VOS ON THE RESURRECTION-BODY

Preterism, Resurrection September 17, 2024 1 Comment

resurrection-bodyPMW 2024-073 by Geerhardus Vos

Gentry Note:
This is part 2 of a two-part study on the believer’s resurrection by Geerhardus Vos. Vos is helpful for countering the heretical arguments of some who deny or greatly alter the historic Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the body. The only changes I will make to Vos’ article is to break it into smaller paragraphs to make it easier to read for a modern audience.

VOS ON THE RESURRECTION BODY

The main passage informing us as to the nature of the resurrection body is 1 Corinthians 15:35–58. The difficulty Paul here seeks to relieve does not concern the substance of the future body, but its kind (compare 1 Corinthians 15:35 “With what manner of body do they come?”). Not until 1 Corinthians 15:50 is the deeper question of difference in substance touched upon. The point of the figure of “sowing” is not that of identity of substance, but rather this, that the impossibility of forming a concrete conception of the resurrection body is no proof of its impossibility, because in all vegetable growth there appears a body totally unlike that which is sown, a body the nature and appearance of which are determined by the will of God. We have no right to press the figure in other directions, to solicit from it answers to other questions.
Continue reading →

VOS ON THE RESURRECTION OF BELIEVERS

Preterism, Resurrection September 13, 2024 Leave a comment

resurrection of the bodyPMW 2024-072 by Geerhardus Vos

Gentry Note:
The preterist hermeneutic is a helpful tool for understanding many New Testament prophecies. But it is a tool that for some folks what has some sort of addictive power that leads them off into error. In fact, it has led hundreds of folks into heresy, even denying the historic Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the body. A helpful antidote to such confused thinking can be found in the writings of Geerhardus Vos, among others. In this two-part series, I will post a couple of major points from Vos’ “Eschatology of the New Testament.” The only changes I will make to Vos’ article is to break it into smaller paragraphs, since he wrote in a day when paragraphs were virtually book length! So, let’s get started with Vos’ observations.

Vos on the Resurrection

The resurrection of believers bears a twofold aspect. On the one hand it belongs to the forensic side of salvation. On the other hand it belongs to the pneumatic transforming side of the saving process. Of the former, traces appear only in the teaching of Jesus (Matthew 5:9; 22:29–32; Luke 20:35, 36). Paul clearly ascribes to the believer’s resurrection a somewhat similar forensic significance as to that of Christ (Romans 8:10, 23; 1 Corinthians 15:30–32, 55–58). Far more prominent with him is, however, the other, the pneumatic interpretation. Both the origin of the resurrection life and the continuance of the resurrection state are dependent on the Spirit (Romans 8, 10, 11; 1 Corinthians 15:45–49; Galatians 6:8). The resurrection is the climax of the believer’s transformation (Romans 8:11; Galatians 6:8).
Continue reading →

VOS INTRODUCTION TO THE TWO AGES

Age(s) (Two Ages) September 10, 2024 Leave a comment

Vos Reformed EschatologyPMW 2024-071 by Geerhardus Vos

Gentry introductory note:

This article includes a portion of Geerhardus Vos’s “The Eschatology of the New Testament.” Herein Vos provides us with a helpful introduction to the Two Age structure of redemptive history. Too many Internet theologues are confused on the matter and therefore confused on New Testament eschatology itself. And some have even abandoned historic Christian orthodoxy on the matter. Thus, they even deny the bodily resurrection at the end of history — because they deny an end to history!

Though Vos is a vigorous amillennialist, this is not a necessary result of the Two Age doctrine. Rather it is a possible result. The Two Age view is widely held, especially in Reformed circles. We can see this at work among Reformed postmillennialists such as B. B. Warfield, John Murray, Greg Bahnsen, Keith Mathison, and others. For example, see: https://wordpress.com/post/postmillennialworldview.com/18460

Continue reading →

INTRODUCING THE TWO WITNESSES (5)

Revelation September 6, 2024 Leave a comment

2 Witnesses (5)PMW 2024-070 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Though this is my fifth study on the identity of John’s two witnesses, I come now to my fourth point. This should be read in tandem with the preceding study.

Fourth, further confirming this approach is the two witnesses’ prophetic fire-and-blood imagery (11:5– 6; cp. Eze 21:32; 38:22; Joel 2:30), the joyful reaction to their death by “those who dwell in the Land [of Israel]” (11:7, 9–10), and the “torment” they cause their Jerusalem hearers (11:10; cf. v 8). The temple and Jerusalem will suffer fiery destruction (Mt 22:7; Ac 2:19–20). The witnesses are not simply gospel preachers, or else they would not be deemed tormentors. Rather, they are functioning as covenant-lawsuit prophets challenging the integrity of the central feature of Judaism: the temple. In Revelation the word-group for “torment” elsewhere speaks of extreme pain and agony, not annoyance or frustration. Thus, some scholars argue that “the two witnesses do not symbolize the preaching of the Gospel in general . . . They are the incarnation of the witness which the Church renders to Christ in the face of a Judaism grown obstinate in its unbelief.”

I would add to this observation that their witness promotes the word of Christ against the temple which the Jews so dearly love, and which figures prominently in Christ’s trial (Mt 26:59–61; 27:40; Mk 14:58–59), as well as in Stephen’s (Ac 6:13–14). Another observes in this regard that: “well may we suppose that Christians . . . urged the declarations of the Saviour as to the impending fate of Jerusalem.” He points out (2:227) that the two witnesses “were prophets in the church, predicting the destruction of the temple and the Jewish commonwealth.” Elsewhere we learn that: “putting the synoptic and Johannine evidence together — and the two appear to be independent — we have a strong presumption that Jesus did say something about the destruction and replacement of the temple.” Continue reading →

NEW BOOK: VOS ON ESCHATOLOGY

Age(s) (Two Ages), Books September 4, 2024 Leave a comment

Vos Reformed EschatologyNOTE FROM KEN GENTRY

Bill Boney and I have taken several of Geerhardus Vos’ most insightful studies on eschatology and brought them into this one book. But we did not simply cut-and-paste Vos’ articles: we updated their early 19th century style and grammar to fit with 21st century publishing standards. We did not change any of Vos’ arguments in the process. If you love Vos, you will love this updated version of his eschatological writings. This book will ship in October but can be pre-ordered today at: https://axeheadpress.com/products/reformed-eschatology-in-the-writings-of-geerhardus-vos

NOTE FROM THE PUBLISHER, AXEHEAD PRESS

Our latest title Reformed Eschatology in the Writings of Geerhardus Vos, edited by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. and Bill Boney, is available for pre-orders now. (Get your copy while it is called “today”!)

In this quick email, I’d like to share something I personally found interesting from reading this book.
Continue reading →

INTRODUCING THE TWO WITNESSES (4)

Revelation September 3, 2024 1 Comment

2 Witnesses (4)PMW 2024-069 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am pressing on in a study of the two witnesses of Revelation (see previous entries). Adding to the previous study I now would point out that not long after Paul’s introduction in Acts (Ac 8:1), he quickly becomes its leading character (Ac 9:1ff). And though he will be the missionary to the Gentiles (Ac 13:46; 14:27; 15:7; 18:6; 22:21; 28:28; Ro 1:5; 11:13; 15:16; Gal 1:16; 2:2, 8; Col 1:27; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 4:17), everywhere Paul goes on his Mediterranean mission, even when taken to Rome in chains, he seeks out the local Jewish community to convince its membership that Jesus is their Messiah (13:4; 14:1; 16:13; 17:2–3; 28:23). Regarding the last chapters of Acts, it has been stated: “it has often been observed that in Luke’s narrative world Paul’s arrival in Rome takes place within the period of ‘testimony’ [maturia] in which, like Jesus himself, his followers are hauled before the ‘kings and governors’ (e.g., Agrippa, 25:23-26, 32; Festus, 25:1-12).”

After Saul the persecutor of Christians becomes Paul the proclaimer of Christ (Ac 9), Herod Agrippa I beheads James (the brother of John) in Ac 12:1–2. Though no reason is given (other than “he saw that it pleased the Jews,” Ac 12:3), during the Lord’s earthly ministry he and his brother John want to call fire down upon the Jewish cities who resist his message (Lk 9:54). And since he is one of the original hearers of Christ’s Olivet Discourse against the temple (Mk 13:3), he surely preaches against the temple himself. Later in Ac 13 the Holy Spirit sets apart two men (13:2; Saul [Paul] and Barnabas) for a similar witness to the diaspora Jews (13:5, 14–17, 26–44) — and with similar results (13:44–46a). There Paul announces: “we are turning to the Gentiles” (13:46b–47), because of the Jewish resistance (13:45). Just as Christ commands his prophets to shake off the dust of their feet in testimony against rebellious Israel (Lk 10:11; 9:5; Mt 10:14), Paul and Barnabas do so (Ac 13:51). As the enemies of Christ, the Jews will be (spiritually) bowed down to lick the dust of their feet (cf. Ps 72:9; Isa 49:23; Mic 7:17; cp. Rev. 3:9). Continue reading →

INTRODUCING THE TWO WITNESSES (3)

Uncategorized August 30, 2024 1 Comment

2 Witnesses (3)PMW 2024-068 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

I am continuing a study begun two issues ago on the two witnesses of Revelation. I will not be dealing with every aspect of their sudden appearance Revelation, but will be defining who they are in the context of the flow of redemptive history.

Not only does Jesus teach that the temple is doomed to destruction but that he is replacing it and its ceremonies in himself. And the early church emphasizes this message by recording it in the Gospels, then publishing, circulating, reading, and preaching it before the destruction of the temple in AD 70, either by means of prominent logia or in one or more of the final Gospels themselves released before that date. Jesus strongly asserts his own authority over the temple (Jn 2:14–17; Mt 21:12–17//) and equates his body with it (Jn 2:19–21). He declares that God now dwells (“tabernacles,” eskēnōsen) in him (Jn 1:14) and that he is “greater than the temple” (Mt 12:6).

He also diminishes the temple’s role in declaring that loving God and neighbor “is much more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices” (Mk 12:22). He authoritatively declares the leper cleansed (Mk 1:40-45), instead of directing him to go to the priests to secure cleansing (Lev 14:2ff). He does not even pay the temple tax, except on the occasion when temple authorities confront him about the matter (Mt 17:24–26). And then he does so only to avoid offense (Mt 17:27). In that context Jesus’ declaration that ‘the sons are free’ thus appears to have provided an unmistakable declaration of independence from the Temple and the attendant political-economic-religious establishment. Against the ceremonial prohibitions he touches the unclean woman, but is not made unclean himself (Mk 5:25–34; cp. Lev 5:2–3) and declares that food does not make one unclean (Mk 7:15; cp. Lev 11:4ff). Continue reading →