[Response To Gentry's Analysis of the Full Preterist View...]

[GENTRY] Eleventh, hyper-preterists eternalize time, by allowing history to continue forever. This not only goes against express statements of Scripture, but also has God dealing with a universe in which sin will dwell forever and ever and ever. There is no final conclusion to the matter of man's rebellion; there is no final reckoning with sin. Christ tells us that the judgment will be against rebels in their bodies, not spiritual bodies (Matt. 10:28). The hyper-preterist system does not reach back far enough (to the Fall and the curse on the physical world) to be able to understand the significance of redemption as it moves to a final, conclusive consummation, ridding the cursed world of sin. The full failure of the First Adam must be overcome by the full success of the Second Adam.

Eleventh – There are two points Gentry brings up here. The first is the full preterist idea that earth history continues forever with no final end and judgment in the future. The second is that the full preterist view supposedly does not show how God overcomes “the curse on the physical world.” The first should be easy to answer, since Gentry himself believes that once the Second Coming and final judgment occurs, time and history are over and the eternal state ensues. So he believes in a “forever” after the Second Coming. We do too. We would probably go to the same passages he does to justify that belief. To what passages does he go? Rev. 21-22?

I believe there is a long future ahead of us on this planet. I do not believe it is just about over. The sun has many millions of years left to burn, at a minimum. We have only just begun to achieve the dominion for which God planted us here. I saw an interesting comment along these same lines in Jim Jordan's publication, Biblical Horizons, where he said:

I personally agree with the great Presbyterian theologian B. B. Warfield, who held that we are still living in the early Church, with thousands of years ahead of us. I expect future generations will be better able to answer some of these questions than I am. [Biblical Horizons Occasional Papers No. 4, page 16]

On what passages do Warfield and Jordan base their belief? Moses stated that God keeps His covenant unto thousands of generations. If we took that exactly literal, how long would it be? I suspect it is an understatement. Millions or billions of generations (or even eternity) may be more like it. In the future, perhaps even as little as 5,000 years from now, Christians in this century will be regarded as “the early Church.” After all, in the year 7,000, we in the year 1997 will have been much closer to the time of Jesus than they will be. Therefore, 1,997 years will seem like a drop in the bucket, time-wise, and WE will be thought of as "the early Church" more and more as time progresses! Because it is hard for us to comprehend a long future ahead, it seems strange that God has allowed some 2,000 years to elapse before His people understood Biblical eschatology (and a host of other doctrines). However, if we assume we are living at the beginning of history, and that we have perhaps hundreds of thousands, even millions of years ahead of us and a whole universe to explore, then to think that God has allowed us 2,000 years to understand His plans is not so hard to fathom. It's entirely plausible. In fact, based on Ezek. 47’s vision of the little trickle of water that issues forth from the New Temple, and goes 4,000 cubits before it becomes the overflowing river of the water of life that heals the nations, it might be just as reasonable to suggest that the full development of the church’s basic understanding of God’s redemptive work might go on for another 2,000 years (for a total of 4,000 years) before the “early church” phase is finished. Maybe we are only “knee-deep” in it at this point? We have only just begun.

According to such passages as Rev. 21:24 – 22:5, this process goes on “forever and ever” (Rev. 22:5). Note that there is “healing of the nations” (Rev. 22:2) going on during this eternal period when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rev. 22:3). Keep in mind that this is the period when the New Heaven and Earth have arrived (Rev. 21) which Gentry himself applies to AD 70 and afterwards. Notice what else this context (Rev. 21-22) says about the redemption from the Fall and the ongoing (
(eternal) benefits and consequences for mankind. Keep in mind that Gentry believes this was inaugurated at AD 70 just as full preterists do:

• Rev. 21:1,2 – Old heaven and earth passed away and the new heaven and earth arrived (which is the New Jerusalem, the bride of Christ). Is there supposed to be another “new heaven and earth” and “bride” yet to come?

• Rev. 21:4 – Every tear wiped away (sound familiar?); no longer any “death”; no more mourning, crying or pain. Sure sounds like the curse is gone and the last enemy “death” has been taken care of! What is this “death” that is no longer around? Why isn’t it the same “death” that had just been mentioned in Rev. 20?

• Rev. 21:27 – Nothing unclean “shall ever come into it” – sounds permanent, final and “forever” to me. Is Gentry suggesting that the blessed state described in Rev. 21-22 will come to an end?

• Rev. 22:1,2 – The river of the water of life is flowing from the throne. Sure sounds like the fulfillment of Ezek. 47. How long is this healing of the nations to go on? Will it ever stop? Only if seed-time and harvest stop (Gen. 8:21f) and the sun fizzles out (not for many millions of years minimum).

• Rev. 22:3 – The curse is gone forever already! Does Gentry really believe this? Are “His bondservants serving Him” yet?

• Rev. 22:4 – Do we “see His face” yet? Do we “see Him face to face” as 1 Cor. 13:8ff says? Has the perfect redeemed state really arrived as this passage implies?

• Rev. 22:5 – Are we reigning “forever and ever” with Him now after AD 70 as this text suggests?

The point of the above should be obvious. Gentry says in his commentary on Rev. 21-22 that these things have been inaugurated as of AD 70. So, why is he critiquing us for agreeing with him? If the “curse” and “death” have been done away with “forever and ever” how could any other eschatological events still be future? Gentry is the one who needs to answer his own questions here. Full preterists are consistent on this. Gentry is not. Why are we wrong for asserting the eternity of the New Heaven and Earth after it arrives? Does he believe there will be an end to this “new heaven and earth” which he believes has already arrived, with another “newer heaven and earth” to come after it, which will finally be the eternal one? Where does the book of Revelation speak of that? Does God need to start inspiring some more prophets to reveal the rest of the story about this additional “newer heaven and earth” that is supposed to come after this present “new heaven and earth”?