PMW 2025-020 by Robert L. Dabney

Gentry note:

R. L. Dabney (1820–98) was a Reformed Presbyterian theologian who served as professor of systematic theology ot Union Theological Seminary (back when it believed something in particular), then he served as Professor of Mental and Moral Philosophy at the University of Texas. This excerpt below is from pp. 832–34 of his Lectures in Systematic Theology. Please note: I have slightly tweaked some of his punctuation, Roman numerals, and nineteenth century style without changing his meaning.

True Meaning of Resurrection
In Scripture the image of a resurrection, anastasis, is a undoubtedly used sometimes in a figurative sense, to describe regeneration (John 5:25; Eph. 5:14). And sometimes to speak of restoration from calamity and captivity to prosperity and joy (Ezek. 37:12: Isa. 26:19). But it is equally certain that the words are intended to be used in a literal sense, of the restoration of the same body that dies to life, by its reunion to the soul. This then is the doctrine. For when the resurrection of the dead (nekron), of those that are in their graves, of those that sleep in the dust of the earth, is declared, the sense is unequivocal. Without at this time particularizing Scripture proofs, we assert that they mean to describe a bodily existence as literally as when they speak of man’s soul in in this life, as residing in a body. And this, though wonderfully changed in qualities, is the same body in the proper, honest sense of the word “same,” which the soul laid down at death. This resurrection will embrace all the individuals of the human race, good and bad, except those whose bodies have already passed into heaven, and those of the last generation, who will be alive on the earth at the last trump. But on the bodies of these the resurrection change will pass, though they do not die. The signal of this resurrection is to be the “last trump,” an expression probably taken from the transactions at Sinai (Exo. 19:16, 19; cf. Heb. 12:26), which may, very possibly, be some literal, audible summons, sounded through the whole atmosphere of the world. But the agent will be Christ, by His direct and almighty power, with the Holy Ghost.

Qualities of Resurrection Bodies
The qualities of the resurrection bodies of the saints are described in 1 Corinthians 15:42, 50, with as much particularity, probably, as we can comprehend. Whereas the body is buried in a state of dissolution, it is raised indissoluble, no longer liable to disorganization, by separation of particles. This is either because protected therefrom by the special power of God or by the absence of assailing chemical forces. It is buried, disfigured and loathsome; it will be raised beautiful. Since it is a literal material body that is raised, it is far the most natural to suppose that the glory predicated of it, is literal, material beauty.

Reformed Eschatology in the Writings of Geerhardus Vos
Ed. by Ken Gentry and Bill Boney
This is a collection of several key eschatological studies by the renowned Reformed theologian Geehardus Vos. We have modernized Vos’ grammar and syntax and updated his layout style according to modern publishing conventions (shorter sentences and paragraphs). We did this without changing any of Vos’ arguments.

For more information on this new Vos work or to order it, see:
https://www.kennethgentry.com/reformed-eschatology-in-the-writings-of-geerhardus-vos/

As to its kind, see Matthew 13:43 and Philippians 3:21, with Revelation 1:13–14. Some may think that it is unworthy of God’s redemption to suppose it conferring an advantage so trivial and sensuous as personal beauty. But is not this a remnant of that Gnostic or Neo-Platonic asceticism, which cast off the body itself as too worthless to be an object of redeeming power? We know that sanctified affections now always beautify and ennoble the countenance (see Exo. 34:29–30). And if God did not deem it too trivial for His attention, to clothe the landscape with verdure, to cast every form of nature in lines of grace, to dye the skies with purest azure, and to paint the sun and stars with splendour, in order to gratify the eyes of His children here, we may assume that He will condescend to beautify even the bodies of His saints, in that world where all is made perfect. Next, the body is buried in weakness; it has just given the crowning evidence of feebleness, by yielding to death. It will be raised in immortal vigour, so as to perform its functions with perfect facility, and without fatigue.

And last, it is buried an animal body; i. e., this is the “natural body” character it has hitherto had. The soma psuchikon is unfortunately translated “natural body” in the English version (1 Cor. 15:44). The Apostle here evidently avails himself of the popular Greek distinction, growing out of the currency of Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy, to express his distinction, without meaning to endorse their anthropology.

The soma psuchikon is evidently the body as characterized chiefly by its animal functions. What these are, there can be little doubt, if we keep in mind the established Greek sense of the psuche, viz: the functions of the appetite and sense. Then the soma pneumatikon must mean not a body now material, as the Swedenborgians, etc., claim (a positive contradiction and impossibility), but a body actuated only by processes of intellection and moral affection. For these, Paul’s readers supposed were the proper processes of the pnuema or nous.

But the Apostle in verses 44 and 50, defines his own meaning. To show that “there is an animal body, and a spiritual body.” That it is no fancy nor impossibility, he points to the fact that such have already existed, in the case of Adam and his natural seed, and of Christ. And as we were federally connected, first with Adam, and then with Christ, we bear first the animal body, (Adam’s) and then the spiritual (Christ’s). And Christ’s humanity also, during His humiliation, passed through that first stage, to the second because he assumed all the innocent weaknesses and affections of a literal man.

Our soma pneumatikon, then, is defined to be what Christ’s glorified body now in Heaven is. Complete this definition by what we find in Matthew 22:30. The spiritual body then, is one occupied and actuated only by the spiritual processes of a sanctified soul, but which neither smarts with pain, nor feels fatigue, nor has appetites, nor takes any literal, material supplies therefor.

Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond
(ed. by Darrell Bock)

Presents three views on the millennium: progressive dispensationalist, amillennialist, and reconstructionist postmillennialist viewpoints. Includes separate responses to each view. Ken Gentry provides the postmillennial contribution.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

Resurrection Bodies of Sinners
It seems every way reasonable to suppose that the bodies of the wicked will be raised without the glory or splendour of the saints. Yet they also will be no longer animal bodies, and will be endued with immortal vigour to endure. The Scriptures plainly teach that our resurrection bodies will be the bodies we now have, only modified — that is, that they will be substantially identical. This follows from the divine justice, so far as it prompts God to work a resurrection. For if we have not the very body in which we sinned, when called to judgment, that “every man may receive the things done in the body,” there will be no relevancy in the punishment, so far as it falls on the body.

GOODBIRTH AND THE TWO AGES
I am currently researching a technical study on the concept of the Two Ages in Scripture. This study is not only important for understanding the proper biblical concept of the structure of redemptive history. But it is also absolutely essential for fully grasping the significance of the Disciples’ questions in Matthew 24:3, which spark the Olivet Discourse. This book will be the forerunner to a fuller commentary on the Olivet Discourse in Matthew’s comprehensive presentation. This issue must be dealt with before one can seriously delve into the Discourse itself.

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! https://www.paypal.com/donate/?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4XXFLGKEQU48C&ssrt=1740411591428

The same truth follows from the believer’s union to Christ. If He redeemed our bodies, must they not be the very ones we have here (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:15)? It appears evidently, from Christ’s resurrection, which is the earnest, exemplar, and pledge of ours. For in His case, the body that was raised was the very one that died and was buried. But if, in our case, the body that dies is finally dissipated, and another is reconstructed, there is small resemblance indeed to our Saviour’s resurrection.

This leads us to remark, fourth, that the very words anistimi, anastasis plainly imply the rearing of the same thing that fell — otherwise there is an abuse of language in applying them to a proper creation.

Last, the language of Scripture in Daniel 12:2; John 5:28–29; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 53, 54; 1 Thessalonians 4:16: it is that which is “in the dust of the earth,” “in the mnemeia,” the nekroi, corpses, which is raised. It is “this mortal” which “puts on immortality.” From the days of the Latin Fathers, and their speculative Pagan opposers, certain objections have been pompously raised against such a resurrection, as though it were intrinsically absurd. They may be found reproduced by George Bush on the Resurrection.

To be continued.

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