Category Archives: Preterism

ORTHODOX PRETERISM AND LUKE 17

PMW 2017-126 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

From time-to-time I receive inquiries regarding the relationship of Luke 17 and Matthew 24. This is generally prompted by orthodox Christians who have been challenged by Hyper-preterists. Thus, it is important for the protection and promotion of evangelical orthodoxy to return to this question when needed.

I argue in several places in my writings, that Matthew 24 is answering two questions from the disciples. They assume the destruction of the temple means the destruction of the world (Matt 24:1–3). But Jesus separates the destruction of the temple from the second coming and the end of history. We see him drawing a line between the two events between verses 34 and 36 in Matt 24. Continue reading

REVELATION AND ORIGINAL INTENT

PMW 2017-070 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am concluding a brief series presenting interpretive issues necessary for understanding Revelation rightly, i.e., from the preterist perspective. Many evangelicals deem Revelation’s judgment passages to be counter-indicative to postmillennialism’s long term hope. In this article I will focus on John’s original intent which shows he was not speaking past his audience to an audience thousands of years in the future.

Today we are so distant from the events of A.D. 70, so removed from the ancient culture, so little acquainted with the first century Jewish outlook, and so accustomed to the Christian perspective, we tend to overlook the enormous redemptive-historical significance of A.D. 70. Those events are not merely another sad instance in the history of “man’s inhumanity to man which makes countless thousands mourn.” They serve not as demonstration of “nature, red in tooth and claw.” Neither do they merely remind us of “the carnage of war, the blood-swollen god.” Continue reading

HELP FROM JOHN’S AUDIENCE

PMT 2017-069 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In my last article I noted the significance of John’s opening time-indicators for interpreting Revelation. These powerfully demonstrate the preterist (past tense) approach to Revelation. That is, that the vast majority of Revelation’s event lie in our distant past and in John’s approaching future.

If you want to explain Revelation to a friend, the first thing you need to do is have them read the first three verses. Then point out to them the near-term indicators (as per my last article). Then you need to point out to them the fact that he is writing to a real, historical audience who would not be inclined to overlook those indicators. Continue reading

POSTMILLENNIALISM AND APOLOGETICS (4)

PMT 2017-048 By Mike Warren (Christian Civilization Blog)

Point 4:
Postmillennialism is the biblical anecdote to failed predictions of Christ’s Second Coming.

Postmillennialism, with a preterist view of the Great Tribulation, refutes the numerous failed predictions, which have undermined the credibility of the modern evangelical church, that Jesus is coming soon to rapture Christians out of the world. Continue reading

REVELATION COMMENTARY UPDATE

revelation-commentary-typesetPMT 2016-003 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A number of my readers have expressed interest in the Revelation commentary I have written. I have finally received notice from the publisher that vol. 1 has been fully typeset. The commentary will be titled: The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of Revelation.

The first of two volumes is 880 pages long and covers Introduction through Revelation 9. Of these pages, 208 are the “Introduction.” Introducing the distinctive approach to the commentary is vitally important, hence the depth of the material therein. Continue reading

DEBATING HYPERPRETERISTS

Brick wallEvery few years I will get a request such as this. I thought it might be helpful to answer it publicly so that in the next few years when I get another one, I can simply point to this article.

Dr. Gentry:

I have a friend who has pointed out problems he has with some of your response to HyperPreterism. He asked me these questions about you: Why do you not publicly debate HyperPreterists? And: In your chapter in Mathison’s book against HyperPreterism, you focus solely on the creedal argument. Does creedalism preclude exegesis?
LFR (North Carolina)

Continue reading

PRETERISTS WHO ADOPT A LATE-DATE

Past DuePMT 2015-080 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Milton Terry underscores the significance of the question of compositional date when interpreting Rev: “The great importance of ascertaining the historical standpoint of an author is notably illustrated by the controversy over the date of the Apocalypse of John. If that prophetical book was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, a number of its particular allusions must most naturally be understood as referring to that city and its fall. If, however, it was written at the end of the reign of Domitian (about A.D. 96), as many have believed, another system of interpretation is necessary to explain the historical allusions.”

“Preterism,” as you well know, is the view that Rev deals with events that are in the near future — when John writes, but now lie in our distant past. Admittedly most preterists who see a large focus on the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70 generally tend to adopt the early date. In fact, this becomes an integral part of the argument in that they prefer internal evidence over external.

However, despite common suspicions and confident complaints, such a commitment to the early date is not absolutely necessary for a preterist analysis. Continue reading