This post continues Carl E. Olson, Will Catholics Be “Left Behind”? (1)

Part Two

I do support the Roman Catholic ecclesiology. However, Olson offers a decent presentation of the dispensational ecclesiology. Classic dispensationalism is characterised by a radical distinction between Israel and the Church and their purposes (or destinies, cf. Vern S. Poythress, Understanding Dispensationalists). Modified dispensationalism has abandoned this distinction and thus undermined the entire dispensational system.

Chapter 7

In Chapter 7, Olson argues that the Church is the New Israel (pp. 215-217). On the basis of an analysis of the Biblical and of the Roman Catholic doctrine of the church, Olson critiques the dispensational distinction between Israel and the Church in four points: It fails hermeneutically, it ignores that the New Covenant fulfils the Old Testament promises and thus establishes a New Israel, the Church. Dispensationalism subverts the Biblical ecclesiology. It also ignores that there is only one people of God throughout history (pp. 220-221).

I am not sure, however, that Olson is correct in claiming that this people is built “through a series of covenants.” The people of God is built by God’s promises that create the faith that justifies (see Romans 4). In fact, I would argue that the most important problem is that dispensationalism (as well as Roman Catholicism) decenters the doctrine of justification.

Olson correctly critiques the view of classic dispensationalism that the church is a mysterious parenthesis that does not fulfil any OT promises (pp. 221-226) and shows that the church is a continuation of the Old Testament Israel (pp. 226-232). Dispensationalism claims that Christ “does not rule as King” (Ryrie, Basic Theology, 1986, p. 259, quoted pp. 234f). Olson shows that this is contrary to the teaching of the New Testament (pp. 235ff) and to the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church (pp. 238-240).

Chapter 8

In Chapter 8, Olson scrutinises the dispensational hermeneutics, which he rightly criticises. However, a large part of this chapter is, in reality, a defense of Roman Catholicism. Olson rejects Sola Scriptura as a non-Biblical and protestant belief and claims that the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church “has the final say in interpreting Scripture … because of the authority and guidance given by Jesus Christ” (p. 276).

Olson discusses the dispensational “literalness” in the view of the Four senses of medieval exegesis (pp. 276-282) and explains – with a concept from the Roman Catholic Dei Verbum – the character of the Old Testament prophecies as “pedagogy” (pp. 282-285).

Chapter 9

Chapter 9 is devoted to the notion of rapture. Dispensationalists such as Walvoord and Ryrie admit that the idea of the rapture is derived from the radical distinction between Israel and the Church (p. 293). Olson asserts – in my view correctly – that “there is a striking absence of proof for the pretribulational Raputre” (296) i.e. the dispensational idea that the Church will be removed from earth before the Tribulation. Finally, Olson argues that the Second coming is not “imminent,” but will take place at an unknown time (pp. 297-302).

Olson emphasises how the notion of the Day of the Lord is a challenge for dispensationalism.

One serious problem for the dispensationalists is the reference to 1 Thessalonians 5 “the day of the Lord”. This term, also rendered as “the day of judgment”, is used in the New Testament to refer to the Second Coming and the end of time. (p. 297f)

Indeed. In fact, I think it is an obstacle to all sorts of premillennalism.

Olson argues against the idea that the church will escape the Tribulation (pp. 302-315) and discusses whether 2 Thessalonians 2 supports the idea of the pretribulational rapture (pp. 315ff). Here Olson quote a quite remarkable claim by Walvoord: “That the Spirit indwells all believers in the Tribulation is nowhere taught” (p. 316).

Olson sketches the two approaches that dispensationalists take to the historical fact that a pretribulational rapture is not taught before around 1800: denial of the importance of history or denial of the historical fact itself (pp. 325-330). He also discusses LaHaye’s fourteen arguments for the pretribulational rapture (pp. 331-335). Finally, Olson discusses the appeal that dispensationalism has (pp. 335-340).

Chapter 10 and the back matters

The concluding Chapter 10 is about “the Catholic vision.” The bibliography is categorised, which helps to overview the literature, but otherwise it is not as userfriendly as one might wish. The index is quite detailed. The short List of key persons consists mainly of dispensationalists.

Concluding remarks

Olson’s Will the Catholics Be “Left Behind” is a broad presentation of dispensationalism. Although I do not agree with the distinctive Roman Catholic arguments of the author, I think that he has shown that dispensationalism is not a sound theology. This is a sad conclusion in view of the fact that dispensationalism is as popular as it is.

The many overviews, quotes and notes makes this volume a helpful introduction, even for those who are not Roman Catholics.

Olson, Carl E. Will Catholics Be “Left Behind”? A Catholic Critique of the Rapture and Today’s Prophecy Preachers. Modern Apologetics Library. San Francisco, California: Ignatius Press, 2003. 424 pp.

Table of Contents

Will Catholics Be “Left Behind”? An Introduction (p. 11-22)

Part One – The Story of the Rapture … and So Much More

1 The Parousia, the Rapture, and the End Times (pp. 25-49)
2 Catholics and the Left Behind Phenomenon (pp. 50-68)
3 A Book of Confusion or Revelation (pp. 69-112)
4 The Millennium: How Long Is a Thousand Years (pp. 113-140)
5 Millenarianism: Early Church to John Nelson Darby (pp. 141-165)
6 Dispensationalism and the Rapture in America (pp. 166-203)

Part Two – A Catholic Critique of Dispensationalism

7 The Kingdom, the Church, and Israel (pp. 207-240)
8 “Bible Prophecy” and Interpreting Scripture (pp. 241-285)
9 Unwrapping the Rapture (pp. 286-340)
10 Conclusion: The Catholic Vision (pp. 341-357)
Glossary of Key Terms (pp. 359-366)
List of Key Persons (pp. 367-371)
Selected Bibliography (pp. 373-390)
Abbreviations (pp. 391-392)
Acknowledgement of Sources Cited (pp. 393-395)
Index (pp. 397-424)

Introductory remarks

I have decided to include Carl E. Olson’s Will Catholics Be “Left Behind,” even though I do not agree with those hermeneutical and doctrinal arguments that are distinctively Roman Catholic. As a Roman Catholic, Olson makes frequent use of Roman-Catholic teaching, especially on hermeneutics and eschatology.

Carl E. Olson, a Master in Theological Studies (2000), was raised as a Fundamentalist and dispensationalist, but converted to the Roman Catholic Church in 1997 (see more here).

Olson writes in a clear, journalistic and – sometimes quite broad – style (for a succinct analysis and challenge of the dispensational hermeneutics, see Vern S. Poythress, Understanding Dispensationalists).

In Part One Olson gives an account of the historical and theological context of the dispensational phenomenon of our time. In Part Two we find a (more) systematic assessment (although Olson does offer some evaluations in Part One). In this post I concentrate on Part One (see here on Part Two).

In general, Olson gives a decent introduction to the history of dispensationalism, to the more important dispensational authors, and to their religious thinking. He also introduces many pieces of secondary literature, which is very helpful for those who will go more deeply into the whole subject. Olson quotes extensively, except from LaHaye and Jenkins’s Tribulation Force, which subtly attacks Roman Catholicism; Olson did not get permission to quote; p. 57 n. 12). Olson’s book is heavily annotated.

Part One

Chapter 3

In my view, Chapter 3, which attempts to outline an interpretation acceptable to Roman Catholics, would benefit from a rewrite. Too much material seems irrelevant to the main argument of Olson’s book. To me it seems more like Olson’s essay on a Catholic interpretation of Revelation.

Even in this chapter, Olson launches severe criticism of the world view of the dispensationalism, comparing it to what David Chilton sees as  pessimism. In fact, Olson cites David Chilton many times, which surprised me because Chilton is a postmillennialist, not an amillennialist, nor a Roman Catholic. Many non-dispensationalists disagree with Chilton’s “optimistic” postmillennialism as well as his theonomic ethics. It may very well be that (some popular) dispensationalists tend “toward a kind of gnosticism in its communication of truth,” as Mark Noll asserts in a passage that Olson quotes (p. 95 n. 56). Whether or not the world view of the ancient Jewish apocalyptists is really similar is another matter. To me, however, it seems fair to describe the dispensational perspective as follows:

These [apocalyptic] elements bear a remarkable similarity to the popular dispensationalist perspective, which asserts that only dispensationalists can understand the book of Revelation, that life on earth is mostly pessimistic, and that there is little reason for working within history to better the earth and the state of humanity. (p. 95).

Chapter 4

Chapter 4 surveys the three main millennial views, but I would suggest other introductions (e.g., Bock [ed.], Three Views on the Millennium). I do not not agree that “ecclesiology is the cornerstone for eschatology” (p. 140). More important is Christology and soteriology.

Chapter 5 and 6

Chapters 5 and 6 are very informative. The phenomenon of dispensationalism is quite strange. Fear and money are two aspects that play a significant role. Fear plays an enormous role in the dispensational communication. And the many books and films etc. is big business.

Olson’s summary of Part One

Concluding Chapter 6, Olson summarises the core features and tendencies of dispensationalism as follows: Dispensationalism is “a reactionary and defensive movement,” motivated by “fear of apostasy, dislike of liberal methods of biblical interpretation, and conviction of impending doom.” Olson and others argue that the dispensationalists also desire “to escape the world and its troubles”. Nevertheless, people are convinced that the dispensational teaching is biblically correct: “a pretribulational Rapture, a seven-year Tribulation, and a thousand-year millennial Kingdom on earth.” Most dispensationalists are resistant to “reasonable dialogue,” according to Olson. Seemingly, dispensationlism makes sense of what is happening in the world, confirms the prophecies of the Bible, and it introduces a certain indifference to culture and politics (pp. 201-203).

From SAGE Publications:

Revelation has always presented major challenges for study, interpretation and application. Over the last twenty years there have been some significant developments in a number of areas, including greater understanding of Revelation’s first-century setting, some settling of debate about the nature of its language, engagement with questions of the complexity of its structure, and a growing awareness of the impact of its rhetoric, both in its original contexts and in the history of interpretation. Yet there still remains a substantial gap between much scholarly insight and its appropriation at a more popular level.

Key Words: Apocalypse • Revelation • interpretation • social setting • rhetorical criticism • language • Old Testament in the New

Logos is about to publish Lenski’s Commentary on the New Testament electronically. The commentary is on the way to replication.

If you want this very helpful exegetical commentary, you may order it for $199.95, but you have to do it immediately. Shortly, the price will change to $299.95.

Thorough as a student of Greek, R. C. H. Lenski interprets the books of the New Testament with meticulous exegetical research while providing an original, literal translation of the text. With his conservative Lutheran perspective, he is unwavering in his high view of Scriptural authority, probing deeply and passionately—arguing his conclusions masterfully.

Beyond exegesis, he provides linguistic and textual analysis, historical background such as information on the author, date, time of writings, authorial intent, chief themes, and much more. Often addressing difficult text, evading nothing, Lenski evaluates multiple interpretations before choosing one in particular. The Lenski Commentary, therefore, will introduce you to a range of interpretations and viewpoints, allowing you to see how other interpretations relate to one another, and will provide the context as to why he has settled on a particular viewpoint.

Richard Charles Henry Lenski, a distinguished Lutheran scholar and commentator, studied for the ministry at the Lutheran Theological Seminary in Columbus, Ohio. Upon earning his Doctor of Divinity, he became Dean of the seminary. He was a former professor at Capital Seminary (now Trinity Lutheran Seminary) in Columbus, Ohio, where he taught in the fields of exegesis, dogmatics, and homiletics. His numerous books and commentaries are written from a conservative perspective.

Here is more information: Lenski’s Commentary on the New Testament (12 Vols.)

Vern Sheridan Poythres is Professor of the New Testament Interpretation at Westminster Theological Seminary. Professor Poythress, an amillennialist, is the author of several articles and books that are of relevance to the study of Revelation (see below).

Understanding Dispensationalists

At a first (and second) glance, the “dispensational” interpretation of Revelation seems strange, at least to a European, Lutheran scholar like me. My impression is that few European scholars are dispensationalists. However, popular, even sensational, books and films have spread dispensational views, as have organisations that do missionary work in Israel and/or among Jews. Hence I have looked for literature on this subject.

Although written more than twenty years ago (the first edition was published in 1987), Vern Poythress’ Understanding Dispensationalists is still a very helpful introduction. Understanding Dispensationalists does not only introduce the reader to dispensationalism. In his challenging of this hermeneutical system Poythress sets forth cogent arguments that are valuable in themselves.

Writing purposefully in a clear and very friendly manner, Poythress discusses the term dispensationalism. He uses it for historical reasons, but prefer terms that are more accurate and specific:

“Darbyism” (after its first proponent), “dual destinationism” (after one of its principal tenets concerning the separate destinies of Israel and the church), or “addressee bifurcationism” (after the principle of hermeneutical separation between meaning for Israel and significance for the church).

Poythress sets forth the characteristics of “classical dispensationalism” (Chapter 2), defined by writers such as John Nelson Darby, Cyrus Scofield, Lewis Sperry Chafer, Charles Ryrie, John F. Walvoord, and others. Poythress recognises variations, some of them so important that they are best taken as a separate group: “modified dispensationalism” (Chapter 3).

Chapter 4 is devoted to “Developments in Covenantal Theology,” as Covenantal Theology is the “principal rival” to dispensationalism. As a Lutheran, I do not subscribe to Covenant Theology. Neither do I think that it is necessary in order to benefit from this volume. Poythress’s covenant-theological approach is recognisable, however.

In Chapter 5 Poythress describes how the classic-dispensational hermeneutical system (as well as some social forces) makes it difficult to argue effectively against dispensationalism. It is necessary to discuss the more basic issues: “what counts as evidence for fulfillment, and how that fulfillment is itself to be understood” (p. 55).

Poythress develops a strategy for dialogue with dispensationalists in the short Chapter 6. One must discuss hermeneutical issues in relation to the interpretation of specific texts. Some issues that need discussion are: the church’s inheritance of OT promises, the nature of OT symbolism, and the use of the Bible in the controversy (pp. 68f).

In three chapters, Poythress develops his argument against dispensationalism. 1 Corianthians 15:51-53 presents a problem to pretribulationalism (Chapter 7), while Hebrews 12:22-24 challenges the hypothesis of “separate parallel destinies for the church and Israel” as well as the problem of “the nonfulfillment of prophecy in the church” (Chapter 12; quotes from p. 118). The penultimate chapter deals with “the fulfillment of Israel in the church” (Chapter 13).

Chapter 8 is a very helpful discussion of “literalness,” which form the basis for Poythress’s analysis and critique of the dispensationalist idea of literalness in chapter 9.

Chapter 10 argues – in my view convincingly – that one cannot interpret the OT in the way dispensationalists do.

What I am calling for, then, is an increased sense for the fact that in the original (grammatical-historical) context, eschatologically oriented prophecy has built into it extra potential. With respect to eschatology, people in the Old Testament were not in the same position as they were for short-range prophecy. Eschatological prophecy had an open-ended suggestiveness. The exact manner of fulfillment frequently could not be pinned down until the fulfillment came. (p. 107)

One of the reasons is that the coming of God changes everything:

But if the transformations of people and land are determined in their character by the coming of God himself, God is still the deepest center of prophetic expectation. Can an Israelite predict in detail what the coming of God will mean? … To have God revealed in full glory to the whole world (Isa. 40:5) means something so spectacular that the Israelite should be reserved about what is metaphorical, and in what way it is metaphorical. (p. 101).

Poythress shows that the Old Testament itself is the best argument against what he calls a “flat” reading. “[I]t is a violation against of grammatical-historical interpretation to read prophecy flat. It is even a violation to read Israel’s history flat.” (p. 104).

Finally, Poythress also shows how the Old Testament typology challenges dispensationalism (Chapter 11).

Table of Contents

1. Getting Dispensationalists and Nondispensationalists to Listen to Each Other (pp. 7-18)
2. Characteristcs of Scofield Dispensationalism (pp. 19-29)
3. Variations of Dispensationalism (pp. 30-38)
4. Developments in Covenant Theology (pp. 39-51)
5. The Near Impossibility of Simple Refutations (pp. 52-65)
6. Strategy for Dialog With Dispensationalist (pp. 66-70)
7. The Last Trumpet (pp. 71-77)
8. What Is Literal Interpretation? (pp. 78-86)
9. Dispensationalist Expositions of Literalness (pp. 87-96)
10. Interpretive Viewpoint in Old Testament Israel (pp. 97-110)
11. The Challange of Typology (pp. 111-117)
12. Hebrews 12:22-24 (pp. 118-125)
13. The Fulfillment of Israel in Christ (pp. 126-129)
14. Other Areas for Potential Exploration (pp. 130-131)

Postscript to the Second Edition (pp. 132-137)
Bibliography (pp. 138-142)

Other works by Poythress

• Poythress, Vern Sheridan. The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R, 2000. (I will return to this book in a later blog)
• Millennium
• Bibliography of Vern Sheridan Poythress

From the Codex Sinaiticus Project website:

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. Its heavily corrected text is of outstanding importance for the history of the Bible and the manuscript - the oldest substantial book to survive Antiquity - is of supreme importance for the history of the book.

The Codex Sinaiticus Project

The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the entire manuscript in digital form and make it accessible to a global audience for the first time. Drawing on the expertise of leading scholars, conservators and curators, the Project gives everyone the opportunity to connect directly with this famous manuscript.

The Codex Sinaiticus Website

The first release of the Codex Sinaiticus Project website will be launched on 24 July 2008 here. The website will be substantially updated in November 2008 and in July 2009, by when the website will have been fully developed.

See more:

• Codex Sinaiticus, the world’s oldest Bible, goes online
• Verdens ældste bibel bliver online (in Danish)

Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., is a major, if not the leading proponent of the so-called partial preterism. Partial preterism asserts that “the bulk of John’s prophecies occur in the first century, soon after his writing of them” (Gentry, in Pate [ed.], Four views, p. 37). This article, “A preterist view of Revelation” is a useful first-hand introduction to Gentry’s view. Thus he is a postmillennialist as well.

Gentry is the leading proponent of the early dating of Revelation (see Before Jerusalem Fell below).

Gentry (b. 1950) is a graduate of Tennessee Temple University (B.A., cum laude), Reformed Theological Seminary (M. Div.), Whitefield Theological Seminary (Th. M.; Th. D., summa cum laude). He also attended Grace Theological Seminary for two years, while a dispensationalist.

A commentary in preparation

Gentry is currently researching an academic commentary: The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of the Book of Revelation (working title for this full-length [perhaps 800+ pages], academic commentary that Gentry issee the Wikipedia article on Gentry for the thesis of this commentary).

According to preliminary studies he has released (”The Wrath of God and Israel”, Fountain Inn, SC: 2007), he will be presenting evidence that the harlot city “Babylon” (Rev. 16:19-19:2) is a metaphor for first century Jerusalem, and that the book’s author John is following the pattern of the Old Testament prophets in denouncing Jerusalem’s unfaithfulness by such images (see especially Jer. 2-3 and Eze. 16). Gentry holds that the theme of Revelation is Christ’s judgment coming against those who pierced him (Rev. 1:7), and the “slain Lamb” (Rev. 5:8,13; etc.) is wreaking vengeance upon first-century Jerusalem in order for God to divorce his unfaithful wife so that he might take a new bride, the Church (Rev. 21-22). Thus, Revelation dramatizes the transition from the old covenant, Temple-based, Judaic economy to the New Covenant, spiritual economy that includes all ethnicities, not just Jews (compare supersessionism). (Wikipedia, see below)

Selected works

Gentry is the author of Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation.

Other books written by Gentry are The Beast of Revelation (1989); He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology; and The Greatness of the Great Commission: The Christian Enterprise in a Fallen World (1990). Some of his books seem to be online.

He is a contributor to four eschatological debate books: C. Marvin Pate, ed., Four Views of the Book of Revelation (Zondervan); Darrell L. Bock, ed., Three Views of the Millennium and Beyond (Zondervan); Thomas D. Ice and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Great Tribulation: Past or Future? (Kregel); and Keith L. Mathison, ed., When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism (P & R).

Articles

See Preterist literature and Articles by Kenneth Gentry

Sources

• Kenneth Gentry (Wikipedia)
• About Kenneth Gentry
• Introducing Dr. Gentry