PMW 2019-066 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
An insightful question.
Recently one of my blog readers made the following perceptive comment regarding my statement that Rome could not be Revelation’s “harlot” because Rome was never in a covenantal relationship with God:
“You said: ‘Fourth, Rome cannot commit adultery against God, for she had never been God’s wife.’ The language of harlot/marriage is spoken of Tyre in Isaiah, and as far as I know, they weren’t in a marriage with God either. Tyre is also spoken of as committing fornication. Continue reading
PMW 2019-056 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
In Gen. 13:14–15 God promises that he will give the land to Abraham’s descendants “forever” (cp. Gen. 12:7). This will soon be confirmed by solemn covenant (cp. Gen. 15:7, 18) and is noted elsewhere in Scripture (Exo. 32:13; Josh. 14:9; 2 Chron. 20:7; Isa. 60:21).
Since “the earth is the LORD’s, and all it contains, / The world, and those who dwell in it” (Psa. 24:1), as Moses well knows (Exo. 9:29; Deut. 10:14), the land is God’s to give to whomever he pleases. Besides this, the evil Canaanite culture would eventually (Gen. 15:16) justify God’s expelling them from the land (Lev. 18:2–3, 24–28 and “Deuteronomy Introduction” at “Special Issues”).
The “forever” nature of this promise must be understood in terms of both the lexical significance of the Hebrew “forever,” the moral sanctions involved in God’s covenant, and the typological function of Old Testament redemptive history. Continue reading
PMW 2018-060 by R. T. France
Gentry introductory note:
In my last blog posting I presented several chapters from R. T. France’s important book, Jesus and the Old Testament. That posting dealt with the transitional function of Mark 13:32 and Matt. 24:36, showing Jesus shifting his focus on the destruction of the temple in “this generation” to the final judgment on “that day.”
In this posting post material appearing just a few pages later, showing that the Christian church typologically fulfills the hope of Israel. These few observation provide us with a wealth of understanding of the relationship of the Church to Israel.
The following is taken from p. 238 of France’s, Jesus and the Old Testament.
So without further comment, here is R. T. France on Mark 13:27/Matt. 24:31:
PMT 2018-057 R. T. France
As I am doing research on my commentary on Matthew 21–24, I am reading R. T. France’s excellent work, Jesus and the Old Testament. He has much that is helpful for the postmillennialist and the (orthodox) preterist. Below I will quote three paragraphs that ought to be an encouragement to my readers. These present to us a helpful hermeneutic approach to many Old Testament passages.
I am sure France did not intend them as postmillennial observations, but they do help us in understanding the postmillennial hope nonetheless. Continue reading