump the last two because they are both in firm disagreement against the preterist position, not because they are the same position. One will not likely change positions based on the exegetical arguments that Gentry lays out, but due to the interpretative principles established earlier.
Once Gentry concludes his exegesis, he answers the standard objections raised against postmillennialism. He continues his exegesis here, where necessary and deftly handles the criticisms leveled against postmillennialism.
My only criticism of the book, and it is a minor one, is Gentry's preoccupation with dispensationalism. It is clearly a bunch of hokum, yet he spends a great deal of time answering them. This is naturally a very easy criticism for me to make in 2013, as dispensationalism long ago began a slow death. I suppose Gentry played a part in that, and I ought not to hold it against him today.
When one understands the power of the gospel in history, the Bible is transformed from a book written for a defeated, but “right” people, to a book of promises for those who “fight the good fight.” This changes everything. Read Gentry and get a taste for the transforming power of the gospel.
January 1, 2023
Every knee shall bow. Do the Dispies even read the Psalms?
January 2, 2019
Don't read this unless you'd like to have all your assumptions about the future challenged.
May 19, 2024
Just excellent, one of my favorite postmillennial resources. It’s by far the most extensive defense of this victorious eschatological perspective.
March 31, 2009
Very good.
May 17, 2012
NiceneCouncil.com has published the Third Edition of this great work. Please see our bookstore at http://store.nicenecouncil.com/he-sha...
June 19, 2022
Thorough, compelling, and accessible. Gentry approaches eschatology from pragmatic, theological, and Biblical angles and presents a very convincing case for the postmillenial hope.
April 24, 2011
Gentry is a clear and straightforward writer, and does a good job presenting the postmillennial case. I especially appreciated his gospel-centeredness, his excellent answers to objections (especially the amillennial argument concerning suffering), and his gentlemanly tone. The sheer number of misconceptions that he removes is staggeringly helpful; He's like a cannery for red herrings.
If someone is reading deeply in eschatology, they ought to read this one. However, there are several weaknesses of presentation that mar the book's usefulness, and keep it from being my first recommendation. (Mathison's Postmillennialism)
Two hundred of the pages that Gentry spends refuting wacky dispensational ideas could be cut without losing anything of the postmillennial case. Dispensationalism is over, and at any rate, is not the proper subject of this book. Related, yes, but not related enough to deserve as much play as it gets. His discussion of theonomy is more related to his argument, but could also slim down a few pages. Focus.
Also, Gary North's intro should be retired. Fun while it lasted. If the book is to be taken seriously, which it should, then North's bravado should be dropped. I happen to agree with North, but don't think the intro helps the book; actually, it hinders it.
The footnotes are wildly disparate in usefulness and scholarship. North boasts about them, but when one of them is used to mention that the granddaughter of a premillennial scholar is a postmillennialist, well, it casts the whole bunch of them in a new light. Similarly, referencing all the NT passages that mention the Church "in Christ" seems to be proof-texting, and of an auxiliary point, at that. Looks impressive, but so does cotton candy.
Gentry's dialogue partners are skewed, as well. I feel like Herman C. Hanko should probably abstain from theological debate after the few articles that Gentry manhandles, but who besides Gentry and Herman's own mother have ever heard of him? Surely someone else said something about postmillennialism that needs refuting. Centering the debate by choosing more evangelically relevant foes would help, which would mean dropping the unpublished articles, and most of the outdated dispensationalist footnotes. Otherwise, Gentry looks like he is kicking puppies.
There is a newer edition of the book out now, which may very well correct some of these flaws, and if it does, stars would deservedly be added, because the heart of Gentry's work is an excellent defense of the triumph of Christ.
If someone is reading deeply in eschatology, they ought to read this one. However, there are several weaknesses of presentation that mar the book's usefulness, and keep it from being my first recommendation. (Mathison's Postmillennialism)
Two hundred of the pages that Gentry spends refuting wacky dispensational ideas could be cut without losing anything of the postmillennial case. Dispensationalism is over, and at any rate, is not the proper subject of this book. Related, yes, but not related enough to deserve as much play as it gets. His discussion of theonomy is more related to his argument, but could also slim down a few pages. Focus.
Also, Gary North's intro should be retired. Fun while it lasted. If the book is to be taken seriously, which it should, then North's bravado should be dropped. I happen to agree with North, but don't think the intro helps the book; actually, it hinders it.
The footnotes are wildly disparate in usefulness and scholarship. North boasts about them, but when one of them is used to mention that the granddaughter of a premillennial scholar is a postmillennialist, well, it casts the whole bunch of them in a new light. Similarly, referencing all the NT passages that mention the Church "in Christ" seems to be proof-texting, and of an auxiliary point, at that. Looks impressive, but so does cotton candy.
Gentry's dialogue partners are skewed, as well. I feel like Herman C. Hanko should probably abstain from theological debate after the few articles that Gentry manhandles, but who besides Gentry and Herman's own mother have ever heard of him? Surely someone else said something about postmillennialism that needs refuting. Centering the debate by choosing more evangelically relevant foes would help, which would mean dropping the unpublished articles, and most of the outdated dispensationalist footnotes. Otherwise, Gentry looks like he is kicking puppies.
There is a newer edition of the book out now, which may very well correct some of these flaws, and if it does, stars would deservedly be added, because the heart of Gentry's work is an excellent defense of the triumph of Christ.
June 1, 2017
Marvelous on almost all counts. It is quite common in some circles for eschatological preoccupation to take up far too much time, and in other circles to be almost entirely neglected. In the first group, it is often accompanied by what Gentry calls "Newspaper exegesis"; in the other group it is thought that it is a peripheral issue and therefore not discussed so as not to stir up debate.
Gentry does a wonderful job of presenting the postmillennial view as the most consistently biblical view, while interacting with the other schools of eschatological thought (pre- & a-). Now, if "end times" stuff either bores you, or you've been burned by "prophetic date-setting" (often found in dispensational camps), Gentry reminds us:
Meaning, we must remember that the Scriptures lead us to look forward to what God has in store. What we believe about what God's purposes are for history and eternity will affect how we live here and now. Gentry shows how postmillennialism is the only view (of the three primary camps) that has a theology of Gospel-victory in history. He is careful in expositing the applicable texts as well as quoting various voices of all three camps. He is always charitable, but somewhat merciless, especially when the other viewpoints are shown to hold utterly ridiculous and unbiblical views.
This is really a must read for every Christian, as it would be immensely profitable for Christians to understand that the pessimism of amillennialism and premillennialism is afflicting the church in such a way that we are rather impotent in our Gospel proclamation. We must affirm and proclaim the Lordship and Kingship of Christ in history, in recognition of His great redemptive work on Calvary.
I highly commend this to the top of your "to-read" list!
Gentry does a wonderful job of presenting the postmillennial view as the most consistently biblical view, while interacting with the other schools of eschatological thought (pre- & a-). Now, if "end times" stuff either bores you, or you've been burned by "prophetic date-setting" (often found in dispensational camps), Gentry reminds us:
Eschatology is a deeply rooted and intricately involved aspect of Christian theology. It should not be approached in a naïve manner or be given superficial treatment. Consequently, no single passage may be expected to present an entire eschatological system [...] Eschatology is woven into the whole fabric of Scripture as the story within. (Gentry, Pg.497)
Meaning, we must remember that the Scriptures lead us to look forward to what God has in store. What we believe about what God's purposes are for history and eternity will affect how we live here and now. Gentry shows how postmillennialism is the only view (of the three primary camps) that has a theology of Gospel-victory in history. He is careful in expositing the applicable texts as well as quoting various voices of all three camps. He is always charitable, but somewhat merciless, especially when the other viewpoints are shown to hold utterly ridiculous and unbiblical views.
This is really a must read for every Christian, as it would be immensely profitable for Christians to understand that the pessimism of amillennialism and premillennialism is afflicting the church in such a way that we are rather impotent in our Gospel proclamation. We must affirm and proclaim the Lordship and Kingship of Christ in history, in recognition of His great redemptive work on Calvary.
I highly commend this to the top of your "to-read" list!
December 10, 2018
An excellent, thorough overview of postmillenialism and preterism
August 23, 2021
This book kind of blew my mind. It showed me how much eschatology matters - that it's not just a niche Revelation 20 thing but an all-encompassing whole-Bible thing. Also, that the eschatological lens through which we read the Bible changes the way we think and act regarding mission and the purpose of the Church.
I started reading this book fairly confident in my amillennialism. Now I'm much less confident! However, I'm not entirely persuaded by postmil yet. It makes sense of some of the difficulties I had understanding prophecies in the psalms and prophetic writings but there are still too many New Testament passages that seem to jar with the postmil view (despite Gentry's attempts to tackle them). Still, this book has probably moved me to a more preterist reading of certain passages like the Olivet discourse. It has also reminded me of the reality that Jesus is reigning over earth NOW. Most of all it has forced me to return to God's word to puzzle these things out, which is always a good thing.
For now my eschatological position will have to remain 'awaiting more light'.
I started reading this book fairly confident in my amillennialism. Now I'm much less confident! However, I'm not entirely persuaded by postmil yet. It makes sense of some of the difficulties I had understanding prophecies in the psalms and prophetic writings but there are still too many New Testament passages that seem to jar with the postmil view (despite Gentry's attempts to tackle them). Still, this book has probably moved me to a more preterist reading of certain passages like the Olivet discourse. It has also reminded me of the reality that Jesus is reigning over earth NOW. Most of all it has forced me to return to God's word to puzzle these things out, which is always a good thing.
For now my eschatological position will have to remain 'awaiting more light'.
May 16, 2013
Very thorough argument for post-mil theology. Must read if you are thinking through the various views.
January 22, 2016
This book revealed to me that I am postmil after all. I believe I misunderstood amil and postmil before reading this book. This book is a careful Biblical analysis of eschatology. Recommended.
April 4, 2019
Really great!
February 9, 2025
A fresh sense of hope.
June 13, 2025
The most well-researched book on eschatology to date.
September 1, 2021
Gentry gives a brilliant exposition of Postmillenalism.
February 18, 2026
Continuing on with my somewhat deep dive into preterism, I realized that I didn’t know much about what full preterists call partial preterism, and Gentry calls orthodox preterism. He calls full preterism ultra-preterism or unorthodox preterism, perhaps because he finds the terms full preterism or consistent preterism too flattering. Unfortunately this book was much more about postmillennialism than preterism, although I did learn some good stuff about preterism.
Gentry argues that postmillennialism is the only optimistic eschatological system, though he stresses that the optimism is based on God's efforts and not human efforts. He writes, "*We may not convincingly argue for any optimistic expectation for mankind's future on a secular base* (emphasis original)." Nonetheless, he seems to be an enthusiastic supporter of the GOP (God's Own Party, perhaps?). In a Facebook post, he writes, "Interestingly, our two best presidents of the 20th and 21st century are named similarly, Ronald and Donald (not to be confused with Ronald McDonald)." Leaving aside the question of Reagan's presidency (I personally think he was a good, though not great president), how can anybody seriously argue that Trump is better than the two Roosevelts, Truman, or Eisenhower?
He uses the following scriptures to show that the Bible supports modern conservative ideas: Securing free market bartering (Matthew 20.1-15), Defending private property rights (Act 5.4), Encouraging the family as the primary welfare agency (1 Tim 5.8). This is a very selective use of scriptures. Elsewhere he says communism is inherently anti-Christian, ignoring the many Christian communes in the 19th century, not to mention Acts 4.32 "No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had."
A significant portion of the book (Part 5) was dedicated to meeting objections to postmillennial optimism. I found Gentry's arguments concerning Matthew 7.13-14 interesting (Enter through the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the road is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who go through it. How narrow is the gate and difficult the road that leads to life, and few find it). Gentry cites Matthew 8.11 and Revelation 7.9 to show that sometimes many are described as entering the kingdom, and Isaiah 2.2-4 and Micah 4.1-4 to show that some O.T. prophets envisioned the nations as coming to God at the end of time. Thus he claims that Matthew 7.13-14 is an ethical, not a prophetic word. For me, all Gentry demonstrates is that the Bible has contradictory passages which various school reconcile in different ways.
Much of the book contrasts postmillennialism with dispensationalism. He is preaching to the crowd here. Dispensationalism is an awful system. Full preterist Ed Stevens wrote an excellent article about how dispensationalism's pessimistic eschatology keeps them from being an effective moral force in the world as well as causing many to unconditionally support Israel.
Gentry does rail against the hyper-literalism of the dispensationalists, a position with which I heartily agree. This became clear to me while watching the Left Behind movie where literal fire literally came out of the mouths of the two witnesses (I literally laughed out loud)! I especially got a kick out of Gentry's asking if we should interpret Luke 3.5a literally: "Every valley will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be made low"!
As fun as it is to poke fun at the dispensationalists, I didn’t read this book to get new arguments against the dispies, but to understand Gentry's position. As a partial preterist, he believes that most, but not all, biblical prophecy has been fulfilled. So as far as the Olivet discourse goes, he believes that it has been fulfilled up until Matthew 24.36. He explains Matthew 24.30 as "The sign that the Son of Man is in heaven is the smoking rubble of Jerusalem, which he prophesies beforehand." This is a weird interpretation. The usual (and probably correct) interpretation of this verse is that the *sign* is in heaven (more properly the sky; the Greek word can mean either heaven or sky), not the Son of Man in heaven. To interpret it the way Gentry does requires inserting an article which is not there in the Greek: "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man [the one] in heaven (KJV)." Most modern translations, including the NKJV put the sign in heaven, not the Son of man: "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven."
Gentry isn’t particularly consistent as to whether to interpret biblical passages as literal or not. So whereas full preterists interpret 2 Peter 3.10, 12 figuratively, Gentry says that this passage, "seems to go beyond apocalyptic imagery and prophetic hyperbole." On the other hand, in commenting on Daniel 12.1-2, widely seen as describing a literal bodily resurrection, Gentry says, somewhat bizarrely, that the resurrection imagery applies to corporate imagery, not individuals. He uses the same apologetic to claim that the first resurrection in Revelation 20.4-6 refers to the spiritual regeneration of believers in the first century, not to a bodily resurrection.
Gentry agrees with the full preterists that the Greek word gē, which can mean either "earth" or "land," generally refers to the land of Israel in Revelation. So he claims, rather bizarrely in my opinion, that the beast from the land (gē) "represents apostate Judaism as concentrated in its religious leadership in its high priestly aristocracy." How in the world did the high priestly aristocracy cause the people of Israel to worship the first beast (Rome)? Unlike Gentry, I think that gē in Revelation generally refers to the entire earth, as it does in Revelation 17.8, where gē (earth) is equated with kosmos (world): "The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast".
Some of the claims in this book were interesting. "Never was 'so high a percentage of a great city so thoroughly and painfully exterminated and enslaved as during the Fall of Jerusalem. (D. A. Carson)'" IDK. Seeing as *everyone* was killed or enslaved at the fall of Carthage in 146 BC this claim seems hard to sustain.
Or, "Chronos indicates a long period of uncertain duration." I was suspicious of this one. However Google AI says, "While chronos does not exclusively mean 'a long time' (it just means 'time' in general), it is commonly used to express that concept."
Or, "Perhaps no period in the world's history has ever been so marked by these convulsions as that which intervenes between the Crucifixion and the destruction of Jerusalem. (W. Boyd Carpenter)." I was suspicious of this one, too. However Google AI Overview: "Yes, historical records indicate there was an unusually high concentration of significant earthquakes, tremors, and other natural disasters in the Roman Empire between 30 AD and 70 AD. This period, particularly during the reign of Nero, saw multiple cities damaged by seismic activity, culminating in the major earthquake of 62/63 AD that heavily damaged Pompeii and surrounding areas, acting as a precursor to the 79 AD eruption." However, it just may be an accident of history that more natural disasters were reported during this time.
Gentry includes an important appendix on what he calls the error of hyper-preterism. He points to five things which he claims were not fulfilled in 70 A.D. and have yet to be fulfilled:
*The visible, glorious, personal Second Coming of Christ
*The physical resurrection of the dead
*The final corporate judgement of all men on Judgement Day
*The end of the present earth and temporal history
*The establishment of the consummate, physical new creation
Gentry claims that these five doctrines are among those universally accepted by orthodox Christians. The first three are beyond dispute. I am unsure what he means by the last two. The orthodox view is generally that the present earth will be *remade*, not that it will be destroyed and a new physical creation established. But perhaps I am misunderstanding what he means by physical new creation.
Many of Gentry's arguments against full preterism are familiar and don’t need to be reiterated here. Probably his worst point is that full preterism can lead to universalism (as though this is a terrible thing!). While Gentry is careful to point out that postmillennialism, despite it optimism, does not fall into the liberal (horror of horrors!) error of universalism, he cites full preterist Samuel G. Dawson as denying hell. (I think there are too many passages affirming eternal conscious torment to dismiss them easily.) But Gentry did make one point in this appendix concerning 1 Corinthians 15.44 that I had not heard before and which I found very interesting: "According to scholars such as A. T. Robertson, generally adjectives ending in -inos denote compositional material, while those ending in -ikos denote characteristics. This fits the flow of Paul's argument regarding the "natural" (psuchikos) and the "spiritual" (pneumatikos) body." The point, explained well by Gentry, is that the spiritual body is not made of spirit; it is just as material as the natural body.
So am I glad I read this book? Yes, I suppose I am though some of the theological parts were a slog for me. I guess that is only natural because as an unbeliever who has no theological irons in this fire I am obviously not part of Gentry's intended audience. I grudgingly give it three stars, the same rating I gave to the two previous Gentry books I read: The Beast of Revelation and Navigating the Book of Revelation.
Gentry argues that postmillennialism is the only optimistic eschatological system, though he stresses that the optimism is based on God's efforts and not human efforts. He writes, "*We may not convincingly argue for any optimistic expectation for mankind's future on a secular base* (emphasis original)." Nonetheless, he seems to be an enthusiastic supporter of the GOP (God's Own Party, perhaps?). In a Facebook post, he writes, "Interestingly, our two best presidents of the 20th and 21st century are named similarly, Ronald and Donald (not to be confused with Ronald McDonald)." Leaving aside the question of Reagan's presidency (I personally think he was a good, though not great president), how can anybody seriously argue that Trump is better than the two Roosevelts, Truman, or Eisenhower?
He uses the following scriptures to show that the Bible supports modern conservative ideas: Securing free market bartering (Matthew 20.1-15), Defending private property rights (Act 5.4), Encouraging the family as the primary welfare agency (1 Tim 5.8). This is a very selective use of scriptures. Elsewhere he says communism is inherently anti-Christian, ignoring the many Christian communes in the 19th century, not to mention Acts 4.32 "No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had."
A significant portion of the book (Part 5) was dedicated to meeting objections to postmillennial optimism. I found Gentry's arguments concerning Matthew 7.13-14 interesting (Enter through the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the road is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who go through it. How narrow is the gate and difficult the road that leads to life, and few find it). Gentry cites Matthew 8.11 and Revelation 7.9 to show that sometimes many are described as entering the kingdom, and Isaiah 2.2-4 and Micah 4.1-4 to show that some O.T. prophets envisioned the nations as coming to God at the end of time. Thus he claims that Matthew 7.13-14 is an ethical, not a prophetic word. For me, all Gentry demonstrates is that the Bible has contradictory passages which various school reconcile in different ways.
Much of the book contrasts postmillennialism with dispensationalism. He is preaching to the crowd here. Dispensationalism is an awful system. Full preterist Ed Stevens wrote an excellent article about how dispensationalism's pessimistic eschatology keeps them from being an effective moral force in the world as well as causing many to unconditionally support Israel.
Gentry does rail against the hyper-literalism of the dispensationalists, a position with which I heartily agree. This became clear to me while watching the Left Behind movie where literal fire literally came out of the mouths of the two witnesses (I literally laughed out loud)! I especially got a kick out of Gentry's asking if we should interpret Luke 3.5a literally: "Every valley will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be made low"!
As fun as it is to poke fun at the dispensationalists, I didn’t read this book to get new arguments against the dispies, but to understand Gentry's position. As a partial preterist, he believes that most, but not all, biblical prophecy has been fulfilled. So as far as the Olivet discourse goes, he believes that it has been fulfilled up until Matthew 24.36. He explains Matthew 24.30 as "The sign that the Son of Man is in heaven is the smoking rubble of Jerusalem, which he prophesies beforehand." This is a weird interpretation. The usual (and probably correct) interpretation of this verse is that the *sign* is in heaven (more properly the sky; the Greek word can mean either heaven or sky), not the Son of Man in heaven. To interpret it the way Gentry does requires inserting an article which is not there in the Greek: "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man [the one] in heaven (KJV)." Most modern translations, including the NKJV put the sign in heaven, not the Son of man: "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven."
Gentry isn’t particularly consistent as to whether to interpret biblical passages as literal or not. So whereas full preterists interpret 2 Peter 3.10, 12 figuratively, Gentry says that this passage, "seems to go beyond apocalyptic imagery and prophetic hyperbole." On the other hand, in commenting on Daniel 12.1-2, widely seen as describing a literal bodily resurrection, Gentry says, somewhat bizarrely, that the resurrection imagery applies to corporate imagery, not individuals. He uses the same apologetic to claim that the first resurrection in Revelation 20.4-6 refers to the spiritual regeneration of believers in the first century, not to a bodily resurrection.
Gentry agrees with the full preterists that the Greek word gē, which can mean either "earth" or "land," generally refers to the land of Israel in Revelation. So he claims, rather bizarrely in my opinion, that the beast from the land (gē) "represents apostate Judaism as concentrated in its religious leadership in its high priestly aristocracy." How in the world did the high priestly aristocracy cause the people of Israel to worship the first beast (Rome)? Unlike Gentry, I think that gē in Revelation generally refers to the entire earth, as it does in Revelation 17.8, where gē (earth) is equated with kosmos (world): "The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast".
Some of the claims in this book were interesting. "Never was 'so high a percentage of a great city so thoroughly and painfully exterminated and enslaved as during the Fall of Jerusalem. (D. A. Carson)'" IDK. Seeing as *everyone* was killed or enslaved at the fall of Carthage in 146 BC this claim seems hard to sustain.
Or, "Chronos indicates a long period of uncertain duration." I was suspicious of this one. However Google AI says, "While chronos does not exclusively mean 'a long time' (it just means 'time' in general), it is commonly used to express that concept."
Or, "Perhaps no period in the world's history has ever been so marked by these convulsions as that which intervenes between the Crucifixion and the destruction of Jerusalem. (W. Boyd Carpenter)." I was suspicious of this one, too. However Google AI Overview: "Yes, historical records indicate there was an unusually high concentration of significant earthquakes, tremors, and other natural disasters in the Roman Empire between 30 AD and 70 AD. This period, particularly during the reign of Nero, saw multiple cities damaged by seismic activity, culminating in the major earthquake of 62/63 AD that heavily damaged Pompeii and surrounding areas, acting as a precursor to the 79 AD eruption." However, it just may be an accident of history that more natural disasters were reported during this time.
Gentry includes an important appendix on what he calls the error of hyper-preterism. He points to five things which he claims were not fulfilled in 70 A.D. and have yet to be fulfilled:
*The visible, glorious, personal Second Coming of Christ
*The physical resurrection of the dead
*The final corporate judgement of all men on Judgement Day
*The end of the present earth and temporal history
*The establishment of the consummate, physical new creation
Gentry claims that these five doctrines are among those universally accepted by orthodox Christians. The first three are beyond dispute. I am unsure what he means by the last two. The orthodox view is generally that the present earth will be *remade*, not that it will be destroyed and a new physical creation established. But perhaps I am misunderstanding what he means by physical new creation.
Many of Gentry's arguments against full preterism are familiar and don’t need to be reiterated here. Probably his worst point is that full preterism can lead to universalism (as though this is a terrible thing!). While Gentry is careful to point out that postmillennialism, despite it optimism, does not fall into the liberal (horror of horrors!) error of universalism, he cites full preterist Samuel G. Dawson as denying hell. (I think there are too many passages affirming eternal conscious torment to dismiss them easily.) But Gentry did make one point in this appendix concerning 1 Corinthians 15.44 that I had not heard before and which I found very interesting: "According to scholars such as A. T. Robertson, generally adjectives ending in -inos denote compositional material, while those ending in -ikos denote characteristics. This fits the flow of Paul's argument regarding the "natural" (psuchikos) and the "spiritual" (pneumatikos) body." The point, explained well by Gentry, is that the spiritual body is not made of spirit; it is just as material as the natural body.
So am I glad I read this book? Yes, I suppose I am though some of the theological parts were a slog for me. I guess that is only natural because as an unbeliever who has no theological irons in this fire I am obviously not part of Gentry's intended audience. I grudgingly give it three stars, the same rating I gave to the two previous Gentry books I read: The Beast of Revelation and Navigating the Book of Revelation.
April 26, 2022
An informative defense of theonomic, postmillennial preterism. It covers a wide range of eschatological matters, including millennial views and interpretation of Revelation. It not only presents the postmillennial view, it also critiques millennialism and premillennialism, and answers objections to postmillennialism. This book gave me a better understanding of postmil, though I still think amil fits the Bible better.
Notes
Postmil proof texts: Ps 2; 22; 72; 110; Isa 2:1-4; 9:6-7; 11:9; Mt 13; 28:19; 1 Cor 15:20-28; Micah 4:1-3; Ezek 17:22-24; 47:1-9; Mk 4:26-29
Preface
Isa 65:17-23 is passage that most refutes amil.
Introduction
Church fathers
• Amil: Hermas, Polycarp, Clement of Rome, Ignatius
• Premil: Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian
• Postmil: Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Augustine (maybe), Calvin (maybe), several Puritans
Interpretation
"God's Law is the standard of justice for all areas of life, including criminal penology (if supported by careful exegesis of the text of each penal sanction and subject to New Testament controls). We may legitimately deduce this from the Romans 12-13 passage." See also Heb 2:2; Rom 7:12; 1 Tim 1:8-11.
Matt 24:4-33 has been fulfilled. When Jesus spoke of "this generation," He meant the generation He was speaking to. When He spoke of "that day," He spoke of future 2nd Advent.
Most of Rev 4-19 has ben fulfilled, seen by time indicators in Rev 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10.
Exposition
Prophecies of interadvental age
Several passages contain prophecies in appropriate to eternal state, and must refer to interadvental age (time between Christ's 1st and 2nd comings):
• Overcoming of active opposition to Kingdom (Psa 72:4, 9; Isa 11:4, 13-14; Mic 4:3)
• Birth and aging (Psa 22:30-31); Isa 65:20; Zech 8:3-5)
• Conversions (Psa 72:27)
• Death (Ps 22:29; 72:14; Isa 65:20)
• Sin (Isa 65:20; Zech 14:17-19)
• Suffering (Psa 22:29; 72:2, 13, 17)
• National distinctions and interaction (Psa 72:10-11, 17; Isa 2:2-4; Zech 14:16-17)
When Jesus prophesied His coming to judge (Matt 26:34), He referred to destruction of Jerusalem (Matt 24:2, 15-21; 26:64; cf. Acts 2:16-22, 26-40).
End of time will be a "heat renovation brought about through supernatural intervention." See 2 Thess 1:7ff; 2 Pet 3:10ff.
1 Thess 4:13-18 "refers to the visible, glorious, second advent to conclude history, not an invisible rapture."
At end of time, Earth will be refashioned, renovated, transformed, passing through cleansing fire of judgment (2 Pet 3:13; Psa 78:69; Isa 51:6). Earth will be renewed as our bodies will be (Eph 1:14; Rom 8:19-23).
Specification
In Dan 9, 1st 7 "weeks" (49 yrs) extends to rebuilding of Jerusalem, and next 62 "weeks" (432 yrs) extends to Jesus' baptism. Middle of 70th "week" is Jesus' crucifixion.
Dan 9:26 refers to 70 AD.
"Last days" or "latter days" began at Christ's 1st advent (Heb 1:1-2). "End of the ages" came during apostolic era (1 Cor 10:11). "The last day" is resurrection and judgment at tend of history (John 6:29; 11:24; 12:48).
Before last day there will be perilous times (2 Tim 3:1) and mockery (2 Pet 3:3).
1,000 yrs (Rev 21:1-6) began at Christ's 1st advent and symbolizes an extensive, complete, perfect period of time.
"This generation" (Mt 24:34) refers to Jesus' contemporaries. In Matt, "generation" ("genea") only refers to a contemporary generation, and "this generation" refers to generation living at Jesus' time. Mt 23:36 clearly speaks of Jesus' contemporaries.
Mt 24:1-35 is about 70 AD, for which Jesus tells signs to watch for. Mt 24:36 - 25:46 is about 2nd advent, and Jesus says there will be no signs.
"World" often refers to Roman Empire (Luke, Acts).
Abomination of desolation (Mt 24:15) was Titus' attack in 70 AD.
Great tribulation (Mt 24:21) was 70 AD. Jesus used apocalyptic hyperbole to emphasize magnitude of covenantal transformation, not death toll.
Astronomical signs (Mt 24:29-30) are common apocalyptic language for collapse of nations (Isa, Jer, Joel, Ezek).
Ezekiel's temple vision
• Symmetry portrays perfection of God's plan.
• Detail of rites indicates centrality of worship in New Covenant era.
• Central idea points to presence of God with His people.
• Waters of life from temple represent life-giving operation of Holy Spirit.
• Allocation of duties and land indicate duties and privileges of God's people in future.
Isa 65:17-25 refers to full extent of gospel transformation of society prior to 2nd advent; it speaks of birth, aging, death, time, sin, curse.
Little horn in Daniel, man of sin/lawlessness in 2 Thess 2, and beast in Rev 13 aren't called Antichrist, and aren't.
John corrects misunderstandings about Antichrist, teaching that antichrist is a movement, not an individual (1 Jn 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; 2 Jn 7), and present, not future (1 Jn 4:3; 2:18).
Revelation
Beast of Rev was present in John's day (Rev 1:1, 4, 11; 2-3). Best represents a kingdom (Roman Empire - Rev 17:9) and leader of that kingdom (Nero) who persecuted Christians for 42 months (Rev 13:5, 7).
Harlot of Rev 17 is 1st-century Jerusalem.
"Falling away" of 2 Thess 2 probably refers to Jewish apostasy/rebellion against Rom. Man of lawlessness/sin is Nero. "Mystery of lawlessness" is Roman imperial line transforming into a persecuting power. Destruction of lawless one is death of Nero in 68 AD during Jewish War, when Christ came in judgment on Jerusalem.
John wrote to particular churches about their circumstances, and message of Rev must be relevant to them, not only to Christians thousands of years later.
If John didn't expect the events to occur soon, "What words could John have used to express such? How could he have said it more plainly?"
Christ's coming on the clouds (Rev 1:7) refers to Jewish War (67-70 AD). In OT, God came in judgment several times (Ps 18:7-15; 104:3; Isa 19:1; Joel 2:1-2). Christ's coming was to be witnessed by those who pierced Him (His 1st-century crucifiers). Great tribulation (Rev 7:14) is focused on Judea (Mt 24:16, 21).
White horse (6:1-2) is Roman army attacking Jerusalem. It can't be Christ because He's the one opening the seals, and the living creatures command the white horse.
6th seal (6:12-17) represents fall of Israel's government.
Angels holding back destruction (Rev 7:1-8) are distraction of Vespasian by Roman Civil Wars, allowing Christians to escape Jerusalem.
1st 4 trumpets of 7th seal (Rev 8) are natural disasters in 1st century.
5th trumpet (Rev 9) is final siege of Jerusalem by Titus, which drove Jews mad.
6th trumpet is Roman reinforcements.
42 mos (Rev 11:2-3) is length of Jewish War.
2 prophets are probably Christians who remained in Jerusalem to testify against it.
1st beast's deadly wound (Rev 13) suggests Rome's revival after Civil Wars.
2nd beast is probably Gessius Florus who caused Jewish War.
Beast's 7 heads (Rev 17:9) are 1st 7 Roman emperors, Nero being 6th. 10 horns are probably 10 major Roman provinces. Christ destroyed beast (Nero) (Rev 19:11-21).
Binding of Satan (Rev 20) began during Christ's ministry and continues throughout Christian era (figurative millennium), except for brief period just before 2nd advent (Rev 20:2-9).
1st resurrection (Rev 20:5) is spiritual rebirth (regeneration). Rest of the dead are unregenerate. 2nd death is Hell, after Judgment Day.
New Creation/Jerusalem began in 1st century and continues into eternity in its ultimate consummation. Destroyed Jerusalem (Rev 19) is immediately replaced by New Jerusalem (Rev 20-22). Isa 65:17-25 describes New Creation experiencing sin, aging, death.
Objection
The Bible speaks of many being saved (Mt 8:11; Rev 7;9; Isa 2:2-4; Mic 4:1-4). Mt 7:13-14 means few at Christ's time were following Him, and He was challenging disciples to follow Him.
Lk 18:8 is Christ urging disciples to endure in prayer through troublesome times in 1st century; it doesn't speak about end of time.
2 Tim 3:1-4, 13 is about things Timothy would have to endure.
Notes
Postmil proof texts: Ps 2; 22; 72; 110; Isa 2:1-4; 9:6-7; 11:9; Mt 13; 28:19; 1 Cor 15:20-28; Micah 4:1-3; Ezek 17:22-24; 47:1-9; Mk 4:26-29
Preface
Isa 65:17-23 is passage that most refutes amil.
Introduction
Church fathers
• Amil: Hermas, Polycarp, Clement of Rome, Ignatius
• Premil: Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian
• Postmil: Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Augustine (maybe), Calvin (maybe), several Puritans
Interpretation
"God's Law is the standard of justice for all areas of life, including criminal penology (if supported by careful exegesis of the text of each penal sanction and subject to New Testament controls). We may legitimately deduce this from the Romans 12-13 passage." See also Heb 2:2; Rom 7:12; 1 Tim 1:8-11.
Matt 24:4-33 has been fulfilled. When Jesus spoke of "this generation," He meant the generation He was speaking to. When He spoke of "that day," He spoke of future 2nd Advent.
Most of Rev 4-19 has ben fulfilled, seen by time indicators in Rev 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10.
Exposition
Prophecies of interadvental age
Several passages contain prophecies in appropriate to eternal state, and must refer to interadvental age (time between Christ's 1st and 2nd comings):
• Overcoming of active opposition to Kingdom (Psa 72:4, 9; Isa 11:4, 13-14; Mic 4:3)
• Birth and aging (Psa 22:30-31); Isa 65:20; Zech 8:3-5)
• Conversions (Psa 72:27)
• Death (Ps 22:29; 72:14; Isa 65:20)
• Sin (Isa 65:20; Zech 14:17-19)
• Suffering (Psa 22:29; 72:2, 13, 17)
• National distinctions and interaction (Psa 72:10-11, 17; Isa 2:2-4; Zech 14:16-17)
When Jesus prophesied His coming to judge (Matt 26:34), He referred to destruction of Jerusalem (Matt 24:2, 15-21; 26:64; cf. Acts 2:16-22, 26-40).
End of time will be a "heat renovation brought about through supernatural intervention." See 2 Thess 1:7ff; 2 Pet 3:10ff.
1 Thess 4:13-18 "refers to the visible, glorious, second advent to conclude history, not an invisible rapture."
At end of time, Earth will be refashioned, renovated, transformed, passing through cleansing fire of judgment (2 Pet 3:13; Psa 78:69; Isa 51:6). Earth will be renewed as our bodies will be (Eph 1:14; Rom 8:19-23).
Specification
In Dan 9, 1st 7 "weeks" (49 yrs) extends to rebuilding of Jerusalem, and next 62 "weeks" (432 yrs) extends to Jesus' baptism. Middle of 70th "week" is Jesus' crucifixion.
Dan 9:26 refers to 70 AD.
"Last days" or "latter days" began at Christ's 1st advent (Heb 1:1-2). "End of the ages" came during apostolic era (1 Cor 10:11). "The last day" is resurrection and judgment at tend of history (John 6:29; 11:24; 12:48).
Before last day there will be perilous times (2 Tim 3:1) and mockery (2 Pet 3:3).
1,000 yrs (Rev 21:1-6) began at Christ's 1st advent and symbolizes an extensive, complete, perfect period of time.
"This generation" (Mt 24:34) refers to Jesus' contemporaries. In Matt, "generation" ("genea") only refers to a contemporary generation, and "this generation" refers to generation living at Jesus' time. Mt 23:36 clearly speaks of Jesus' contemporaries.
Mt 24:1-35 is about 70 AD, for which Jesus tells signs to watch for. Mt 24:36 - 25:46 is about 2nd advent, and Jesus says there will be no signs.
"World" often refers to Roman Empire (Luke, Acts).
Abomination of desolation (Mt 24:15) was Titus' attack in 70 AD.
Great tribulation (Mt 24:21) was 70 AD. Jesus used apocalyptic hyperbole to emphasize magnitude of covenantal transformation, not death toll.
Astronomical signs (Mt 24:29-30) are common apocalyptic language for collapse of nations (Isa, Jer, Joel, Ezek).
Ezekiel's temple vision
• Symmetry portrays perfection of God's plan.
• Detail of rites indicates centrality of worship in New Covenant era.
• Central idea points to presence of God with His people.
• Waters of life from temple represent life-giving operation of Holy Spirit.
• Allocation of duties and land indicate duties and privileges of God's people in future.
Isa 65:17-25 refers to full extent of gospel transformation of society prior to 2nd advent; it speaks of birth, aging, death, time, sin, curse.
Little horn in Daniel, man of sin/lawlessness in 2 Thess 2, and beast in Rev 13 aren't called Antichrist, and aren't.
John corrects misunderstandings about Antichrist, teaching that antichrist is a movement, not an individual (1 Jn 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; 2 Jn 7), and present, not future (1 Jn 4:3; 2:18).
Revelation
Beast of Rev was present in John's day (Rev 1:1, 4, 11; 2-3). Best represents a kingdom (Roman Empire - Rev 17:9) and leader of that kingdom (Nero) who persecuted Christians for 42 months (Rev 13:5, 7).
Harlot of Rev 17 is 1st-century Jerusalem.
"Falling away" of 2 Thess 2 probably refers to Jewish apostasy/rebellion against Rom. Man of lawlessness/sin is Nero. "Mystery of lawlessness" is Roman imperial line transforming into a persecuting power. Destruction of lawless one is death of Nero in 68 AD during Jewish War, when Christ came in judgment on Jerusalem.
John wrote to particular churches about their circumstances, and message of Rev must be relevant to them, not only to Christians thousands of years later.
If John didn't expect the events to occur soon, "What words could John have used to express such? How could he have said it more plainly?"
Christ's coming on the clouds (Rev 1:7) refers to Jewish War (67-70 AD). In OT, God came in judgment several times (Ps 18:7-15; 104:3; Isa 19:1; Joel 2:1-2). Christ's coming was to be witnessed by those who pierced Him (His 1st-century crucifiers). Great tribulation (Rev 7:14) is focused on Judea (Mt 24:16, 21).
White horse (6:1-2) is Roman army attacking Jerusalem. It can't be Christ because He's the one opening the seals, and the living creatures command the white horse.
6th seal (6:12-17) represents fall of Israel's government.
Angels holding back destruction (Rev 7:1-8) are distraction of Vespasian by Roman Civil Wars, allowing Christians to escape Jerusalem.
1st 4 trumpets of 7th seal (Rev 8) are natural disasters in 1st century.
5th trumpet (Rev 9) is final siege of Jerusalem by Titus, which drove Jews mad.
6th trumpet is Roman reinforcements.
42 mos (Rev 11:2-3) is length of Jewish War.
2 prophets are probably Christians who remained in Jerusalem to testify against it.
1st beast's deadly wound (Rev 13) suggests Rome's revival after Civil Wars.
2nd beast is probably Gessius Florus who caused Jewish War.
Beast's 7 heads (Rev 17:9) are 1st 7 Roman emperors, Nero being 6th. 10 horns are probably 10 major Roman provinces. Christ destroyed beast (Nero) (Rev 19:11-21).
Binding of Satan (Rev 20) began during Christ's ministry and continues throughout Christian era (figurative millennium), except for brief period just before 2nd advent (Rev 20:2-9).
1st resurrection (Rev 20:5) is spiritual rebirth (regeneration). Rest of the dead are unregenerate. 2nd death is Hell, after Judgment Day.
New Creation/Jerusalem began in 1st century and continues into eternity in its ultimate consummation. Destroyed Jerusalem (Rev 19) is immediately replaced by New Jerusalem (Rev 20-22). Isa 65:17-25 describes New Creation experiencing sin, aging, death.
Objection
The Bible speaks of many being saved (Mt 8:11; Rev 7;9; Isa 2:2-4; Mic 4:1-4). Mt 7:13-14 means few at Christ's time were following Him, and He was challenging disciples to follow Him.
Lk 18:8 is Christ urging disciples to endure in prayer through troublesome times in 1st century; it doesn't speak about end of time.
2 Tim 3:1-4, 13 is about things Timothy would have to endure.
The postmillennial hope is in the gospel of God's sovereign redemptive grace through the Lord Jesus Christ. The postmillennialist does not long for just any old worldly peace or for mere materialistic prosperity, devoid of evangelistic success, Christian discipleship, biblical righteousness, and true holiness. Such an empty peace would not serve as a sign of kingdom victory, for it is a gospel kingdom that we promote, which entails the widespread influence of the gospel.
February 25, 2009
Gentry is a great scholar with an eye for the details in the text. I've read this book twice now. Gentry presents a very clear and precise case for the postmillennial position. May be a little to much for those not very well attuned to eschatological debates. Maybe start with K. Mathison's book for a much more basic intro. to postmillennial hermeneutics and theology.
October 11, 2011
By far the most comprehensive book I've read on postmillennial eschatology. Gentry is very thorough and answers many misconceptions and misinterpretations which surround this hopeful and helpful biblical doctrine concerning the end times. Christ is the LORD!
Many thanks to the Nicene Council dot com for making this available for free as a ebook! nicenecouncil.com/
Many thanks to the Nicene Council dot com for making this available for free as a ebook! nicenecouncil.com/
August 2, 2021
One of the best books I've ever read. Every Christian needs to read this book and come face to face with these ideas. Not only is the book well-written, thorough, and rhetorically persuasive, but it's also very scripturally sound, exegetically secure, and theologically profound. Eschatology matters, and this eschatology speaks to the truth of God's mission on Earth.
June 1, 2013
This book is nothing short of awesome. Gentry does a fine job of exegeting postmillennialism and demolishing the frameworks of opposing viewpoints. Along the way he also gives rock solid support for theonomy and dismantles dispensationalism. I would highly recommend this book.
August 14, 2015
Great book..Converted me. :)
April 26, 2024
This is a review of the third edition.
I highly recommend He Shall Have Dominion to anyone wanting to better understand postmillennial eschatology. Dr. Gentry demonstrates eschatological systems are whole-Bible theologies; eschatology is vital in properly comprehending Scripture’s redemptive narrative and how God brings His saving designs to completion.
Among the 4 common eschatological systems proposed throughout Church history, postmillennialism is uniquely optimistic in the Spirit causing gospel victory through the Church’s obedience to the Great Commission in the current Church age. Dr. Gentry’s explanation of how this gospel victory is introduced in Creation, anticipated by the Old Testament, realized in Christ’s incarnation and earthly ministry, expanded following His ascension to the heavenly Throne, and consummated at His return is satisfying.
Coming from a dispensationalist upbringing, I also appreciated the treatment of dispensational premillennialism throughout the book, along with the appendix concerning hyper/full preterism. Even though I adopted postmillennialism before I started reading, I was helped by Dr. Gentry’s explanation of various eschatologically significant events and characters, such as Daniel 9’s Seventy Weeks and the Antichrist, and the inclusion and handling of common objections to postmillennialism.
Overall, I loved meditating on the glorious gospel hope as presented by postmillennialism while reading He Shall Have Dominion, and I am more convinced this is the teaching of Scripture now than I was before reading it.
I highly recommend He Shall Have Dominion to anyone wanting to better understand postmillennial eschatology. Dr. Gentry demonstrates eschatological systems are whole-Bible theologies; eschatology is vital in properly comprehending Scripture’s redemptive narrative and how God brings His saving designs to completion.
Among the 4 common eschatological systems proposed throughout Church history, postmillennialism is uniquely optimistic in the Spirit causing gospel victory through the Church’s obedience to the Great Commission in the current Church age. Dr. Gentry’s explanation of how this gospel victory is introduced in Creation, anticipated by the Old Testament, realized in Christ’s incarnation and earthly ministry, expanded following His ascension to the heavenly Throne, and consummated at His return is satisfying.
Coming from a dispensationalist upbringing, I also appreciated the treatment of dispensational premillennialism throughout the book, along with the appendix concerning hyper/full preterism. Even though I adopted postmillennialism before I started reading, I was helped by Dr. Gentry’s explanation of various eschatologically significant events and characters, such as Daniel 9’s Seventy Weeks and the Antichrist, and the inclusion and handling of common objections to postmillennialism.
Overall, I loved meditating on the glorious gospel hope as presented by postmillennialism while reading He Shall Have Dominion, and I am more convinced this is the teaching of Scripture now than I was before reading it.
April 12, 2019
Ce livre est un très bon point d'entrée dans le postmillénarisme, mais n'est pas un point final pour autant (contrairement à ce que dit Gary North dans sa préface trop enthousiaste). Kenneth Gentry a eu beaucoup d'intelligence éditoriale dans le plan et l'arrangement de son livre, et globalement le livre remplit bien ses objectifs: servir d'introduction et de défense générale au postmillénarisme, non pas complète, mais satisfaisante.
Il y a un bon équilibre entre exposition et réfutation, et dans l'ensemble je suis très satisfait de ce livre. Il reste cependant des points de curiosité que j'ai très envie d'explorer davantage, et sur lequel j'ai encore des questions: 1. L'exégèse postmill de l'apocalypse (il en dit à la fois trop et pas assez) 2. La vision de la Loi Civile de Moïse propre à la théonomie (et qui sent le néo-calvinisme) Heureusement, Kenneth Gentry y joint une excellent biographie qui est très utile pour ceux qui se posent des questions supplémentaires. Je suis donc satisfait aussi sur ce point.
Il en ressort que je recommande chaudement ce livre à tous ceux qui veulent savoir ce qu'est le postmillénarisme. Pour ma part, après la lecture je peux dire: je suis postmillénariste.
Il y a un bon équilibre entre exposition et réfutation, et dans l'ensemble je suis très satisfait de ce livre. Il reste cependant des points de curiosité que j'ai très envie d'explorer davantage, et sur lequel j'ai encore des questions: 1. L'exégèse postmill de l'apocalypse (il en dit à la fois trop et pas assez) 2. La vision de la Loi Civile de Moïse propre à la théonomie (et qui sent le néo-calvinisme) Heureusement, Kenneth Gentry y joint une excellent biographie qui est très utile pour ceux qui se posent des questions supplémentaires. Je suis donc satisfait aussi sur ce point.
Il en ressort que je recommande chaudement ce livre à tous ceux qui veulent savoir ce qu'est le postmillénarisme. Pour ma part, après la lecture je peux dire: je suis postmillénariste.
December 26, 2018
This work handles explicitly the question of eschatology, and focuses on the biblical theological evidence for postmillennialism, as well as gives preterist alternatives for so-called "end times" verses. Those who are wondering how this eschatology bleeds down into one's approach to politics will have to go elsewhere. Along these lines, one small aesthetic objection I have for Gentry is his emphasis on the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom. He is adamant that this spiritual kingdom has political implications, but he was probably overstating that point to avoid triggering discussions of theonomy/the role of the civil magistrate.
Overall, it is a must-read overall positive construction for postmillennialism. I don't agree with all of his interpretations of the texts he cited, but he definitely lays out the basic argument for the position and handily critiques the others (mostly dispensational premillennialism, but the others get their fair bash). You are left at the end recognizing that the objections to an optimistic eschatology are more based upon naivety and tradition than the Bible itself.
Overall, it is a must-read overall positive construction for postmillennialism. I don't agree with all of his interpretations of the texts he cited, but he definitely lays out the basic argument for the position and handily critiques the others (mostly dispensational premillennialism, but the others get their fair bash). You are left at the end recognizing that the objections to an optimistic eschatology are more based upon naivety and tradition than the Bible itself.
February 1, 2021
He Shall Have Dominion is one of the clearest expositions of the Bible’s teaching on eschatology and all that it touches that I have ever read—and I do have a MA in Theology so I’ve read many expositions of Scripture. Gentry carefully builds a scriptural case for believing in the ultimate success of the Gospel. And that is what sets this teaching apart from others: Does the Scripture teach that the Church with the Gospel will ultimately fail only to be rescued from oblivion by Christ into the eternal state, or do the Scriptures expect and teach that the Great Commission will be completed and “the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea” Isa. 11:9? I do believe it teaches the latter.
This book is a great pattern for a systematic teaching of the Bible, bringing Scripture to explain Scripture. But the book is not written in technical terms that only scholars can appreciate. He Shall Have Dominion is written for the layman, the sincere Christian who wants to know what the Scriptures teach on the issue of eschatology. And Gentry writes in so interesting a manner that I could hardly put it down. Highly recommended!
This book is a great pattern for a systematic teaching of the Bible, bringing Scripture to explain Scripture. But the book is not written in technical terms that only scholars can appreciate. He Shall Have Dominion is written for the layman, the sincere Christian who wants to know what the Scriptures teach on the issue of eschatology. And Gentry writes in so interesting a manner that I could hardly put it down. Highly recommended!
March 29, 2024
This is a book I think that all christian students should read. It is a long and hard, but very worth-it read. He critiques all the golden cows of my baptist childhood, and I did not enjoy it at first because of that. However, as I continued to read I discovered that he was absolutely correct on many points. I still disagree on some minor things, but this book solidly convinced me of many things - such as the postmillenial return of Christ, the victory of the gospel in history, and the exegetical impossibility of premillenialism (and especially dispensationalism).
The arguments are very thorough and biblically-backed.
The arguments are very thorough and biblically-backed.
September 6, 2019
Eschatology matters. The way we view the world going effects the way we live our lives today. Ken Gentry presents a victorious gospel, a reigning Christ, and a hopeful future that is as easy to read as this topic can be. Gentry is a careful and faithful exegete of Scripture and that is what he offers in this work. A good theological work will leave the reader not in a confusing pile of information, but in a spirit of doxology to our great God. This book did that for me. I do recommend.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews