God's Hope for God's World
PMW 2020-025 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
A reader contacted me with this question:
“Why do you think 2 Thessalonians 1:7 is referring to the final return while denying the doctrine of the imminent return of Christ? That is, if 2 Thessalonians 1:7 is not the AD 70 coming but the final return, then didn’t Paul believe the final return could happen in his day since he wrote to the believers in his day, ‘and to grant relief to you.’ Just wondering how you deal with that?” Continue reading
PMW 2026-036 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
One of the leading interpretive cues in Matthew 24 is the disciples’ questions in Matthew 24:3: “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” In terms of Matthew’s rhetorical strategy, his record of their questions here may be equal in significance to the Lord’s own statement at Matthew 24:34 regarding “this generation.” After all, as Ulrich Luz notes: “much depends on the interpretation of the double question, since in the opinion of most exegetes it determines the interpretation of the entire chapter.” [1]
What is more, the significance of the Discourse is emphasized in its circumstances: Jesus is “sitting” and he is “on the Mount.” When Jesus sits to speak, this introduces his formal instruction on an important matter. We can see this, for instance, in Matthew 5:1 (where he gives his Sermon on the Mount) and 13:1 (where he presents his parabolic instruction to the crowds on the beach). This formal teaching posture is enhanced by the where he is delivering the Discourse: he is speaking from a mountain. We see the significance of such a setting when Jesus’ takes three of his disciples to “a high mountain by themselves” (Matt. 17:1), where the transfiguration was experienced. And also when he issues his world-challenging great commission (Matt. 28:16ff), which was delivered on “the mountain which Jesus had designated” (Matt. 28:16). Consequently, the disciples would understand that what they are about to hear is of great importance.
Continue readingPMW 2026-028 by Jason Bradfield
Gentry note:
Jason Bradfield once again applies devastating logic and destructive grammatical analysis to hyper-preterism. In this article he offers a master class in how NOT to interpret Scripture. He demonstrates this from the hyper-preterism in Gary DeMar’s writings. He also provides a warning regarding the necessity of understanding Greek grammar before writing about it. I highly commend Bradfield’s work and recommend you sign up to receive his new articles on a regular basis. I certainly have! (https://www.reformation.blog)
PMW 2025-087 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
In my preceding article I began a brief study of Matthew 16:27 and 28. I am providing evidence that Jesus speaks of the “coming of the Son of Man” as applying to his Second Coming at the Final Judgment to end history. Upon declaring this, he adds a note about his near-term coming, which demonstrates his authority at the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70. This article will conclude the argument by providing my fourth point, following upon the preceding three.
So now we must note not only the wording of the passage, but its flow, setting, and purpose.
In v. 28 Jesus inserts the “truly I say to you” formula (v. 28), which he often uses. He always uses this formula as a bold underscoring of something he has said. So? How does it function here? This will explain his rationale in the setting of his current instruction. Continue reading
PMW 2025-086 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
One of the more remarkable brief aside statements by Jesus, which impacts eschatology, is found in Matthew 16:27–28. Jesus’ declaration reads:
[v. 27] For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. [v. 28] Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.
As an orthodox preterist, I hold that this passage brings together the AD 70 judgment and the Final Judgment. [1] As orthodox preterists argue (following most conservative, evangelical theologians in general), the AD 70 destruction of the temple is a dramatic judgment of God in itself. But it is also a typological foretaste of the universal Final Judgment, which it pictures through the local judgment on Israel. [2] (This is much like the Israel’s Old Testament exodus event being an important act in itself, while serving as a type of coming redemption through Christ.) Continue reading
GoodBirth Ministries is raising funds to subsidize Kenneth Gentry’s exegetical and theological research. And your help is much needed and appreciated.
If you would like to read more about GoodBirth’s projects or make a tax-deductible donation, please go to: GoodBirth Ministries website.
Recent comments