LUKE V. LITERALISM

LieralismPMT 2015-131 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Populist dispensationalism is heavily committed to a literalistic hermeneutic. (I do not mean that literally, however: how could an intellectual commitment to a hermeneutic construct be “heavy”? Unless, of course, it is presented in a big book containing either a large number of pages or a small number of extraordinarily thick sheets of paper. But I digress.).

Many dispensationalists argue for a literalistic hermeneutic based on Christ’s first coming. They state that since his first coming was a literal fulfillment of OT prophesy it serves as evidence that all OT prophecy should be interpreted literally. But when we look into the NT, we find that it can present Christ and his enthronement in a spiritual sense, as well. This undercuts the literalism argument in that it shows that prophecies regarding Christ’s first coming are not always and invariably literalistic.http://www.kennethgentry.com/products/He-Shall-Have-Dominion-%28paperback-book%29-30%25-off%21.html


He Shall Have Dominion

(paperback by Kenneth Gentry)

A classic, thorough explanation and defense of postmillennialism (600+ pages). Complete with several chapters answering specific objections.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com


For instance, in Acts 2 we find a classic and eschatologically relevant spiritual fulfillment of the OT in the apostolic era. Peter interprets the Davidic kingdom prophecies in general (Ac 2:30) and Psalms 16:8–11 (Ac 2:25–28) and 110:1 (Ac 2:34–35) specifically as being fulfilled in Christ’s ascension and session:

Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. (Ac 2:30–33)

Here Peter declares that David prophesied the enthronement of Christ when he spoke of his resurrection. The resurrection of Christ begins his state of exaltation, which ends his earthly state of humiliation. And it is the beginning of his kingly enthronement. From Pentecost until the end of history Christ is enthroned and reigning as a king. Jesus is not awaiting a future, literal enthronement in a dispensational millennium. [1]Indefensible


Indefensible (by Sam Kastensmidt)
Sub-title: 10 Ways the ACLU is Destroying America. An Important work in our day of cultural collapse and Christian persecution.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com


This is the standard exposition of non-premillennial covenant theologians (e.g., Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants, 220–21), as well as non-dispensationalist premillennialists and progressive dispensationalists (e.g., Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 344).

Later, Paul preaches that Christ’s resurrection fulfills David’s promise to Israel: “And we declare to you glad tidings; that promise which was made to the fathers. God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: ‘You are My Son, today I have begotten You.’ And that He raised Him from the dead, no more to return to corruption, He has spoken thus: ‘I will give you the sure mercies of David’” (Ac 13:32–34).

Literalism has difficulties in the kingdom preaching passages in Acts.


Special note
For an important, free, downloadable mp3 sermon on Genesis 2:4-ff click here: What Is the Message of Genesis 2? In this message I show that more was told to Israel of the Creation than we find in Genesis 1 and 2, pointing out that the Creation Account is necessarily a summary account. I also point out that Moses has a moral reason for presenting the Creation account; he is not providing it simply for Israel’s interest. Then I show that Genesis 2:4 is the heading of the following section so that it structurally links Genesis 2 with Genesis 1 and begins the redemptive story of the rest of Genesis and all of Scripture. If liberalism’s attack on Genesis 2 has alarmed you, I recommend listening.


Footnote

  1. As an aside, this passage in Acts 2 led me out of dispensationalism while I was enrolled in Grace Theological Seminary in Winona Lake, Indiana. When I came upon this passage in my research for a class paper, I was startled to see Peter’s point. Not long after this discovery, I left Grace Theological Seminary and transferred to Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi. There I studied under Greg L. Bahnsen and was startled one more time: this time by his strong affirmation of postmillennialism.

Righteous Writing ad

Advertisements

Tagged: ,

7 thoughts on “LUKE V. LITERALISM

  1. Toluwa Adebayo November 2, 2015 at 2:24 pm

    Hello Mr Gentry I am a young Christian. I’ve been looking through eschatology recently and I’m looking into all three at the moment.
    One verse postmils use that I’m wondering about is psalm 72:11. I’ve heard ammils say ‘all kings’ there refers to rulers in all the eras of history, and ‘all nations’ to people from every nation instead of entire countries as a whole. Premils obviously believe the kingdom to be physical but how do postmils explain?

  2. Kenneth Gentry November 4, 2015 at 7:55 am

    The Amill view doesn’t make sense. Why would the Psalmist (as the representative of God) command that only some kings scattered here and there should bow to the Lord? Why would he only want some nations to serve him? To the postmillennialist this is a clear call to all kings and all nations to serve him.

  3. Toluwa Adebayo November 5, 2015 at 2:03 pm

    Thank you. One more question. With psalm 22:27, could the last section of the passage about ‘the families of the nations’ worshipping before God refer to judgement day, as described in Philippians 2?

  4. Kenneth Gentry November 11, 2015 at 12:11 pm

    It seems that the Psalmist’s purpose is more positive than indicated in Phil 2. However, that sort of understanding would be a secondary significance of such prophecies for those in history who never repent while on earth.

  5. Toluwa Adebayo November 13, 2015 at 1:26 pm

    Sorry I said that would be my last question but I stumbled on something: in Daniel 2:35, I heard a premillennialist say ‘the growth of the stone is not impeded or stopped, that nothing there implies gradualism, and the decline of Christendom refutes this’

  6. Kenneth Gentry November 13, 2015 at 1:47 pm

    Then what does “growth” mean? Besides this is not the only text that speaks of the gradual unfolding / growth of the kingdom.

  7. Gloria December 28, 2015 at 3:08 pm

    Love the “Draw Bridge” picture. It took a minute, but a fun laugh!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: