The Promise of the Future

Rating:
Summary: Venema's "difficult" task.
Review: Cornelis P Venema's "difficult" task, or yet more accurately his impossible task, is to provide a system that shows Christ's coming is split in two while the 'end of the age' refers to the future. The task is in fact so difficult for Partial Preterists that they cannot agree among themselves as where the "end of the age" is, see The End Of All Things, by Seraiah forward by RC Sproul Jr., page 40.

Matt. 24:9 refers foremost to our future here. Yet Matt. 24:9 is a parallel to Luke 21:12: "But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues". By starting off with a proviso that Matt. 24:9 refers to Christ's coming in our future, yet various other parts of Matt. 24 refer to AD 70 on account of historical relation Venema's method of categorization agrees that Luke says Matthew 24:1-14 is fulfilled in AD 70 creating a contradiction. Cornelis P Venema has only asserted by the natural flow of consistency that Full-Preterism has the answer, if we will believe there is one Gospel in Matthew and Luke and by his method of interpretation.

Matthew 24:1-14 refers foremost to our future here. However the scenario of Matthew 24:1-14 is included with all of Matthew 24:4-28 in other places in the Bible that deal with the dichotomy of the apocalypse. The Bible itself reaches past Venema's verse ending in Matthew 24:14 to show that 24:1-14 is included with what example Cornelis P Venema outlines as the historical type of coming for AD 70. Matthew 24:4-28, Mark 13:7-23, Luke 21:9-24 and Revelation 6:1-11 all parallel, so to say that part of Matt. 24 has to do only with AD 70 is in the end only to affirm that a consistent view of 24:1-14 refers only to AD 70.

Cornelis P Venema separates the soul and the body, realizing its heretical gravity again and again. Yet he goes on to assert it admitting there is no solid foundation for it. Cornelis P Venema writes of the two eschatons for the two parts of man: ". . . divide the Bible's teaching about the future into two parts . . . individual . . . and . . . creation. . . . Though this division of the Bible's teaching is somewhat artificial, it is nonetheless unavoidable . . ." pg. 35. It is not "somewhat artificial", it is entirely artificial and does not exist in the Bible. Cornelis P Venema admits our resurrection into the presence of Christ is focused on the "body" alone in Scripture (page 40-41). Ignoring this bar he asserts only the old unrelated arguments again providing only confusion for those morning the loss of their loved ones leaving us to believe they are in some kind of state of limbo waiting.

When Peter sought to divert Christ from the thinking of the cross as an exit from this world he was sternly rebuked by the Lord and referred to as the enemy of Christendom. Cornelis P Venema writes on Page 225: "This golden age, the period of the millennium . . . will be a period marked by moral righteousness, universal peace among the nations . . . and unprecedented economic prosperity. " The millennium is marked by believers and their families who have their heads cut off their bodies as they take a stand for Jesus against Satan. These martyrdoms demonstrate who are the righteous and and proceed to show the reason for the second coming, this is one of the most elementary truths of Scripture, note Mark 13:20 with Rev. 6:11. Note that Cornelis P Venema uses Rev. 6:11 elsewhere on page 50 to refer to our present state, creating another contradiction with his view of the millennium. If there are two comings (one in AD 70 and one in our future) they are radically identical not radically different. The separation of the wheat and the tares happens according to this view along with ever increasing prosperity rather then ever increasing solidarity with the cross of Christ. This view is in fact the anti-Christian view, not unlike the expectations which were held by Judas the son of perdition and those who crucified Christ. That which is spiritual is replaced for that which is natural and a counterfeit peace with the kingdom of Satan is acquired.

Cornelis P Venema sets out to show that Matt. 24:36 is set apart to refer to a prosperous world in the future. He seeks to set it apart for his view of the millennium that radically stands apart from AD 70. However in context Matt. 24:36 refers to Jerusalem as the days of Noah as seen in the next verse 24:37, and the days where the kingdom is taken from Jerusalem in Matt. 21:43-43. The last hour concept is repeated in Matthew 24:44, 24:44, 25:13, covering a much broader section. Matt. 24:36 is not an isolated truth that is taken apart by itself for two distinct comings. If there is a logical way to divide Matt. 25 here, this Cornelis P Venema has yet to provide, other then to say that there is a rule that when we cannot understand God's word we can divide it into irrelevant a truths until what is to be presently understood completely disappears.

The Promise Of The Future is founded on a partial coming, partial resurrection and therefore answers nothing we are presently at odds with today, especially in light of the new questions that have come to light through Full-Preterism, it is a hopelessly banal work. For more information see redirectionalism.com

Please understand that my arguments here are not configured to portray any PERSONS as heretical, but only to show why I disagree with any VIEW in the most clearest way I can use. I consider Partial Preterists to be my Christian brothers in the Lord. I only disagree with their form of eschatology and wish to make it clear why.

Don-Perry
OPC-Westfield-NJ

Rating:
Summary: Venema's "difficult" task.
Review: Cornelis P Venema's "difficult" task, or yet more accurately his impossible task, is to provide a system that shows Christ's coming is split in two while the 'end of the age' refers to the future. The task is in fact so difficult for Partial Preterists that they cannot agree among themselves as where the "end of the age" is, see The End Of All Things, by Seraiah forward by RC Sproul Jr., page 40.

Matt. 24:9 refers foremost to our future here. Yet Matt. 24:9 is a parallel to Luke 21:12: "But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues". By starting off with a proviso that Matt. 24:9 refers to Christ's coming in our future, yet various other parts of Matt. 24 refer to AD 70 on account of historical relation Venema's method of categorization agrees that Luke says Matthew 24:1-14 is fulfilled in AD 70 creating a contradiction. Cornelis P Venema has only asserted by the natural flow of consistency that Full-Preterism has the answer, if we will believe there is one Gospel in Matthew and Luke and by his method of interpretation.

Matthew 24:1-14 refers foremost to our future here. However the scenario of Matthew 24:1-14 is included with all of Matthew 24:4-28 in other places in the Bible that deal with the dichotomy of the apocalypse. The Bible itself reaches past Venema's verse ending in Matthew 24:14 to show that 24:1-14 is included with what example Cornelis P Venema outlines as the historical type of coming for AD 70. Matthew 24:4-28, Mark 13:7-23, Luke 21:9-24 and Revelation 6:1-11 all parallel, so to say that part of Matt. 24 has to do only with AD 70 is in the end only to affirm that a consistent view of 24:1-14 refers only to AD 70.

Cornelis P Venema separates the soul and the body, realizing its heretical gravity again and again. Yet he goes on to assert it admitting there is no solid foundation for it. Cornelis P Venema writes of the two eschatons for the two parts of man: ". . . divide the Bible's teaching about the future into two parts . . . individual . . . and . . . creation. . . . Though this division of the Bible's teaching is somewhat artificial, it is nonetheless unavoidable . . ." pg. 35. It is not "somewhat artificial", it is entirely artificial and does not exist in the Bible. Cornelis P Venema admits our resurrection into the presence of Christ is focused on the "body" alone in Scripture (page 40-41). Ignoring this bar he asserts only the old unrelated arguments again providing only confusion for those morning the loss of their loved ones leaving us to believe they are in some kind of state of limbo waiting.

When Peter sought to divert Christ from the thinking of the cross as an exit from this world he was sternly rebuked by the Lord and referred to as the enemy of Christendom. Cornelis P Venema writes on Page 225: "This golden age, the period of the millennium . . . will be a period marked by moral righteousness, universal peace among the nations . . . and unprecedented economic prosperity. " The millennium is marked by believers and their families who have their heads cut off their bodies as they take a stand for Jesus against Satan. These martyrdoms demonstrate who are the righteous and and proceed to show the reason for the second coming, this is one of the most elementary truths of Scripture, note Mark 13:20 with Rev. 6:11. Note that Cornelis P Venema uses Rev. 6:11 elsewhere on page 50 to refer to our present state, creating another contradiction with his view of the millennium. If there are two comings (one in AD 70 and one in our future) they are radically identical not radically different. The separation of the wheat and the tares happens according to this view along with ever increasing prosperity rather then ever increasing solidarity with the cross of Christ. This view is in fact the anti-Christian view, not unlike the expectations which were held by Judas the son of perdition and those who crucified Christ. That which is spiritual is replaced for that which is natural and a counterfeit peace with the kingdom of Satan is acquired.

Cornelis P Venema sets out to show that Matt. 24:36 is set apart to refer to a prosperous world in the future. He seeks to set it apart for his view of the millennium that radically stands apart from AD 70. However in context Matt. 24:36 refers to Jerusalem as the days of Noah as seen in the next verse 24:37, and the days where the kingdom is taken from Jerusalem in Matt. 21:43-43. The last hour concept is repeated in Matthew 24:44, 24:44, 25:13, covering a much broader section. Matt. 24:36 is not an isolated truth that is taken apart by itself for two distinct comings. If there is a logical way to divide Matt. 25 here, this Cornelis P Venema has yet to provide, other then to say that there is a rule that when we cannot understand God's word we can divide it into irrelevant a truths until what is to be presently understood completely disappears.

The Promise Of The Future is founded on a partial coming, partial resurrection and therefore answers nothing we are presently at odds with today, especially in light of the new questions that have come to light through Full-Preterism, it is a hopelessly banal work. For more information see redirectionalism.com

Please understand that my arguments here are not configured to portray any PERSONS as heretical, but only to show why I disagree with any VIEW in the most clearest way I can use. I consider Partial Preterists to be my Christian brothers in the Lord. I only disagree with their form of eschatology and wish to make it clear why.

Don-Perry
OPC-Westfield-NJ

Rating:
Summary: A true optimistic amillennialist!
Review: Cornelis Venema has done the church a wonderful service by writing a comprehensive and accessible text on eschatology from a consistently Reformed perspective. The book thoroughly covers all of the important topics in both individual and cosmic eschatology: death, the intermediate state, the second coming, signs of the times, millennial views, the resurrection of the body, final judgment, heaven, and hell. He does so in a fair and irenic manner.

I would take issue with a few interpretive details, but these minor quibbles do not detract from my overall enthusiasm for the book. I would highly recommend it to anyone seeking a good single volume resource on eschatology.

Rating:
Summary: Informative, challenging, inspiring, and highly recommended
Review: In The Promise Of The Future, Cornelis Venema, Dean of the Faculty and Professor of Doctrinal Studies at Mid- America Reformed Seminary, Dyer, Indiana, provides a major examination of biblical teachings on the future of the individual, the church, and the universe as a whole. The Christ-centered nature of biblical teachings on the future is emphasized, as is the importance of the church's historic confessions for an understanding of eschatology. The Promise Of The Future is informative, challenging, inspiring, and very highly recommended reading for students of Christian theology, biblical studies, eschatology, and prophecy.