Category Archives: AD 70

POSTMILLENNIALISM AND APOLOGETICS (4)

PMT 2017-048 By Mike Warren (Christian Civilization Blog)

Point 4:
Postmillennialism is the biblical anecdote to failed predictions of Christ’s Second Coming.

Postmillennialism, with a preterist view of the Great Tribulation, refutes the numerous failed predictions, which have undermined the credibility of the modern evangelical church, that Jesus is coming soon to rapture Christians out of the world. Continue reading

POSTMILLENNIALISM AND APOLOGETICS (3)

PMT 2017-047 by Mike Warren (Christian Civilization Blog)

Point 3:
Postmillennialism refutes the skeptics’ claim that Jesus broke His promise to return.

Postmillennialism, with a preterist view of the Great Tribulation, refutes the claim of skeptics that Jesus was a false prophet because He did not return to earth within a generation as He predicted and as His apostles expected. Continue reading

POSTMILLENNIALISM AND APOLOGETICS (2)

Point 2:
Postmillennialism validates the resurrection and the truth of Jesus’ messag
e.

Postmillennialism, with a preterist view of the Great Tribulation, points to empirical evidence still visible in our own day that a major prophecy by Jesus came true, which validates Jesus as a true prophet from God (Deut. 18:21-22), and that validates Jesus’ message, such as His statements about being God and about His resurrection.[1] (“Preterist” means “past” and means here that the Great Tribulation occurred in the past, namely the first century A.D.) Continue reading

ACTS 24:15 AND THE RESURRECTION (2)

PMT 2016-089 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my previous article, I began a brief consideration of Acts 24:14–15. This passage is often used by Hyper-preterists in an attempt to demonstrate that the corporate, public, universal, systematic Christian faith has not been mistaken on one of its foundational doctrines for 2000 years. They mistakenly hold that this passage points to the expectation of a first-century resurrection of the dead.

In my opening article I focused on the lexical issues involved in the key term mellein in this passage. They believe it means “about to,” which it does not. Please read that article to orient yourself to the argument. In this article I will conclude by noting their syntactical and contextual error. Continue reading

ACTS 24:15 AND THE RESURRECTION (1)

binocularsPMT 2016-088 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Hyper-preterism may be a small movement, but it is a vociferous one. Hyper-preterists believe that the eschatological expectations in Scripture were all fulfilled in the destruction of the temple in AD 70 which closed the old covenant era. Though they are correct in noting the overlooked significance of AD 70, they are incorrect in applying all eschatology to that event.

One of their favorite passages is Acts 24:14–15. In this passage we come upon passage that is significant to the debate. Continue reading

THE SIGN OF THE SON OF MAN (2)

sign-of-son-of-man-2PMT 2016-085 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my preceding article I began answering a reader regarding my interpretation of Matt. 24:30. I believe that the events of AD 70 are the sign of Jesus’s enthronement in heaven. That article should be read before entering into this one. Now I continue my defense of my interpretation (which is not mine, but one that is held by a number of scholars).

Hagner (“Matthew” in Word Biblical Commentary 2:714) points out the LXX backdrop to Matt. 24:30 which is found in Zech. 12:10–14. He notes that in Zech. 12:10–14 “the phrase pansai hai phulai, “all the tribes,” as well as he ge, here meant as ‘the land [of Israel].’” But then he argues that “in keeping with Matthew’s universal perspective, the tribes of the earth, which in the OT originally meant the tribes of Israel, are to be understood all the nations of the earth.” Nolland (“Matthew,” New Intl. Greek Comm., 984) agrees. How can this be said in light of the context? Continue reading

THE SIGN OF THE SON OF MAN (1)

sign-of-son-of-man-1PMT 2016-084 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Reader’s question

I have been challenged on my view of Matt. 24:29-30 by someone who knows the Greek well. He stated that the passage does not mean what the preterist claims. He went as far as to say that the people I read and trust on this subject are wrong. Can you offer a Greek study/explanation as to why verse 30 can be read with the meaning being that “then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven?” Continue reading