Category Archives: Objections

APOSTOLIC SUFFERING

Objections, Theology July 19, 2022 1 Comment

CryingPMW 2022-056 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my last blog article I introduced the question: “Is the church called to suffer?” The suffering church motif is widespread in evangelical theology. And one reason it is so is because the church is suffering and has long suffered. Another reason though is that there are numerous verses in the New Testament that seem to confirm this perception.

In the opening article I cited several well-known theologians who make this argument. How can the postmillennialist respond? I am dealing with this question in several articles because of its significance — and because of confusion regarding postmillennialism itself. Continue reading →

CHRISTIANITY’S FIRST SUFFERING

Objections, Theology July 15, 2022 1 Comment

PMW 2022-055 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.Suffering christ

I am continuing a response to the claim that God has called the church to be a suffering church throughout her history. Though the church certain has suffered in her past and does suffer in the present. . . . And though she must suffer in patient faithfulness. . . . She is not called to always suffer on earth. She is faithfully suffering unto glory. Her time of victory will come before the end.

Let us now look at some other verses deemed to require that the church be always and only a suffering community. Continue reading →

WHAT IS “SUFFERING”?

Objections, Theology July 12, 2022 Comments: 3

Jail BiblePMW 2033-054 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am continuing a postmillennial response to the evangelical claim that the church is called to suffer in history. If so, this would undermine the postmillennial hope. Postmillennial victory cannot be true if the church is always to suffer.

Now we must note:

Persecution is serious external oppression

As we reflect on this point in the debate we must bear in mind a vitally important matter: The only kind of suffering that contradicts post-millennialism is suffering rooted in dangerous external threats and oppression (especially when designed to suppress or punish the Christian faith). The New Testament era Christians are indeed a suffering people, enduring “threats and murder” (Ac 9:1–2), capital punishment (Ac 7:59; 12:1–2), and imprisonments and beatings (2Co 11:23–25), while being made a “public spectacle” and having their “property seized” (Heb 10:32–34). And were these conditions to continue until the end, postmillennialism could not be true. Continue reading →

JESUS WAS A PRETERIST (1)

Objections, Preterism June 28, 2022 Comments: 2

PMW 2022-050 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A few years ago I was privileged to hear Dr. Wayne A. Briddle of Liberty University deliver a cogent, careful, and cordial critique of evangelical preterism (which he designated “partial preterism”). Dr. Briddle graciously allowed me a few moments at the end of his presentation to respond. He also asked if I would mind providing him some sort of critique of his presentation for his better understanding of the issues from my perspective. Here is my reply.

Introduction

In his paper, Dr. Bridle provided a helpful summary statement regarding the nature of and evidence for preterism. His summary was apparently designed for an audience not thoroughly familiar with the debate. I commend him for his careful introduction of the topic. His summary should aid any one interested in the basics of preterism and its variant forms (from heterodox Hyper-Preterism or Full or Extreme Preterism to the Orthodox (“partial”) Preterism of R. C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, and Kenneth Gentry). Continue reading →

MISTAKEN DISMISSALS OF POSTMILLENNIALISM (4)

Objections May 31, 2022 Leave a comment

Hasty dimissalPMW 2022-042 by Greg L. Bahnsen (edited by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.)

(Gentry note: This is the fourth in a four-part series on “Misguided Grounds for Rejecting Postmillennialism.” This article was originally written by Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen, but is presented here as edited by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. In this article, Dr. Bahnsen considers “Premature Charges.”)

In addition to the misguided and failed attempts to dismiss postmillennialism based on (1) newspaper exegesis, (2) misrepresentation, and (3) the application of two-edged criticism (which applies to the critic as well as the position criticized), there are current day charges against the position which are premature or unfounded. Continue reading →

MISTAKEN DISMISSALS OF POSTMILLENNIALISM (3)

Objections May 27, 2022 Leave a comment

Miss targetPMW 2022-041 by Greg L. Bahnsen (edited by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.)

(Ken Gentry note: This is the third in a four-part series on the sad practice of rejecting postmillennialism on faulty grounds. Dr. Bahnsen wrote this material and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., has edited it and offered here. This rejection falls on its own sword in that it involves two-edged criticisms. Let’s see how this is so.)

A third infelicitous way in which postmillennialism has been disposed of is by means of (allegedly) critical considerations which in fact apply as much to the other eschatological positions as to postmillennialism. This is particularly embarrassing as a scholarly lapse. But what do we mean? Continue reading →

MISTAKEN DISMISSALS OF POSTMILLENNIALISM (2)

Objections May 24, 2022 Comments: 3

Bad researchPMW 2022-040 by Greg L. Bahnsen (edited by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.)

This is the second in a four-part series on “Misguided Grounds for Rejecting Postmillennialism.” This article was originally written by Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen, but is presented here as edited by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. In this article, Dr. Bahnsen considers “Misrpresentation.”

Misrepresentation Documented

Postmillennialism has not only been discarded in this century on clearly unorthodox grounds; it has also been made a straw man so that modern advocates of the other schools of interpretation can easily knock it down and get on to other interests. The worst possible interpretation is put on postmillennial tenets, or the eccentric aspect of some postmillennial writer’s position is set forth as representing the basic school of thought. Continue reading →