Category Archives: Interpretation

HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (2)

hyperpreterism, Interpretation December 18, 2018 Comments: 28

PMW 2018-102 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is the second in a three-part series highlighting several Hyper-preterist confusions regarding my writings. Hyper-preterists stumble here just as they do in their attempted exegesis of key passages of Scripture. You should read my first article before reading this one.

In the previous article I pointed out that my arguments for a transition in Matthew 24 between AD 70 and the Final Judgment are not my (distinctive, self-created) arguments. I picked them up from others. In this article I will point out the arguments from those other writers, my predecessors.

For instance, the following commentators see Matt. 24:36 (or its parallel Mark 13:32) as shifting the focus of the Discourse from the near-term (“this generation”) AD 70 destruction of the temple to the distant (while “delaying,” Matt. 25:5) Second Advent and Final Judgment at the end of history. This, of course, does not prove that the shift is true, but it will prove that the argument for a shift at v. 36 was not created by me. I will list a few of these scholars: Continue reading →

HYPER-PRETERIST CONFUSIONS (1)

hyperpreterism, Interpretation December 14, 2018 Comments: 4

PMW 2018-100 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Hyper-preterism is an heretical view of eschatology that denies the historic, corporate, public, universal, systematic Christian faith. (Don’t mention this to them, though, for they want by themselves to determine what the church of our Lord Jesus Christ should believe.)

Specifically, the four leading (but not only!) Hyper-preterist errors involve their denying important biblical doctrines:

1. They deny a future, physical resurrection of all men. Some even deny the continuance of Christ’s physical resurrection after he left the earth!

2. They deny a future, visible, glorious, physical return of Christ.

3. They deny a future, universal, final great judgment of all men.

4. They deny a future end to temporal history and the beginning of the final, physical, consummate, reconstructed new creation order (which is anticipated in the spiritual new creation existing now in the gospel, 2 Cor. 5:17). In their view, history continues forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever. Thus, God must forever endure a sinful universe without any final judgment and removal of sin. God’s created order will continue in a sinful estate. Continue reading →

THE BIBLE IS NOT ALWAYS NORMATIVE

Interpretation December 11, 2018 Leave a comment

PMW 2018-099 by Larry E. Ball

The entire Bible is the inerrant, infallible word of God. The Bible is authoritative and fully trustworthy in everything it says.

In my book on the Revelation of John[1], I make the statement that the Bible was written “for us but not to us.” The New Testament (as well as the Old) must always be interpreted in terms of a particular historical context. No, this does not make me a liberal theologian!

As a simple example of the importance of historical context, Paul wrote, “When you come bring the cloak which I left at Troas with Carpus, and the books, especially the parchments (2 Tim 4:13).” This text was written to Timothy and not to me – not to Larry Ball – although it was written for me. Continue reading →

ANCIENT NEAR EAST APPROACHES TO GENESIS?

Creation, Interpretation, Worldview October 16, 2018 Leave a comment

PMW 2018-083 by Paul J. Barth (Aquila Report)

Gentry note:
The Genesis Creation Account is not only foundational to a biblical worldview, but to the Bible itself. Too many evangelicals waffle when it comes to Moses declaring that God created in six days. I could only wish they had the same problem as Augustine: Why did it take so long? But they don’t. They are trying to maintain academic respectability before the secular, God-denying world. And that is tragic. This is a helpful article for a (postmillennial) worldview.

Now let us hear Paul J. Barth on the matter.

False Assumptions of Ancient Near East Literary Approaches to Genesis

“Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” Hebrews 11:3

“Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.” 1 Timothy 1:4

Dr. Richard Belcher Jr. summarizes Dr. C. John Collins’ theory from his book Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? about how ancient Near East literature and cosmology should influence our interpretation of Genesis: Continue reading →

MATTHEW 24:28 “EAGLES” OR “VULTURES”?

AD 70, History, Interpretation, Matthew 24, Olivet Discourse September 11, 2018 Comments: 7

PMW 2018-073 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In the opening section of the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25), Jesus deals initially and significantly with the approaching AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem by Roman imperial forces (vv. 4–34). We may easily surmise this from the local context. After all, the Discourse is introduced by Jesus’ prophesying the destruction of the temple (Matt. 24:2), then linking his prophecy to the temple locale (“the holy place,” v. 15), warning the local residents to flee from the area (Jerusalem is in Judea, v. 16), and informing them generally when it will occur (in “this generation,” v. 34). [1]

The Roman eagle

Matt. 24:28 is an interesting verse embedded in this context. But its frequent mistranslation dulls the cutting edge of Jesus’ warning about the Roman invasion. Continue reading →

MATTHEW ENDS AS HE BEGINS

Interpretation August 21, 2018 Leave a comment

PMW 2018-067 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am currently working on a new commentary. This one will be on Matthew 21–25, the immediate context for the Olivet Discourse. This is a discrete literary unit set off from the rest of the Gospel.

Structural unity

In Matthew 21:1 Jesus heads toward Jerusalem, where he will be finally and fully rejected by the Jewish nation. Just after the conclusion to this discrete unit, we read Matthew’s note that Jesus has ended his formal, public teaching and is now ready to be killed by Israel:

Matt. 26:1–3: “When Jesus had finished all these words, He said to His disciples, ‘You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man is to be handed over for crucifixion.’ Then the chief priests and the elders of the people were gathered together in the court of the high priest, named Caiaphas; and they plotted together to seize Jesus by stealth and kill Him.”

Continue reading →

PRINCIPLES FOR RECOGNIZING THE BEAST

Interpretation, Revelation January 16, 2018 Comments: 4

PMW 2018-005 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The beast of Revelation is a favorite theme of “prophecy experts.” Unfortunately, they generally do not allow John to establish the principles for the beast’s interpretation in Revelation, preferring instead the news media and radio evangelists. In this article I will mention four key principles that must be kept in mind to reduce the field to biblical proportions, you might say. As is evident from the history of the interpretation of 666, we certainly need something to confine our thinking to the realm of the reasonable.

The necessary limiting principles for analyzing the identity of John’s beast are: Continue reading →