PMW 2026-077 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
Introduction
I am frequently asked how postmillennialism can stand since Jesus speaks of the narrow gate to salvation. This is certainly a reasonable question, because it is a biblical one.
Inquirers often challenge me: I just can’t imagine this present world becoming a Christian majority at any point, especially in light of Christ’s wide and narrow gates and many being called, but few chosen, etc. I don’t see that at all. Never has the world been a friend of God and I don’t see a future scene like that at all in Scripture.
This is an important question. Let’s consider how we can resolve the theoretical problem.
Complication
This certainly is a popular passage that seems to undermine the postmillennial outlook. These words have long been cited to show the paucity of the number of saved:
Dispensationalist Louis Barbieri writing Dallas Seminary’s Bible Knowledge Commentary (BKC, 2:34) writes: “Even the Lord Jesus acknowledged that few would find the true way, the way that leads to life (i.e., to heaven, in contrast with ruin in hell).”
A. B. Bruce writing in the class Expositor’s Greek Testament (1:132) comments on our passage: “The passage itself contains no clue to the right way except that it is the way of the few.”
In his controversial The Gospel According to Jesus, well-respected dispensationalist pastor John MacArthur (191) stated that there cannot be a billion Christians in the world because “such figures certainly do not square with what Jesus said about many on the broad road and few on the narrow.”
He Shall Have Dominion
(paperback by Kenneth Gentry)
A classic, thorough explanation and defense of postmillennialism (600+ pages). Complete with several chapters answering specific objections.
See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com
Reformed amillennialist scholar Herman Hanko agrees: “There are several passages in the scriptures which refer to the fact that the number of the saved, though a great multitude, is nevertheless, relatively speaking small. Texts such as Matthew 7:14 and 22:14 are referred to in this connection. . . . It is like a narrow way, and there are only a few who enter this way.” (Hanko, “An Exegetical Refutation of Postmillennialism,” 15.)
In his highly-regarded Systematic Theology (1124)_premillennialist scholar Wayne Grudem writes of this passage: “Jesus seems here to be saying that those who are saved will be ‘few’ in contrast to the ‘many’ who travel toward eternal destruction.”
Undoubtedly, postmillennialism’s distinctive principle is its conviction that the vast majority of men will be saved. How do we reply to this comment by our Lord himself?
Resolution
We must note that in other places the Bible speaks of the vast number of the redeemed. Interestingly, just a few verses later — and apparently soon after stating the words of Matthew 7:13–14 — the Lord speaks seemingly contradictory words in Mt 8:11: “And I say to you that many [polus, the same word in Mt 7:13 for the lost] will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.”
Rev 7:9 speaks boldly of a great number of the redeemed: “After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands.” And of course we should recall those prophecies which speak of “all nations” flowing into the kingdom (e.g., Isa 2:2–4; Mic 4:1–4).
<hr />
<a href=”https://www.kennethgentry.com/house-divided-breakup-of-dispensational-theology-bahnsen-gentry/”><strong>House Divided: The Break-up of Dispensational Theology</strong></a>
<img class=” wp-image-16755 alignright” src=”https://postmillennialismtoday.files.wordpress.com/2022/10/house-divided-2022.png” alt=”House Divided 2022″ width=”101″ height=”150″ />By Greg Bahnsen and Ken Gentry
This book presents and defends Christian Reconstruction theology, particularly theonomic ethics and postmillennial eschatology. It does to by responding to dispensationalism’s social and exegetical theology.
For more educational materials: <a href=”http://www. KennethGentry.com” data-wplink-url-error=”true”>www. KennethGentry.com</a>
<hr />
Obviously, for the evangelical Christian Scripture holds no contradictions. How, then, can we reconcile such seemingly contradictory passages? And more importantly, how does the postmillennialist deal with Matthew 7:13–14 in light of his optimistic expectations?
To resolve the matter we must realize, two important facts. First, this is a statement about current conditions when Christ speaks. That, in fact, was the situation: very few were coming to the Father in salvation; the vast world was going through the gate of destruction. This is not a prophecy of the future, but a statement of the present situation.
Second, as Warfield noted long ago: “our Lord’s purpose is rather ethical impression than prophetic disclosure.” That is, he is urging his disciples to consider the present situation they witness round about them. They are to look around them and see that many souls are presently perishing and so few men are seeking righteousness and salvation. What will they do about this sad predicament? Do they love him enough to seek its reversal? Christ’s challenge to them is ethical.
In John 4:35 Jesus urges the dim-eyed disciples to see how work must be done: “Do you not say, ‘There are still four months and then comes the harvest’? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white for harvest!” In Matthew 7 he warns against false prophets that will arise among the people (Mt 7:15–20). Then he warns that a man must hear and act upon his words (Mt 7:21–27). His disciples must feel the horror of the present vast numbers entering the broad way to destruction.
<hr />
<img class=”alignright size-full wp-image-211″ src=”https://postmillennialismtoday.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/perilous-times-full-e1449764911855.png” alt=”” width=”101″ height=”150″ />
<span style=”color: #000000;”><strong><a style=”color: #000000;” title=””PT”” href=”https://www.kennethgentry.com/perilous-times-a-study-in-eschatological-evil-by-gentry/”><em>Perilous Times: A Study in Eschatological Evil</em></a> </strong></span>(by Ken Gentry)
Technical studies on Daniel’s Seventy Weeks, the great tribulation, Paul’s Man of Sin, and John’s Revelation.
See more study materials at: <span style=”color: #000000;”><a style=”color: #000000;” title=””www.KennethGentry.com”” href=”//www.KennethGentry.com””>www.KennethGentry.com</a></span>
<hr />
Certainly the gate to heaven is narrow: Christ is the only way, the only truth, and the only life (Jn 14:6). “There is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved” (Ac 4:12). For “no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1Co 3:11). But the Lord’s statement in Matthew 7:13–14 does not imply that always and forever he will only save a few people in each era. In fact, Scripture frequently indicates that great multitudes will be saved, that all nations will be discipled, that the world as an organic system will experience the redeeming work of Christ, that all of his enemies will be subdued — to the “ends of the earth.”
Tagged: broad way to destruction, narrow gate
It seems to me Warfield is correct in speaking about the few being those in that time. I would narrow it down to the Jews of that day with the majority rejecting Jesus and very few enduring the coming persecution without falling away.
I agree that a great “multitude” will be chosen, but that doesn’t mean a “majority” will be chosen compared to the total number called. Agree? What other evidence do you have to support your position that the vast majority of people born will be saved? I hope you are correct, but the word “few” causes me to question your position. I am just attempting to be a good Berean.
Amen and amen!!!
I simply answer such question by saying that Jesus was referring to that Jewish generation which would end at AD 70. Many Jews are called but only few would find the narrow path. The rest perished or were dragged away during the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. So for me, that passage has nothing to do with the Gentiles. I think this is a good argument, but others may find it lacking.
Many reference. As found in my book “He Shall Have Dominion.” Such as Psa 2:8; John 12:32. And many more. (Sorry i am rushed at the moment).
Ken, I understood Jesus to be saying that His being lifted from the earth will draw all men from every nation of people to Him, not just the Jews. Jesus was not restricting the statement to a particular ethnic group. The immediate context is significant because some Greeks were seeking Jesus (John 12:20-21) before Jesus made this statement.
The Greek word itself doesn’t settle the theological question of whether this “drawing” is irresistible. If we “call” all men to come, are we not drawing them to hear the good news? But we know many are called, but few chosen. There is an interesting connection with John 6:44. The same Greek verb is used there: “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him…” Could it be that all men in every nation will be drawn to Jesus, but only those whom the Father, which sent Jesus, ‘draws will come?’ (John 12:33
Compare how the word “come” is used in John 6:35 and John 6:37, so Jesus does not seem to say “draw” means “come.” All men from every nation will be drawn to Jesus, but only those whom the Father draws will come in repentance and belief. I see the drawing as the necessary condition that makes coming possible.
Jesus describes the ‘coming” man in verse 45. “Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath ‘learned’ of the Father, ‘cometh’ unto me.”
Being drawn by the general call is not enough. One must also be “drawn” by the Father and have learned of the Father via the Holy Spirit, changing the “natural man” into a “spiritual man” of God who now has the mind of Christ. Only those drawn by the Father who have learned from the Father will come unto Jesus.
I would not define “draw” as simply meaning “come.” Rather, “draw” is the action that brings or attracts someone toward Christ. “Come” describes the person drawn actually approaching or ‘coming’ to Christ. Jesus says the Father’s drawing is necessary for the person to ‘come’ in repentance and belief. John 6:45 then connects that coming with hearing and learning from the Father.
Another important verse we ought to consider is John 6:65: “Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.”
Jesus repeats the same basic idea, but this time instead of saying “draw,” He says it must be “given” by the Father. John 6:65.
The real question isn’t simply: does God force people to come? What does the Father’s drawing relate to hearing, learning, believing, and the person’s actual coming to Christ?
You also gave Psalm 2:8 to support your position. “Ask of me, and I shall give thee the nations [heathens] for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
“I shall give thee the nations” is considerably broader than saying: “I shall save every individual in those nations.” The verse concerns Christ’s inheritance and dominion over the nations. Psalm 2 begins with the nations and their rulers rebelling against the LORD and His Anointed: “Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?” Then God declares that He has established His King in Zion (vv. 1-6), and the Messiah is told: “Ask of me, and I shall give thee the nations for thine inheritance…” (v. 8)
I think Psalm 22:27 makes a much stronger case for worldwide success of the
call of the Gospel than Psalm 2:8. I am presently looking at Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:9, Habakkuk 2:14, and Revelation 7:9 with an open mind since we all have things we presuppose to be true about the millennium.
I don’t think God’s people should argue among themselves about the millennium to the neglect of our duties as “soldiers for Christ” and “ambassadors for Christ,” calling all men to repent, be baptized, and be reconciled to God. I think “coming out and separating” is important, and “touching not the unclean thing is important as well as living as if in a foreign country as strangers and pilgrims seeking a better heavenly country where God has prepared a city for His people. Perhaps if we spent more time on these duties, the millennium would start to take shape, and if the majority of people called are not among the few chosen, at least we know a large “magnitude” of the people called will be among the chosen.
Thanks for the work you have done on this matter over the years. I have asked my questions in good faith as I seek to be a good Berean and not force any passage to fit a particular view of the millennium.
Interesting thoughts. Unfortunately, I am tied up with my Two Ages project and can’t give this the attention it deserves. I hope later to maybe write an article on the topic.
Ken, thank you for the speedy reply. I look forward to reading your future article. If more questions come to mind, I will send them to you to consider when you write your next article on this subject.
Aaron, if “many are called, but few chosen” only applied to the Jews living at the time the words were spoken, why didn’t Jesus make that clear when He made the statement? The rule is “many are called, but few are chosen.” Jesus’ statement seems clear to me. I can see no clear exception to this rule in this passage.
The chosen make up a great magnitude of God’s elect, but “magnitude” does not necessarily equate with “majority,” does it? I am sure the verse applied to the Jews living at the time, but again, why didn’t Jesus tell us clearly that the statement was limited to the Jews of the day?
Thanks for considering my questions.