Most scholars agree that Matthew 24 is answering two questions posed by the disciples when Jesus departs the temple for the last time (Matt 24:1). He declares that the temple is doomed and will be dismantled stone-by-stone (Matt 24:2). They assume the destruction of the temple means the destruction of the world (Matt 24:3). But Jesus […]Continue Reading...
Revelation is a book as fascinating as it is difficult. Unfortunately, it is made more difficult by approaching it in the wrong way and viewing it through out-of-focus lenses. In our day the naive dispensational view is the dominant evangelical approach to eschatology — despite its many and continuing failed predictions of the date of […]Continue Reading...
Preterism is still largely unfamiliar to dispensationalists who dominate the evangelical publishing market. Yet it is making headway. And I believe it is making its presence felt due to its great strengths. Let’s consider those, then consider its weaknesses. Preterism’s strengths The leading strengths of preterism are: (1) It retains and emphasizes the relevance of […]Continue Reading...
Of the four interpretive schools of Revelation, one of the most neglected in our times has been preterism. It is however experiencing a strong resurgence in recent days. This seems to be due to two powerful influences: (1) Futurism has warn out the evangelical market with false predictions. (2) As Christians look at the alternatives […]Continue Reading...
Most evangelicals today assume that Revelation is speaking about their own future. Too few of them realize there are other approaches to Revelation. Futurism is a difficult view to overthrow because of its large installed base of adherents. In this article I will be focusing on futurism’s strengths and weanesses, having presented the basics of […]Continue Reading...
Revelation has confused the minds of the best theologians and thinkers. The confusion is so deep-rooted that four basic schools of interpretation regarding Revelation have arisen and dominated the exegetical landscape. In this series I am summarizing each of the basic interpretive schools so as to better inform the Christian of the lay of the […]Continue Reading...
The wry and sometimes disparaging humor of Ambrose Bierce is recorded in his Devil’s Dictionary. There he defines “Revelation” as follows: “Revelation. n. A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing.” He would have loved our modern tele-evangelism use […]Continue Reading...
When we approach the Book of Revelation, we must do so with fear and trembling. It has conquered many a strong scholar. Some have likened Revelation to a black hole: It is so dense that light cannot escape from it. This is strange in that it is actually called a “revelation,” i.e., unveiling, opening. Because […]Continue Reading...
The Book of Revelation is called a “revelation,” despite its seeming to be an obfuscation to most modern readers. It seems that wherever there are five commentaries on Revelation, you will find six views of this mysterious book, such is our perplexity when approaching this magnificent work.Continue Reading...
Revelation is a difficult book. Except perhaps for tele-evangelists, who have spent dozens of hours studying it and thousands of hours preaching it. But even John had difficulties understanding what was going on in his own book (Rev 7:13-14; 17:7; 19:10; 20:8–9). And it is deemed a difficult book by most biblical scholars and commentators.Continue Reading...
Does the “Cultural Mandate” in Gen 1:26-28 help the postmillennial argument? Or is it “forced” evidence? One PMT reader commented to my “How You Became a Postmillennialist” article (PMT-2014-075) by expressing doubt that this has anything to do with the postmillennial hope. So I ask: Does this passage speak to the postmillennial program? I believe […]Continue Reading...
In my last blog article I began a brief consideration of the challenge: How can postmillennialism have a hope for the future in light of the total depravity of man? This is a reasonable challenge. Our eschatology must be compatible with out theology. One doctrine should not undermine another: “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John […]Continue Reading...
Many opponents of postmillennialism reject the hope-filled outlook because of their strong convictions regarding the power of sin. Like me, they are committed to Calvinistic doctrine regarding man’s total depravity. Total depravity teaches that man is a fallen sinner and depraved in every aspect of being. How can we have any hope for a better […]Continue Reading...
This is my final article in a brief series responding to the charge that preterism is anti-Semitic. The charge arises in that preterists hold that many New Testament passages prophesy the judgment of Israel. I have already shown how this charge is misdirected in several respects. But now I will show that if the charge […]Continue Reading...
The New Testament is one embarrassing book. How can anyone believe it? Not only is preterism anti-Semitic, but so is the New Testament. Christianity needs just to fold up, pack it away, and leave the world alone. This New Testamen= anti-Semitism charge is according to secularists and liberal “theologians,” that is. But ironically, those evangelicals […]Continue Reading...
Preterists believe that Jesus called down judgment upon Israel, and that this judgment was deserved by the people of Israel. Because of our modern historical situation — post-Holocaust — this view is deemed by some to be an immoral position because of its latent anti-Semitism. But is the charge legitimately brought against the preterist? This […]Continue Reading...
Preterism teaches that several New Testament prophecies apply to the AD 70 destruction of the temple. A good number of scholars and even more prophecy populists complain: “Preterism is Anti-Semitic.” But is preterism’s focus on the Jewish judgment in AD 70 anti-Semtic? This is a serious moral charge. How does the preterist postmillennialist answer it? […]Continue Reading...
I receive a lot of email questions. Here is one blog readers might appreciate. Your discussion is great regarding Gal. 6:16 on pages 172-174 in your book titled: He Shall Have Dominion. I like to ask you a question about how you handle the argument put forward by dispensationalists regarding Galatians 6:16 and the term […]Continue Reading...
This is a question I received by email that you may find of interest: “If Revelation was written in AD 65-66 about events in AD 70, how could John have expected Revelation to be widely circulated in so short a period of time? It seems the book’s grandiose vision would be largely wasted because of […]Continue Reading...
Here is a question I recently received. Perhaps you have thought the same: Good afternoon, sir. I recently read an article by you in which you referred to the label “optimistic amill.” as an oxymoron. Could you please tell me why you think that? I’d be very thankful. I am currently working through these eschetalogical […]Continue Reading...
- AD 70
- Current Events
- Interesting stuff
- Just for Fun
- Kingdom of Christ
- New Testament
- Objections Answered
- Old Testament
- Olivet Discourse
- Postmillennial Scholars
- Postmillennialism Explained
- Practical Issues
- Prophetic texts
- Second Coming