Response to Balyeat’s CritiqueBy Kenneth J. Davies
In response to Mr. Balyeat’s critique of my review of his book, I would like to say that I am truly sorry if I have misrepresented him in any way. I feel that my review accurately presented his views, although I unfortunately chose a quotation that did not. He is quite right to call me to task in this matter.
When I said he insisted that the Second Coming was to be "at the end of history," and that it would be "visible across the whole sky—from East to West" (p.117), I apparently misinterpreted what he was saying. Balyeat stated that Mt 24:27-28 is erroneously assumed to refer to Jesus’ "Second Coming at the end of history, a ‘coming’ that will be visible across the whole sky—from East to West." It sounded to me as if he was saying that this could not have been speaking of the Second Coming, since that coming would be "at the end of history," and have the characteristic of being "visible...from East to West." Perhaps it is my own bias, but I believe this could be taken either way.
I was remiss, however, not to recall Mr. Balyeat’s statement on p. 118, where he says, "The comment about lightning in the East being visible in the West was simply to let [Jesus’] disciples know they would see the armies approaching (from the East) ahead of time, even as they see lightning in the East and know...that a storm will soon be there in the West!"
However, I stand by my representation of Mr. Balyeat’s view that Mt 24 does not refer to the Second Coming. As he states just prior to the above quotation, "The ‘coming’ of which Jesus spoke in Matthew 24:27-28 was not the Second Coming, but rather His coming in judgment on apostate Jerusalem." As I said in my review, "He readily admits that this [coming in judgment] took place in AD 70..." (p. 119). How is this building a "straw man" argument? As you can see, I never said he applied these verses "to a future Second Coming," nor did I claim that his rejection of a full preterist position was based on these verses. I hope this has cleared the "muddied waters," and restored the reader’s faith in me as a "rocket scientist."
All are free to critique and challenge my reviews at any time (remembering that I, like brother Balyeat has also said, am your brother in Christ). Let us never allow misunderstandings to further divide an already dismembered body of Christ. Let us rather concentrate on those things we have in common. We are all members of the same body of Christ.
In Christ, Ken Davies