PMW 2017-071 by Chris Hume (originally posted at Reformed Hope)
[Gentry note: Postmillennialism expects the conversion of the vast majority of men and nations before Christ returns. Conversion by God’s free grace necessarily leads to a desire to obey and serve God. Serving God involves obedience to his law which is a transcript of his holy character. God is holy, just and good, therefore “the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good” (Rom. 7:12). Therefore, his law is to be promoted to men and nations (Rom. 3:19, 31), not as a means of justification, but as an instrument of sanctification. Chris Hume’s article is helpful for our better understanding the significance of God’s commandment against theft.]
The Ten Commandments and the Moral Law of God
Whenever we begin to discuss the commandments of God, we would do well to ask ourselves the following question: Who is required to obey said laws? Continue reading
PMW 2017-064 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
Postmillennialism expects a day when “the earth will open up and salvation [will] bear fruit, and righteousness [will] spring up with it” (Isa 45:8). It expects the discipling of the nations to teach all the things Christ taught his disciples (Matt. 28:19), which included the continuing relevance of God’s law (Matt. 5:17–19; cp. Rom. 3:19, 31). This is because the law reflects God’s character which is “holy and righteous and good” (Rom. 7:12). Because of this, postmillennialists would do well to learn God’s law and its practical applications.
Learning Deuteronomy well is a good place to start. And the structure of Deuteronomy is helpful for reinforcing and expanding the application of God’s law. Let me explain. Continue reading
PMW 2017-062 by Chris Hume (Reformed Hope)
[Gentry note: Postmillennialism is committed to a God-defined righteousness as characterizing the advance of God-established kingdom in a God-created world. Thus, we are interested in how God’s law impacts ethics. Chris provides us with a helpful article in this regard.]
A common view is that the civil law of Moses was a bondage to Old Testament saints. This understanding leads people to view passages which speak of freedom from the law as meaning that saints are now “free” from the “bondage” of the civil laws of the Old Testament. In my opinion, this view is erroneous. Whatever you may believe about the civil laws of the Old Testament, you cannot biblically defend the view that the civil laws were a burden. You may attempt to make arguments against applying the general equity of the civil laws to societies today, but you cannot cogently use any argument that implies said laws were a form of bondage to Old Testament saints. Please allow me to explain. Continue reading
PMT 2016-029 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
I often receive queries from folks who are thinking through the issue relative to the postmillennial hope. Though not all postmillennialists are theonomic, I am. I believe our hope leads to the expectation that God’s Law will prevail in the world.
Here is a series of emails I received from a reader.
I have a question for you that has bothered me off and on. As a partial preterist, I defend the interpretation of “New heavens and Earth” as the figurative establishment of the New Covenant and the passing away of the old heavens and earth as the passing of the Old Covenant. But as a reluctant theonomist, this puts pressure on my understanding of Matt 5:17 (Jesus saying that the Law will not pass away until the heavens and earth pass away). Continue reading
PMT 2015-128 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Th.D.
Theonomy is not an essential element of postmillennialism. Many postmillennialists are even opposed to theonomy. But it is a component of the form of postmillennialism that I have adopted. And it fits well with the outlook for future ethical conduct rooted in God’s word.
But some scholars point to Acts 25:11 as biblical evidence against the theonomic thesis.
“For if I am an offender, or have committed anything worthy of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar.” Acts 25:11
PMT 2014-030b by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
I am continuing a confessional defense of theonomy. We must now turn our attention to the swirling vortex of the debate: the Confession’s statement in 19:4:
IV. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require. Continue reading
PMT 2014-029b by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
In my previous blog (PMT 2014-028b) I began a series defending theonomy from charges that it is contray to the Westminster Standards. I will continue that study in this article. Continue reading