Category Archives: Olivet Discourse

THE BEST MATTHEW COMMENTARIES

PMW 2026-027 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

As I am working on a new book, tentatively titled The Two Ages of Redemptive History, I am investigating a number of commentaries on Matthew (I do not fly by the seat of my pants as some preterist enthusiasts do!). I have found help in many of them, even when they do not hold to a preterist understanding of Olivet. Yet, several commentaries have become absolutely essential in my investigation. And I highly recommend them to my reader.

In this brief article I will recommend some good commentaries for you. If you are interested in the the Two Ages concept, especially regarding how it impacts the Olivet Discourse in particular  or the Gospel of Matthew in general, you really need to get hold of these. Continue reading

CONFUSED DISCIPLES THEN AND NOW

PMW 2026-026  by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am researching a book on the Two Ages of Redemptive History. This issue of the biblical function of “this age” and “the coming age” arose during my research on a new expanded study Olivet Discourse.

In my research I have a large and important section showing how confused were Jesus’ twelve disciples — despite having the best teacher possible! Their confusion plays a large role in their misunderstanding Jesus’ prophecy of the destruction of the temple (Matt. 24:2). They ask two questions of him, the second of which shows their confusion. They ask when shall these things be, then they ask what shall be the sign of your parousia and of the end of the age (Matt. 24:3). As per much first century Jewish and apocalyptic expectations, they believed the temple could not be destroyed without history ending and that the Messiah would wage war against pagans.
Continue reading

EL AÑO 70 D. C. Y LA SEGUNDA VENIDA EN MATEO 24 (Parte 2)

PMT 2014-052 por Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Gentry note:
Carlos Sanchez Lafuerza has volunteered to begin translating some of my PostmillennialWorldview articles into Spanish. I very much appreciate his willingness to do such, since I receive a lot of interaction from Hispanics and have had several of my books translated into Spanish. For information on Carlos, see the page on this site called “Spanish-translated Articles.” Now for Carlos’ translation of an older article:

En este artículo ofrezco una segunda entrega sobre la cuestión de si el discurso del Monte de los Olivos se centra únicamente en el año 70 d. C. o si también mira hacia la Segunda Venida. Creo que habla de ambos acontecimientos. Lo cual no debería sorprendernos, ya que el año 70 d. C. es un anticipo de la Segunda Venida. Consulte el artículo anterior (PMT 2014-051). Para obtener información más detallada, consulte mi libro The Olivet Discourse Made Easy.

Continue reading

EL AÑO 70 D. C. Y LA SEGUNDA VENIDA EN MATEO 24 (Parte 1)

Translation of PMT 2014-051 por Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Gentry note:
Carlos Sanchez Lafuerza has volunteered to begin translating some of my PostmillennialWorldview articles into Spanish. I very much appreciate his willingness to do such, since I receive a lot of interaction from Hispanics and have had several of my books translated into Spanish. See the page on this site titled “Spanish-translated Articles” for a brief bio of Carlos.

Now for his translation of my older article, numbered PMT 2014-051

And now for Carlos’ translation of PMT 2014-051:

El discurso del Monte de los Olivos (Mateo 24-25) es uno de los cinco discursos principales de Jesús que estructuran el Evangelio de Mateo. Está motivado por la dramática denuncia de Jesús contra Jerusalén y el templo (Mateo 23:37-38), su ceremonial partida definitiva del templo (Mateo 24:1a), la confusa pregunta de sus discípulos sobre el templo como un hermoso lugar de culto (Mateo 24:1b) y su declaración de su inminente destrucción (Mateo 24:2).

Continue reading

HIS LIGHTNING COMING

PMW 2025-047 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am an orthodox preterist. I believer that Matt 24:1–34 presents Christ’s great prophecy against the first century Jewish temple in Jerusalem. In that prophecy, known as the Olivet Discourse (or more technically: The Eschatological Discourse”), Jesus denounces the temple and warns of its soon-coming destruction (Matt. 24:2). I have argued in numerous writings that the Discourse as a whole deals with AD 70, as well as the end of history. I see the line of demarcation between AD 70 teaching and Second Advent teaching being drawn at Matt 24:34–36.

Nevertheless, a Second Advent intrusion appears in the near-term prophecy. Though I previously held that Matt 24:27 spoke of his judgment-coming in AD 70, I have come to realize I was mistaken. Read carefully in its context, it refers to the Second Advent. That statement reads:

“For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be.”

How can this be? Continue reading

WHY FOCUS ON MATTHEW’S DISCOURSE?

PMW 2025-029 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.Matthew

The “Olivet Discourse” is known by scholars as the “Eschatological Discourse.” This title focuses on its content, not its context; on what it teaches, not on where it was given. Though this fundamental Discourse appears in all three of the Synoptics (Matt. 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21), in this posting I will explain why I focus on Matthew’s version of the Olivet Discourse in my research. I will present seven important reasons.

First, Matthew’s version is in the most Jewish Gospel
“It is agreed on all hands that this is a very “‘Jewish’ Gospel” (Leon Morris). This is significant in that the Discourse is sparked by deeply Jewish concerns raised by the Lord’s disciples (Matt. 24:1–3; cp. Mark 13:4). This includes highlighting the Jewish temple (“holy place,” v. 15; cp. vv. 1–2), its geographical setting in Judea (v. 16), and a distinctly Jewish Sabbath concern (v. 20). Robinson declares that “Matthew is more concerned than any other evangelist with the relationship of Christianity to the temple, the priesthood and the sacrifices” (J. A. T. Robinson).
Continue reading

NARRATIVE FLOW IN THE GOSPELS

GenrePMW 2024-042 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my last posting I noted that an important issue impacting the preterist interpretation of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew is: narrative flow. We will now briefly consider this matter.

GOSPEL GENRE

To properly recognize Matthew’s redemptive-historical flow, we must understand that the Gospels are not biographies per se. J. K. Brown declares Matthew to be “theological history or theological biography.” This is a helpful observation, though more needs to be said.

Gospel scholar John Wenham notes that “gospel” is a “newly invented genre.” Therefore, Warren Carter states that “because of their theological content and pastoral orientation,” the Gospels are “a unique genre in the ancient world.” Clark Pinnock explains that “these works constitute a new literary phenomenon. They are not biographies as such, for they omit much material normally found in such works.” Continue reading