by Sam Waldron | Sep 19, 2018 | Eschatology
In my last post I attempted to emphasize several of the explicit assertions of Owen regarding 2 Peter 3. In this post I want to suggest that there are several natural inferences or implications of Owen’s argument that need to be carefully weighed.
The Inferential Implications of Owen’s Argument
Here is the first one. If Owen is right, then it follows that the whole Olivet Discourse speaks only of the coming of Jesus for the destruction of Jerusalem. Peter’s words allude to Matthew 24. There is a seamless web between Matthew 24 and 25. Thus, Matthew 25:31-46, the passage which speaks of Jesus coming in glory to judge all nations and consign the sheep to eternal life and the goats to eternal punishment, must rather refer to the coming of Jesus at the destruction of Jerusalem. This passage which speaks so clearly of day of judgment would appear to be nothing more than a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem.
Another inference which may naturally be drawn from Owen is that the other references to the coming of Christ in 1 Peter and 2 Peter must be thought as references to the coming of Christ at the destruction of Jerusalem. I refer to passages such as these:
“so that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ;” (1 Pet. 1:7 NAU)
“Therefore, prepare your minds for action, keep sober in spirit, fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” (1 Pet. 1:13 NAU)
“The end of all things is near; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer.” (1 Pet. 4:7 NAU)
“but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing, so that also at the revelation of His glory you may rejoice with exultation.” (1 Pet. 4:13 NAU)
“And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.” (1 Pet. 5:4 NAU)
“for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.” (2 Pet. 1:11 NAU)
Now let me be clear that I do not know how Owen may have interpreted these passages. I am only asserting that upon the exegetical grounds he takes in 2 Peter 3 all of them may be so interpreted as to refer merely to the destruction of Jerusalem.
I have already admitted that Owen here seems clearly to be adopting a partial preterist position. It also needs to be said, however, that upon Owen’s principles of interpretation it is difficult to find a clear text in the New Testament that teaches the Second Coming of Christ in glory at the end of the age. This is surely a consequence of his exegesis that must be carefully weighed.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Sep 17, 2018 | Eschatology
Owen’s way of reading 2 Peter 3 is so alien to most Christians in our day that there may be some doubt about what he is actually saying and implying. In this post I want to emphasize both the explicit and the implicit significance of the way Owen interprets 2 Peter 3. My hope is that the results of this survey will by themselves raise significant doubt about the propriety of Owen’s exegesis.
The Explicit Extent of Owen’s Argument
Owen takes Luke 21:34, 36 as a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem (page 138). Here is what he says speaking of the “dissolution” of “the Judaical church and state”:
“As it was foretold and threatened by Christ. How were believers cautioned to be ready for it with eminent holiness and watchfulness therein! So Luke xxi. 34, 36, “Take heed to yourselves; watch, therefore.” Why so? “Christ is coming,” verse 27. When? “Why in this generation,” verse 32. What to do? “Why, to dissolve heaven and earth,” verse 25; to “dissolve the Jewish church and state. Watch, therefore, give all diligence.” So also Matt. Xxiv. 42.”
Owen takes the words of 2 Peter 3:4 (“the promise of His Parousia”) as a reference to Jesus’ coming at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Thus, it is not just a coming, but the Parousia which is said to occur at the destruction of Jerusalem.
Owen takes Isaiah 65:17f. as exclusively a reference to the present gospel age (page 135). Remember his words: “this is a prophecy of gospel times only; and that the planting of these new heavens is nothing but the creation of gospel ordinances…” It would be one thing if Owen maintained that this was a promise anticipated or even partly fulfilled in the gospel age. His words, however, are clear. They are exclusively fulfilled in the gospel age— “nothing but the creation of gospel ordinances.”
I find this interpretation deeply troubling in itself for a number of reasons, but what I find even more troubling are its implications or consequences. I will point out those consequences in my next post.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Sep 13, 2018 | Eschatology
In my last post I quoted Owen’s statement of his partial preterist view of 2 Peter 3. I believe this view to be seriously misguided in the exegesis of 2 Peter 3 and also burdened with serious, practical consequences. Let me hasten to add that these serious, practical consequences were probably not as visible nor even as serious in Owen’s day as they are in ours.
In defense of his partial preterist view of the prophecy of 2 Peter 3 Owen says that “I shall offer these two reasons, of many that might be insisted on from the text.” Here is the first of those two reasons.
“Because whatever is here mentioned was to have its peculiar influence on the men of that generation. He speaks of that wherein both the profane scoffers and those scoffed at were concerned, and that as Jews;–some of them believing, others opposing the faith. Now, there was no particular concernment of that generation in that sin, nor in that scoffing, as to the day of judgment in general; but there was a peculiar relief for the one and a peculiar dread of the other at hand, in the destruction of the Jewish nation; and, besides, an ample testimony, both to the one and the other, of the power and dominion of the Lord Jesus Christ;–which was the thing in question between them.” (Works, 9:134)
This is a remarkable assertion. It assumes an identification of the false teaching with which Peter was dealing which will need to be examined. It also asserts that “there was no particular concernment of that generation in that sin, nor in that scoffing, as to the day of judgment in general.” This assertion also needs to be questioned.
But here is Owen’s second reason for his view. It contains assertions that are, if anything, even more troubling.
“Peter tells them, that, after the destruction and judgment that he speaks of, verse 13, “We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth,” etc. They had this expectation. But what is that promise? Where may we find it? Why, we have it in the very words and letter, Isa. Lxv. 17. Now, when shall this that God will create these “new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness?” Saith Peter, “It shall be after the coming of the Lord, after that judgment and destruction of ungodly men, who obey not the gospel, that I foretell.” But now it is evident, from this place of Isaiah, with chap. Lxvi. 21, 22, that this is a prophecy of gospel times only; and that the planting of these new heavens is nothing but the creation of gospel ordinances, to endure for ever. The same thing is so expressed, Heb. Xii. 26-28.” (Works, 9:134, 135)
We must begin to explore the validity of these arguments and their truly massive implications in the next post.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Sep 11, 2018 | Eschatology
My first post on this subject, I must confess, was a deliberate “teaser.” It was a deliberate attempt to attract interest in my subject and get you to “stay tuned” and come back next week to the same time and channel. Now I must ‘fess up and tell you without further ado what my concern is about Owen. It is found in Book 9 page 134 of his Works. My general area of concern is eschatological. My specific concern is the Preterist interpretation of 2 Peter 3 which Owen adopts. Some of you may not have Owen’s works. Of course, this may at some level and for some people undermine your very credibility as a Reformed Baptist. (Pardon my humor, please!) Yet for those of you who do not have his Works here is what Owen says:
“On this foundation I affirm, that the heavens and earth intended in this prophecy of Peter, the coming of the Lord, the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, mentioned in the destruction of that heaven and earth, do all of them relate, not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state; …”
Owen goes on to offer two reasons (which he says are among many that could be offered) for this view. In the posts that follow I will provide a critique both of Owen’s reasoning and several (what I believe to be) conclusive arguments against the exegetical ground he occupies in his interpretation of this key, eschatological passage.
Before I close this present post, I simply want to identify what the position is that Owen is taking. He is quite obviously taking the partial preterist approach to New Testament prophecy and to 2 Peter 3. I gladly acknowledge that, since he speaks of the last and final judgment of the world, he is not defending the full preterist view. That is to say, his view is that some but not all of the prophecies of the New Testament are fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem and the events surrounding it. This is partial preterism, not its heretical evil twin, full or hyper-preterism.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Sep 8, 2018 | Eschatology
Caveat comes from the Latin cavere. The verb in Latin means to be on guard. I am using its English descendant caveat to mean a warning or caution. Such is my esteem for John Owen that I prefer the softer idea of caution.
John Owen has attained (and not without warrant) a high status among Reformed Baptists in our day. This status derives from many things, I suppose. He is certainly a profound and faithful expositor of the Reformed faith. He is also a progenitor of the Reformed Baptist movement as a Congregationalist Puritan and one of the authors of that confession from which the mass of the 1689 is immediately drawn, the Savoy Declaration of Faith. The views articulated in the Savoy are only a kind of half step from the positions regarding baptism and the church found in the 1689. 1689 Federalism has publicized the idea that Owen’s views of covenant theology articulate a covenant theology amenable to and even foundational for Reformed Baptist views of covenant theology.
For all of these reasons, to cite Owen is almost to cite Scripture in Reformed books and blogs. Do we have a celebrity theologian of our own in John Owen? This is a question, I think, worth considering. Christian realism and spiritual sanity require, I think, that we admit that all men have spiritual and exegetical feet of clay. I think this is true of John Owen, and in the posts that follow I will point out a place at which I am convinced Owen does have feet of clay. It is also an exegetical place about which, in my opinion, we may no longer entertain his views without opening ourselves to serious error.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
