PMW 2025-003 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is my second article on biblical objections to postmillennialism. Biblical objections are serious. If they are based on a proper understanding of the biblical passage being brought forward. Unfortunately, attempts to undermine postmillennial using Scripture passages also fails for lack of proper evidence. I must be brief, but I will consider two passages frequently thrown against the postmillennial hope.

Luke 18:8

“I tell you that He will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?”

Regarding this verse dispensationalists Wayne House and Thomas Ice argue that: “This is ‘an inferential question to which a negative answer is expected.’ So this passage is saying that at the second coming Christ will not find, literally, ‘the faith’ upon the earth.” Were this the case, postmillennialism would certainly be mistaken. How could Christians be optimistic if the entire Christian faith is prophetically determined to disappear from the earth? Unfortunately for the pessimistic readings of this passage, this is not the case as we may see from the following observations:

This objection misses Christ’s point. This passage is not dealing with Christianity’s future existence at all. In the context, the Lord is dealing with the matter of fervent prayer. In the Greek “faith” has a definite article before it. As a result it refers to the faith already mentioned: the faith of the praying widow in Christ’s parable: “Then He spoke a parable to them, that men always ought to pray and not lose heart” (Luke 18:1). Christ’s teaching is not dealing with the question as to whether or not Christianity will exist in the future. Rather it is focusing on the question: Will Christians still be persevering in prayer? But there is more.

Tongues-speaking: Meaning, Purpose, and Cessation

by Ken Gentry

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

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

This objection misconstrues Christ’s grammar. We must note that, contrary to House and Ice, the form of Christ’s question does not expect a “negative answer.” The Funk-Blass-Debrunner Greek grammar notes that the implied answer to the question is “ambiguous,” because the Greek word used here (ara) implies only “a tone of suspense or impatience in interrogation.”

This objection misunderstands Christ’s goal. The Lord appears to be focusing on his imminent coming in judgment upon Israel, not his distant second advent at the end of history. Jesus clearly speaks of a soon-coming vindication of his people: “I tell you that He will avenge them speedily” (Luke 18:8a; cp. Rev 1:1; 6:9–10). He is urging his disciples to endure in prayer through the troublesome times coming upon them. In fact, the preceding context of Luke 18 speaks of Jerusalem’s approaching destruction (Luke 17:22–37).

This objection overlooks Christ’s implication. In the final analysis, no evangelical millennial view supposes that absolutely no faith will exist on the earth at the Lord’s return. Yet, to read the postmillennial objectors, Luke 18:8 supposedly teaches that Christianity will be totally and absolutely dead at his return.

Unto You and Your Children
By Larry E. Ball

This book defines and illustrates the covenant as it appears in the Bible, and then demonstrates how the covenant affects our children as we raise them in the church. It also develops a justification for infant (covenant) baptism.

However, before the writer examines the idea of the covenant in the Bible, he first covers a number of other topics that a person needs to understand before he can understand the covenant. He spends at least one chapter revisiting the gospel. What is the gospel? He then establishes the meaning of such words as regeneration, conversion, election, and salvation. He is convinced that before a person can properly understand the covenant and covenant baptism there must be some agreement on the definition of these other terms.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

2 Timothy 3:1–4, 13

“Realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God. . . . But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”

A quick reading of Paul’s last epistle seems to undermine the postmillennial hope. Amillennialist Herman Hoekema references this passage and declares: “the postmillennial expectation of a future golden age before Christ’s return does not do justice to the continuing tension in the history of the world between the kingdom of God and the forces of evil.” How may the postmillennialist respond to this powerful objection?

This objection forgets Paul’s historical context. As with most of his epistles, Paul’s letter is an occasional epistle. That is, it is dealing with a particular historical occasion in the first century. He is speaking of things that his associate Timothy (2 Tim 1:2) will be facing and enduring (2 Tim 3:10–14). He is not prophesying about all future expectations for the faith. The letter is addressed to Timothy (2 Tim 1:1–6) about circumstances he and Paul are facing (cf. 2 Tim 1:13–15; 4:1), which will require spiritual strength on Timothy’s part (2 Tim 2:1–2, 7, 14; 4:5).

This objection misunderstands the meaning of “the last days.” In the New Testament the “last days” cover the entire period from the first coming of Christ until his second coming. We see this in several places. Peter’s Pentecostal sermon clearly applies the “last days” concept to the first century when he explains the outburst of tongues-speaking: “This is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel: In the last days….” (Acts 2:16–17a; see discussion of Isa 2 in ch 3 above). Thus, this is not declaring what the final future, the very last day of earth will be like. This is important when we note that:

This objection misinterprets the text itself. The text does not demand constant bad times lie in the future. Paul is stating that difficult “times” (kairoi) will come during the last days (the period between the first and second advents). The Greek term Paul employs here is a plural, kairoi, which indicates “seasons.” It is erroneous to read this reference to some “seasons” of difficulty as if it said all seasons will be difficult. Postmillennial gradualism expects that “seasons” of perilous times will punctuate history. We do not believe that Paul is saying that this is all that we can expect in history.

When Shall These Things Be?
(ed. by Keith Mathison)
A Reformed response to the aberrant HyperPreterist theolgy.
Gentry’s chapter critiques HyperPreterism from an historical and creedal perspective.
See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

This objection misapplies Paul’s concern. This passage does expect an accelerating moral collapse as history unfolds. Citing 2 Timothy 3:13 in the debate leaves the unwarranted impression that things shall irrevocably become worse and worse in history. But the verse actually says: “evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.” Paul is speaking of specific evil men becoming ethically worse, not more and more evil men becoming increasingly dominant. He is speaking of their progressive personal degeneration, i.e., the progressive anti-sanctification of particular evil men. He says absolutely nothing about an increase in the number and power of such evil men.

This objection overlooks Paul’s optimism. Paul balances his warning about evil men with an encouraging note of optimism. As a good postmillennialist, Paul comforts Timothy by stating that these evil men “will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all” (2 Tim 3:9). Since God places limits on those evil-doers, Paul speaks as a man who expects victory. How different from the modern church’s widespread, pessimistic conception of the progressive, limitless power of evil in our day. Paul conceives of the ultimate, long term impotence of evil in history.

Conclusion

In the past few articles, I have surveyed a few of the leading objections to postmillennialism. I have (perhaps too briefly!) looked at practical, doctrinal, and biblical objections. [1] We noted that some verses do seem to contradict the optimistic outlook of postmillennialism. But when we looked more carefully at these passages, we saw that they present no difficulty to postmillennialism.

Postmillennialism is built up from Scripture. And because of the Scripture’s integrity, it does not contradict itself. The postmillennialist gladly compares Scripture with Scripture to see whether these things are so (Acts 17:11).

NOTES

1. I devote three who chapters to considering these and other objections to postmillennialism in my 600 page He Shall Have Dominion.

2. Oops. I promised “Notes” in the plural. So I am adding this in order to avoid being caught in a lie with only one note.

Click on the following images for more information on these studies: