Category Archives: Second Coming

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

IMPORTANCE OF BODILY RESURRECTION

PMW 2025-027 by Ben WitheringtonWitherington

Gentry note: As I continue daily research for my next book, I have stumbled on a helpful one titled Jesus, Paul and the End of the World by Ben Witherington (IVP 1992). Dr. Witherington is Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary and a widely recognized scholar who has written over sixty books on a variety of biblical issues and from leading evangelical publishers. Although I do not endorse everything he states in this work, he has many valuable, well-researched, deeply-exegetical insights that have been profitable for me. This is only an excerpt from pages 187–191 of this work. There is a lot of surrounding context that is necessary for grasping the full force of his argument. But this ought to whet your appetite. And steer you clear from the proto-Gnosticism of hyper-preterists who see the resurrection body as an ethereal, spiritual reality rather than a corporeal, material one.

That which follows is by Witherington and is cited from his book Jesus, Paul and the End of the World:

In 1 Thessalonians 1:10 Christ’s resurrection is connected with the believer’s future deliverance from God’s wrath. In fact, almost always when Paul speaks of Christ’s resurrection he does so in connection with the events that will transpire when Christ returns. He clearly does not see Christ’s resurrection as an isolated historical anomaly but as an eschatological event that is the harbinger and in some sense the trigger or at least the prerequisite of future eschatological events. Paul is surely dealing with Christians in Thessalonica who had speculated about such eschatological matters, and it may even be that the Thessalonian Christians were reflecting the characteristics of a millenarian movement. If so, then it would appear that Paul is trying to offer a certain amount of “eschatological reserve” while still affirming much of the substance of the Thessalonians’ beliefs about the future. Here Paul grounds the believer’s future status in the belief in the past Christ-event. Continue reading

WHERE DO WE GO AT DEATH?

New earth

PMW 2023-100 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A writer sent a note asking:

“One thing I’m a little confused about is the ultimate end of history. Does man remain on earth when Christ returns? After Christ has put all enemies under his feet and handed over the kingdom to the Father, does heaven and hell “merge” and man remains on earth for a lack of better words while Christ is present physically (assuming also still in some sense everywhere present because he’s God). I’m so confused as I feel like I always hear by and large from Christians is to just go to heaven and it seems many believe the present earth to be destroyed. Or is there something else beyond earth/heaven?”

Ken Gentry responds:

Basically, I believe that when we die now (in history) we go to heaven — as did the disciples, the thief on the cross, and Paul the apostle: Continue reading

THE GOSPEL, SECOND COMING & ‘THIS AGE’ (1)

PMW 2022-099 by B. B. Warfield

Gentry note:
This article (under the shorter title “The Gospel and the Second Coming”) is from volume 1 of The Selected Shorter Writings of B. B. Warfield. It gives Warfield’s brief argument for postmillennialism. It also shows that this theological giant back in the early 1900s recognized the two-age structure of redemptive history (“this age” and “the coming age”). This is significant in that some current-day writers wrongly believe is an amillennial construct, despite being held by Greg Bahnsen, Keith Mathison, me (!) and others. Though I do not agree with ever angle he presents within, here is Warfield’s insightful article.

The Gospel, Second Coming & “This Age”

The Millennium
The term “millennium” has entered Christian speech under the influence of the twentieth chapter of the book of Revelation. From that passage, imperfectly understood, there has also been derived the idea that is connected with this term. We say, from that passage imperfectly understood. For the book of Revelation is a symbolic book; that is to say, what it describes it describes not directly but indirectly, through the medium of symbols. To take its description literally is therefore to substitute the symbol for the reality. That is what is done when the opening verses of the twentieth chapter are read as if they predicted a period of long duration in the earthly history of the Church, in which Satan is to deceive the nations no more and the resurrected martyrs are to live and reign with Christ.

Continue reading

IS CHRIST’S RETURN “IMMINENT”? (1)

PMW 2019-086 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

A most remarkable feature of prophetic interest is the Christian’s conviction that we are living “in the shadow of the second coming,” that we are in a “countdown to Armageddon.” We often find linked with a radical misunderstanding of the last days the doctrine of the imminent return of Christ, especially among dispensationalists and premillennialists — but also even with amillennialists.

I will deal with the question in two articles. In this one I will set up the matter; in the next one I will answer it. I will focus largely on the dispensational approach to the question. Interestingly, the doctrine of imminence is simultaneously one of dispensationalism’s most potent drawing cards while being also its most embarrassing error.

John F. Walvoord explains imminency for us: “The hope of the return of Christ to take the saints to heaven is presented in John 14 as an imminent hope. There is no teaching of any intervening event. The prospect of being taken to heaven at the coming of Christ is not qualified by description of any signs or prerequisite events.” Continue reading

AD 70: POINTER TO SECOND ADVENT

AD 70 anticipates Second AdventPMT 2014:026 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

AD 70 prefigures the Second Advent; it is theologically linked to it. But this does not imply any concept of double-fulfillment. There is a fundamental difference between prolepsis and double-fulfillment. Let me explain.

In the OT we have several “Day of the Lord” events: against Babylon (Isa 13:9), Jerusalem (Joel 2:1), and others. Each of these is a pointer to the final Day of the Lord (2 Pet 3:10), though each OT version is spoken of as THE (singular) Day of the Lord. This is much like our spiritual resurrection in salvation (John 5:24-25; 1 John 3:14) pointing to our final resurrection at the end of history. Or like the Christian’s being a “new creation” (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15), which is a picture of the consummate new creation (2 Pet 3:10). Continue reading

MORE ON THE DISCIPLES’ CONFUSION

PMW 2020-056 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Over the past few months I have written several articles on the disciples’ questions to Jesus in Matthew 24:3. Their two questions are: “Tell us, [1] when will these things happen, and [2] what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” Thus, their two questions are asking “when” (Gk. pote) and “what” (Gk. ti). Understanding their questions and their state-of-mind is important for us if we ourselves want to understand the Olivet Discourse (known in academia as the “Eschatological Discourse”).

In those earlier articles I pointed out that the disciples were frequently confused at Jesus’ teaching, which often caused them to misunderstand it. I noted that their tendency to confusion explains why they ask him about his “coming [Gk.: parousia] and the end of the age [Gk.: sunteleias tou aiōnos],” when he prophesies the destruction of the temple (Matt. 24:2). They obviously assumed that the temple’s destruction would occur at his Second Advent at the end of history. And they were mistaken in this Jew-centric supposition. Continue reading