PMT 2015-058 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
From time-to-time I get questions that I think are insightful and may be helpful to other readers. The question below came from a Facebook friend, Cindy D. I believe this will be helpful to publish more broadly than simply in a Facebook “message.”
I have a question! I loved your book, The Beast of Revelation, and to me, it cleared up a lot of questions, and had a hand in bringing me OUT of futurism. I just now saw a post by a guy in a group I am in who wrote the following about why he says Nero can’t be the Beast. Can you give me some feedback on his post that I can share with him on it? Continue reading
PMT 2014-140 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
In Daniel 12:1–2 we find a passage that clearly speaks of the great tribulation in AD 70: “Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued” (12:1). But it also seems to speak of the resurrection occurring at that time: “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt” (12:2).
How are we to understand this passage? Does Daniel teach that the eschatological, consummate resurrection occurs during the great tribulation in AD 70? No, he does not. Let me explain. Continue reading
PMT 2013-031 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
I am continuing a critique of dispensationalism’s gap theory for Daniel’s Seventy Weeks prophecy. In my last posting I presented four of their arguments with my rebuttals. I will continue now with the fifth and final dispensational argument.
Fifth, the order within the prophecy: “In the record of the prophecy, the destruction of the city [v. 26b] is placed before the last week [v. 27a].” 1 Since this occurs in A.D. 70, we must allow a gap to account for it.
This argument overlooks the peculiarities of Hebrew poetic style. Oriental expression often confounds the Occidental concern for chronological succession; the Western framework may not be foisted upon the passage. This “revelational pattern” 2 allows a parallel rehearsal and expansion of the topic without requiring actual succession in time. Even classic dispensationalists understand that some prophetic passages do not flow chronologically. 3 A better understanding of the relation between verses 26 and 27 is given above. Continue reading
PMT 2013-030 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
Dispensationalism interposes this gap or parenthesis between the sixty-ninth and the seventieth weeks; it spans the entire Church Age from the Triumphal Entry to the Rapture.1 The dispensational arguments for a gap of undetermined length between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks are not convincing. Let us consider the leading arguments for this gap. I will state the argument briefly with some documentation and then respond.
First, the peculiar phraseology in Daniel: Daniel places the cutting off of the Messiah “after the 62 ‘sevens,’ not in the 70th ‘seven.’” 2 This allows for a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. If the cutting off does not occur in the sixty-ninth or the seventieth weeks, there must be a gap wherein it does occur. Continue reading
PMT 2013-028 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
This is part four of a series on Daniel’s Seventy Weeks (Dan 9:24-27). We are now focusing on what Daniel says about what Israel will experience “after the sixty-two weeks” (Dan. 9:26) that follow the “seven weeks” (Dan 9:25). This is to occur, then, after the sixty-ninth week. A natural reading of the text demands that this be during the seventieth week, for that is the only time remaining to accomplish the stated goals of the prophecy (Dan. 9:24).
At that time “Messiah shall be cut off.” The English rendering “cut off” translates the Hebrew karath which “is used of the death penalty, Lev. 7:20; and refers to a violent death.” 1 Thus, it refers to the death of Christ on the cross. Continue reading
PMT 2013-027 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
In studying Daniel’s Seventy Weeks prophecy, it is important that we carefully consider Daniel 9:24. This verse provides the ultimate goal of the prophecy: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.” Let me briefly sketch the events in verse 24 within the context of the whole prophecy.
The Significance of Verse 24
The six infinitival phrases of verse 24 form three couplets, which serve as the main point of the prophecy and as the heading to the explication that follows. “Know therefore and understand” (9:25) introduces that explication. Correspondences should exist, then, between the events of verse 24 and the prophecy of verses 25-27.
Among non-dispensational evangelicals the general view of Daniel 9:24 holds that these six elements are the goal of the whole prophecy and that they occurred during the first advent 2000 years ago. Contrary to this view, Culver puts the matter into bold dispensational relief: these events are “not to be found in any event near the earthly lifetime of our Lord.” Ryrie points to this verse and applies it to our future: “God will once again turn His attention in a special way to His people the Jews and to His holy city Jerusalem, as outlined in Daniel 9:24.” Clearly then, the dispensationalist adopts a decidedly futurist approach to the prophecy — when he gets past the first sixty-nine weeks. Continue reading