HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (1)

PMW 2018-100 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Hyper-preterism is an heretical view of eschatology that denies the historic, corporate, public, universal, systematic Christian faith. (Don’t mention this to them, though, for they want by themselves to determine what the church of our Lord Jesus Christ should believe.)

Specifically, the four leading (but not only!) Hyper-preterist errors involve their denying important biblical doctrines:

1. They deny a future, physical resurrection of all men. Some even deny the continuance of Christ’s physical resurrection after he left the earth!

2. They deny a future, visible, glorious, physical return of Christ.

3. They deny a future, universal, final great judgment of all men.

4. They deny a future end to temporal history and the beginning of the final, physical, consummate, reconstructed new creation order (which is anticipated in the spiritual new creation existing now in the gospel, 2 Cor. 5:17). In their view, history continues forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever. Thus, God must forever endure a sinful universe without any final judgment and removal of sin. God’s created order will continue in a sinful estate.

Thus, this contemporary Internet movement of Hyper-preterists is attempting to replace the historic, universal Christian view with their new innovations in doctrine created by untrained, self-proclaimed “theologians.” This small band of brothers is attempting to upend historical Christianity after 2000 years so that they can replace it with a altogether new construct. Fortunately, their numbers are small — and apparently declining. In this, Hyper-preterism is unlike Mormonism that presented an altogether new (and bizarre!) theology and yet has somehow grown to remarkable proportions — even more than the Jehovah’s Witnesses (with their confused eschatology) and the Church of Scientology (at least they admit they were founded by a science-fiction writer).


Have We Missed the Second Coming:have-we-missed-the-second-coming
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


A part of the lure of Hyper-preterism is its proud, pompous, pulpit-pounding pummeling of orthodox believers who “foolishly” hold to historic Christian theology. Unfortunately, they too often misunderstand and therefore misrepresent the facts. In this brief study I will present just a few illustrations of their overzealous confidence regarding some of my work. This is not by way of offering a theological or exegetical refutation (I offer that elsewhere, and will be offering more in my forthcoming commentary on Matthew 21–25). Rather, in this and my next two posts, I will simply demonstrate a few of their confused, boastful misunderstandings.

Gentry’s Peculiar Errors?

To begin, I must note that I believe Jesus refers to both the AD 70 destruction of the temple in Olivet’s opening section (Matt. 24:4–35) and the Second Coming and the Final Judgment in its latter section (Matt. 24:36–25:45). The Lord theologically links these two, even while historically separating them. That is, the AD 70 judgment of the temple is a local preview of the universal final judgment involved in Christ’s Second Coming.

The Olivet Discourse Made Easy


Olivet Discourse Made Easy (by Ken Gentry)

Verse-by-verse analysis of Christ’s teaching on Jerusalem’s destruction in Matt 24. Show the great tribulation is past, having occurred in AD 70.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com


For instance, one Hyper-preterist writer interacts with my understanding of the Olivet Discourse by stating: “But what of [Matthew 24] verse 35 which addresses the ‘heaven and earth’ passing away? Surely that is referring to the end of planet earth and a ‘transition’ to the physical and final Second Coming event described for us in Matthew 24:35—25:31-46 (per Postmillennialist Kenneth Gentry)?”

Actually, my argument does not involve this use of Matt. 24:35. As I note in several places, Jesus’ statement in v. 35 is simply affirming the certainty of his prophetic word: it is more stable than the universe. Verse 35 is closing Christ’s opening prophecy of AD 70, whereas the transition to the Second Advent/Final Judgment begins at v. 36. There Jesus provides a transitional introduction to the second portion of his Olivet Discourse: “But of that day and hour,” etc.

Not only so, but this same writer leaves his readers with a false impression: that I am a lone innovator who is stumbling along all by myself. Yet the understanding of Matt. 24:36 (and/or its counterpart in Mark 13:32) as opening the transition in the Discourse, is not “per … Gentry.” The writer speaks in the same posting of the “Partial Preterist division theories of Kenneth Gentry” and of “his artificial division theory of Matthew 24-25.” But I have picked up my understanding from others. These are not my views, personally created by me. Those who follow my exegesis are not picking up a distinctive view that I made up.

In my next posting, I will document my sources. Stay tuned.


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

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


Advertisements

Tagged:

4 thoughts on “HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (1)

  1. Gordon Hull. December 14, 2018 at 11:22 am

    Thanks for this article re hyperpreterism, these people are selling a lot of books over here, i myself have many of them. A clear voice refuting their errors is needed and i cant hear many of them. I look forward to your next posts.

  2. William L. Vincent December 14, 2018 at 2:26 pm

    Greetings. I am a former FP and present tense Eastern Orthodox Christian. I, of course, agree with the overall tenor of what you present. I would like to offer something for your consideration, however. I have for a long time agreed with your approach to the Olivet discourse. Recently I have begun to rethink that position. This is based on a particular phrase in vs 29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days…”

    When I look at the preceding passages, they are not describing the fall of Jerusalem, they are describing the tribulation that Christians would endure.

  3. MyUniversalProfileIDr December 15, 2018 at 9:58 pm

    Matthew 24:35 clearly transitions from the coming judgement of Jerusalem, to the final judgement at the end of earth time.

    The question then is whether He transitions back to the Jerusalem judgement, or continues on the new topic, in verses 36+

    As nothing would outrank final judgement, and in the absence of any obvious re-transition time statements, plausibly the new topic remains final judgement

  4. MyUniversalProfileID December 17, 2018 at 11:24 pm

    “Those days” in verse 29 = “Those days” in verse 22

    And verse 22 is clearly referring to the Abomination of Desolation in verses 15-21

    Note verse 21, “days of great distress”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: