Postmillennial Worldview

PMW 2026:015 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The word “grace” in the Bible is not always used as a redemptive term. In fact, neither does it always bear the same basic meaning (e.g., it can mean attractive, gift, or thanks).

THE FACT OF REDEMPTIVE GRACE

Nevertheless, the most important idea involved in grace in its most widely used meaning speaks of an active favor or good will extended from one person to another, whether from God to man (Gen 6:8; Exo 34:9) or from man to man (Gen 33:15; 1 Sam 1:18). Fundamental to this meaning of grace is that it involves a benefit that is freely given in kindness to another who has no claim on the giver.

We find a general use of the term “grace” that clearly exhibits this significance in Lot’s experience. Genesis uses the Hebrew for “grace” in Lot’s response to one of the angels who come to escort him to safety before God destroys Sodom (Gen 19:15–17). In Genesis 19:19 we read of Lot’s thankful recognition of the angel’s display of grace: “Now behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have magnified your lovingkindness, which you have shown me by saving my life.”

But the grace in which we are interested is the grace of God in salvation. The general idea of grace is gloriously magnified in his specific saving mercy in behalf of the sinner.

God’s redemptive grace is his unmerited work in behalf of sinners, by which they receive the benefit of forgiveness of sin and eternal salvation from God’s judgment.

---

1 John: Salvation, Heresy, Assurance
20 downloadable mp3 sermons by Ken Gentry
First John is a much neglected epistle that deals with crucial issues: it explains salvation, warns against heresy, and demonstrates the assurance of salvation. Very helpful, especially for new Christians.
See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

---

Indeed, as theologian Louis Berkhof explains: “grace is an attribute of God, one of the divine perfections. It is God’s free, sovereign, undeserved favour or love to man, in his state of sin and guilt, which manifests itself in the forgiveness of sin and deliverance from its penalty.”

Because of man’s sin (see ch 2) he deserves God’s wrath, yet because of God’s grace he receives God’s blessing. As Peter expresses it to his audience: God saves man from his sin because he is “the God of all grace, who has called you to His eternal glory in Christ” (1 Pet 5:10). In salvation Christ, the Son of God, stands in for the sinner and endures God’s righteous judgment upon sin, so that the sinner himself may be saved. This is why God turns his face from Christ as he suffers on the cross (Matt 27:46).

For instance, in 2 Corinthians 5:21 we read that God “made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” Paul teaches us that Christ “was delivered over because of our transgressions” (Rom 4:25; cp. Rom 8:32; Gal 2:20; Eph 5:2). Indeed, he states that “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us” (Gal 3:13).

But there is more.

God’s saving grace is not only granted to the undeserving but to the ill-deserving. That is, we should not illustrate God’s grace in salvation as being like someone giving a gift to a homeless person, i.e., the undeserving. Rather it is better to picture it as someone giving a gift to a homeless person after the homeless person has viciously attacked him, i.e., to the ill-deserving. Grace is undeserved favor for the ill-deserving sinner.

So then, as we should understand from our earlier study of sin, we are sinners who deserve the opposite of God’s favor: we deserve his wrath. For “God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom 5:8). Indeed, Christ “died for the ungodly” (Rom 5:6). Because of its theological usage, the English word “grace” has served as a useful acronym for God’s saving love for sinners: God’s Riches At Christ’s Expense.

As a consequence of God’s saving grace, Paul can write that “having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God” (Rom 5:1–2). Thus, simply put, the “gospel” (literally: “good news”) is “the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24). We truly “receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness . . . through the One, Jesus Christ” (Rom 5:17).

---

Christ’s Church (20 mp3 downloads)
by Ken Gentry
An in-depth sermonic presentation of the doctrine of the church. This is vitally important today with the evangelical church not living up to its biblical calling
See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

---

But now let us consider:

THE BEGINNING OF REDEMPTIVE GRACE

To better understand the glory of God as a gracious Redeemer, we must once again look back to the beginning. For immediately upon Adam’s fall into sin (bringing corruption into man’s being and ruin into his history), God promises redemption. Thus, God dramatically exhibits his grace by exercising it in the very historical context of man’s rebellion.

Even as God calls down his curse upon Satan, Adam, and Eve, he promises a coming Redeemer for man. In Genesis 3:15 we read God’s curse upon Satan which simultaneously presents his blessing upon man: “I will put enmity Between you and the woman, / And between your seed and her seed; / He shall bruise you on the head, / And you shall bruise him on the heel.” In these words we may discern several important truths.

First, we see that because of his sin and the enmity of Satan, man must expect conflict in history. This brief prophecy presents us with a mighty, history-long struggle between the serpent’s seed and the woman’s seed. The tranquility in Eden has been breached and the turbulence in history has begun. We see the immediate results of this conflict in Eve’s firstborn son, Cain, killing her second son, Abel (Gen 4:1–8). This murderous hostility continues as we see in Lamech (Gen 4:23–24), in Noah’s day (Gen 6:5), and throughout Scripture. It becomes so bad that God says “I will blot out man whom I have created . . , for I am sorry that I have made them” (Gen 6:7).

But, second, we see that God presents two seed lines that will engage the struggle in history. The word for “seed” here “can refer to an immediate descendant (Gen. 4:25; 15:3), a distant offspring [Gal 3:16, 19], or a rather large group of descendants [Gen 22:17; Psa 105:6]. Here and throughout Scripture, all three senses are developed and merged in tracing this concept. In our Genesis text we can infer both the single and collective senses.”

---

God Gave Wine (by Ken Gentry)

A biblical defense of moderate alcohol consumption. Considers all key biblical passages and engages the leading objections.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

---

The two seed lines which are traced throughout Scripture are the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. The seed of the serpent is not a literal lineage, but a spiritual line of people who follow Satan’s original rebellion against God: this line includes all the non-elect (Matt 13:38; John 8:44). The seed of the woman involves both a literal singular seed (Christ) and a spiritual corporate seed which follows God’s original intention for Eve: they are the elect (John 1:12; 11:52; 1 John 3:1–2).

After Cain slays Abel we read of the birth of Seth’s son, Enosh. There we discover that “then men began to call upon the name of the LORD” (Gen 4:26). John presents these antithetical seed lines as “the children of God and the children of the devil” (1 John 3:8, cp. Matt 13:48; John 8:44; 1 John 3:10).

The ultimate individual, literal seed of the woman is Jesus Christ, the Redeemer of God’s elect. “When the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons “ (Gal 4:4–5). Luke traces Jesus’ genealogy from Mary back to “the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3:38).

Third, the seed of the woman (Christ) will conquer the seed of the serpent (Satan). Though Satan will bruise his heel (a painful wound), Christ will crush his head (a mortal blow). Despite Satan’s attempt to corrupt mankind and destroy God’s work, God here promises to send a Redeemer who will conquer him by means of his redemptive grace. God’s seed will secure victory in history.

Thus, the prophecy in Genesis 3:15 is theologically called the “protoevangelium,” the first promise (“proto”) of the gospel (“evangelium”) and its victory in history. In fact, it is the first prophecy in Scripture and it points to the coming of our Redeemer, Jesus Christ the Son of God in whom he is well-pleased (Matt 3:16; 17:5). God is indeed a gracious Redeemer.

---

God’s Law Made Easy

(by Kenneth Gentry)

Summary for the case for the continuing relevance of God’s Law. A helpful summary of the argument from Greg L. Bahnsen’s Theonomy in Christian Ethics.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

---

PMW 2025-089 by Barry Cooper (of Ligonier)

Gentry note:
From time-to-time I like to present postmillennial articles from other writers. This one is brief but to the point. It was published on Ligonier’s website last year. I am glad postmillennialism is still alive and well at Ligonier.

If you’re a follower of Christ, how optimistic are you about the future of this world we’re living in?

Many of us seem to grow more disillusioned about the prospects as we grow older. And I have to say, this is only amplified if you’re English. For nearly half a century now, I’ve watched our national team get repeatedly knocked out of major sporting tournaments on penalties, so in general, the English psyche has been carefully conditioned to always expect the worst. Our natural, ingrained tendency leans toward the pessimistic. Continue reading →

PMW 2025-055 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

On May 15, 2025 Gary DeMar (my old RTS classmate, friend, fellow-conference speaker, and publisher of several of my books) published an article about me that does not make sense: “Why Ken Gentry Must Oppose Full Preterism.”

DeMar’s opening charge

“Ken Gentry keeps changing his views about preterism. That’s OK because we all make changes. I believe his charges are designed to avoid having to deal with challenges to the partial preterist position.”

I must note up-front that Gary is correct. As I study the issue more carefully, I discover that I have made some exegetical oversights and argumentative mistakes in the past. However, I would note that though I have changed some of my arguments within preterism, my overall theology has not changed. I still remain fully within the flow of historic, orthodox Christianity (as reprehensible as that may sound to some). Continue reading →

PMW 2025-025 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In this article I will be briefly responding to a reader that has been confused over some lexical and interpretive issues in eschatology. Hopefully this will help not only him but my other readers who may have experienced the same types of confusion.

The reader was interacting with my article “Understanding Collapsing Universe Prophecies” (PMW 2025-016) published on February 25, 2025.

The ends of the ages

He opens with: “The idea does not hold up that 2,000 years later we are still living in the same age as Paul and the Corinthian believers. Why? Because Paul wrote that the culmination of the ages had come upon them. (1 Corinthians 10:11).” Continue reading →

PMW 2025-017 by David M. Russell

This post is excerpted from David M. Russell, The “New Heavens and New Earth,” pp. 167–173
Russell is focusing on Romans 8 and its implications for cosmic renewal in the new heavens and near earth. This world is not as it will always be: a fallen world under the curse of God. One day it will be renewed in glory and righteousness, at the coming of Jesus Christ. The following is Russell’s work.

It is apparent that Paul’s primary concern in this passage is not present suffering, although such is not to be dismissed easily as a petty distraction. His central focus is clearly the future glory. The entire section is therefore dominated by the theme expressed in the word apokaradokia, the “anxious longing” (NASB), “eager expectation” (NEB), or “eager longing” (NRSV) which is the characteristic outlook of the created order. In this term, which occurs in the NT only here and in Phil. 1.20, Paul ascribes to the creation an attribute of positive and confident anticipation. While the etymology of a word may be misleading, that Paul apparently constructed the word is instructive. The verb, from kara (“head”) and dechomai (“to take,” originally “to stretch”), gives the image of “craning the head forward,” that is, straining with outstretched head to catch the first glimpse of an object in the distance. The preposition apo may suggest “diversion from other things and concentration on a single object.” Continue reading →

PMW 2025-009 by P. Andrew Sandlin

NOTE:
The following is an article by my good friend and culture warrior, P. Andrew Sandlin. I highly recommend his works.To subscribe to regular postings by Andrew Sandling: https://christianculture.com/

ROMANS 13 IS NOT A THEOLOGY OF THE STATE
We sometimes hear that Romans 13 discloses a theology of the state to be used as a pattern today without further qualification, but this well-intended assumption is incorrect. A biblical theology of the state is possible only after carefully investigating and properly weighing all of the biblical data. Even that course isn’t sufficient. To have a proper understanding of the state in the Christian worldview, we need to consider it within the context of the Bible’s creation-fall-redemption storyline, which is also the irreducible basic of the Christian worldview.

Nonetheless Romans 13:1–7 is important, and not just because, like all other Bible passages, it’s the infallible word of God. It shows us God’s will mediated through Paul to Christians living under a particular kind of regime, the dictatorial Roman Empire. By contrast, we live within a constitutional republic. This fact doesn’t negate what Paul taught in Romans 13, but it should cause us to be careful about assuming everything Romans 13 teaches must without further consideration apply to Christians today. Just as we wouldn’t assume Christians should work to reinstitute slavery on the grounds Paul gives instructions to both masters and slaves, so we shouldn’t decontextualize Romans 13 and assume everything about it must equally apply in every political situation in history. Continue reading →