Category Archives: AD 70

PRETERIST IMPULSES

AD 70, Interpretation, Preterism May 28, 2024 Leave a comment

Narrative flowPMW 2024-041 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The interpretation of the Olivet Discourse that applies its opening portion to first-century Israel is called “preterism.” [1] This theological term derives from the Latin preteritus, which means “gone by, past.” [2] The evangelical, orthodox preterist sees many (not all! [3]) important New Testament prophetic passages as being fulfilled in the first century, thus in our distant past. These prophetic events transpired in the era surrounding the AD 70 destruction of the Jewish temple. These events powerfully, publicly, and permanently close the old covenant, typological era (Heb. 8:13; cp. Matt. 21:33–43; John 4:21–23). Continue reading →

ON MISSING JESUS’ POINT

AD 70, Interpretation, Olivet Discourse May 24, 2024 Comments: 2

Missing the targetPMW 2024-040 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The Olivet Discourse has a large presence in the Gospel record (two whole chapters of ninety-seven verses in Matthew, as well as being preserved in Mark 13 and Luke 21). But since so many evangelical Christians are hypnotized by its prophecies of woe (generating multi-million-selling books), and since, as we will see, it is a valuable tool for apologetics in confirming the integrity of biblical prophecy (showing Christ’s ability to prophesy future events), it well deserves our careful consideration in the contemporary eschatological debate.

Unfortunately, Christ’s woe-filled teaching found pointedly here is woefully misunderstood practically everywhere. This is as true among biblical scholars as it is among evangelical students. And it is especially true among self-appointed, back-slapping “prophecy experts” (also known as “televangelists”). Therefore, as Michael Theophilos notes: “It is no understatement to suggest that more ink has been spilt on this chapter, with its synoptic parallels, than on any other in the Gospel narratives.” [1]
Continue reading →

EARLY DATE DIFFICULTIES (3)

AD 70, History, Objections, Revelation May 21, 2024 Comments: 2

Nero redivivusPMW 2024-039 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am continuing a brief series on problems scholars have with the early (pre-AD 70) date of Revelation. I am using his Leon Morris’ book: The Revelation of St. John (2d. ed.: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) as my main source. Let’s get to work!

A most unusual phenomenon seems to appear in Revelation, according to Morris. His third argument is very popular among late-date theorists. This evidence regards the very unusual and ancient legend known as the Nero Redivivus myth. Morris briefly explains the myth and confidently employs it: “Again, it is urged that the book shows evidence of knowledge of the Nero redivivus myth (e.g. xvii. 8, 11). After Nero’s death it was thought in some circles that he would return. At first this appears to have been a refusal to believe that he was actually dead. Later it took the form of a belief that he would come to life again. This took time to develop and Domitian’s reign is about as early as we can expect it” (Morris 37). Continue reading →

EARLY DATE DIFFICULTIES (2)

AD 70, Objections, Revelation May 17, 2024 Comments: 4

Roman persecutionPMW 2024-038 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Revelation’s early date is generally held by modern postmillennialists of the preterist variety. I have argued elsewhere positively for the early date. So here I am offering a short series that briefly responds to late-date evidences. I am focusing on Leon Morris’ arguments, due to their cogency, succinctness, and his stature as a Revelation commentator.

Morris discovers “indications that Revelation was written in a time of persecution.” This evidence is felt to accord “much better with Domitian.” [1] W. G. Kümmel is quite confident that “the picture of the time which the Apocalypse sketches coincides with no epoch of the primitive history so well as with the period of Domitian’s persecution.” [2] Morris, Kümmel, and a number of other scholars list this as among their leading arguments for the A.D. 95-96 date. Continue reading →

NOT ONE STONE?

AD 70, Dispensationalism, Temple April 16, 2024 Leave a comment

wailing wallPMW 2024-029 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Th.D.

From time-to-time when I speak at conferences on the Olivet Discourse, I will have dispensationalists raise a question that they believe presents a problem for the preterist interpretation. I have even seen this in some published articles and books. Perhaps you have heard it yourselves. In fact, I know at least one of you have because you wrote me to ask me about it!

Now what is this challenge that some raise against the AD 70 fulfillment of the first portion of the Olivet Discourse? The challenge is:

How can you teach that AD 70 fulfills Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:3? After all, that verse says “not one stone here shall be left upon another, which will not be torn down.” But we all know that the huge Wailing Wall that exists today was a part of the temple.
Continue reading →

THE TEMPLE IN REVELATION 11

AD 70, Preterism, Revelation, Temple January 2, 2024 Leave a comment

Temple 2PMW 2024-001 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
Revelation is an important book in eschatological discussions. The most vigorous Revelation debate in ecclesiastical circles today revolves around the dispute between preterism and futurism. Preterism holds that Revelation was largely fulfilled not long after John wrote it. Futurism holds that it deals largely with events yet to come.

Because of this debate, the identity of the temple in Rev 11 arises as a serious matter. In Revelation 11:1, 2 we read:

And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Here we find a Temple standing in a city called “the holy city.” Continue reading →

THE GREAT TRIBULATION vs. THE POSTMILLENNIAL HOPE? (7)

AD 70, Matthew 24 September 22, 2023 Comments: 4

PMW 2023-074 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is my final installment in this series on the great tribulation as understood within postmillennialism. We come now to a few more difficult texts.

Christ’s coming

In Matthew 24:27 Jesus states: “For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be.” This is the sort of language we expect regarding the second coming of Christ, when he comes publicly and gloriously to conclude world history. Did Christ come like lightning in AD 70: How can this sort of language apply to AD 70?

We must understand this declaration in terms of the context. The Lord had just cautioned his disciples: “If therefore they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them” (Matt 24:26). We must recall Josephus’ report in Jewish Wars 2:13:5 [261–62] cited above that records an episode in which an Egyptian false prophet arose in the wilderness claiming a great deliverance.

Jesus dismisses such by stating that when he physically comes again to the earth, it will be an unmistakable event: “For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be” (Matt 24:27). The “for” (gar) here shows that he is giving the reason why his disciples should not think he is off in some wilderness or in an inner room somewhere. When he does return in his second coming, it will be as visible and dramatic as a lightning flashing. Continue reading →