A friend of mine reached out to me that, apparently, I am once again the “flavor of the week” for Mike Wiltcher “review” (I use this term lightly) of my book Then Comes the End. I certainly do not mind any reviews or critiques of my work, so long as they are academically honest. Wiltcher’s so-called “review” is neither academic nor honest. I went and looked at his post and saw that along with his “review,” he posted the following meme:
I commented publicly on Wiltcher’s post: “Hey Mike Wiltcher I certainly don’t mind any reviews of my book, but the meme you’re using is totally off base and accusatory. I am by no means 'anti-Semitic' or believe in Platonism in the least. This is not simply another example of 'broad brush' arguments, it’s academically dishonest. So, I would just ask that you find a new meme and update your post with that meme. Thanks”
Wiltcher then responded with the typical, “I never said YOU were
anti-Semitic …” — which is not at all what I charged him with — and he accused me
of “showing a great inability to understand plain English.” Well, I can assure
Wiltcher that I understand plain English, and he understands context.
Furthermore, he understands the implications of the meme that he used in his
posting, which is why he has now doubled down (out of the “goodness” of his
heart) with an even more derogatory meme.
Wiltcher can claim that he never said “I” was [fill in the blank], but he sure did make the statement, “This phrase shows that Elder Jason is laboring from the Gonostic [sic] inspired concept that ALL humanity will be SPIRITUAL and NO ONE will have a physical body” — a point I NEVER make in my book. Again, Wiltcher’s so-called “review” is neither academic nor honest. I strongly affirm the physical, bodily resurrection of the dead. As a matter of fact, on page 11 footnote 25 of my book, I state, “The essential view of eschatology should be a belief in the literal return of Christ and the bodily resurrection of the dead at the Parousia.” So, to infer or even specifically state that I am "laboring from Gnosticism" and deny the bodily resurrection is borderline libel.
Wiltcher’s ramblings are indicative of what I have come to expect from dispensational Apostolics in falsely labeling a doctrine as something else as a fear tactic rather than offering an academic response. I saw in a sample of his publication of the Hayes-Wiltcher Debate on Millennialism that Wiltcher lists both Postmillennialism and Amillennialism under the one heading of Nunc-Millennialism so that he can lump Preterists (like Gary DeMar) and Amillennialists all in the same boat — again so academically dishonest — when neither Full nor Partial Preterist ascribe to Amillennialism. I investigate this common misconception on pages 123–126 of my book. This is similar to how liberal politicians attack those who affirm traditional marriage as “homophobes.” “Antisemitism,” “Platonism,” “Preterist,” these are all theological buzz words dispensational Apostolics use to draw suspicion to anything not dispensational-premillennialism. As a friend commented to me, “You don’t need substantive arguments if you can label someone with a hate crime and create a meme.” It is really kind of sad, because I have read non-Apostolics who are more academically honest in their reviews of Oneness Pentecostalism than some of our own brethren are when it comes to eschatology.
I think the most absurd comment Wiltcher made, though, is that the many (over 800) footnotes in my book are “cherry picking of whom [I] quoted.” Understand, the Work Cited for my book is just over 15 pages long! Likewise, my book is an expansion of my MDiv thesis, which was reviewed by two UGST professors — one of whom has three doctorates, and the other is a recognized Johannine scholar even among non-Apostolics and a published author (T&T Clark) — and the Academic Dean who is a scholar in linguistics. If my dissertation were even remotely guilty of “cherry picking” sources, these three well-respected Apostolic scholars who have called my feet to the carpet in my thesis defense. My thesis was reviewed and approved without any requirements for additions.
It is just dumbfounding to me, reading through Wiltcher’s “review,” of
how much he ignores in trying to answer arguments from my book. In trying to
answer who will populate the Millennial earth, Wiltcher appeals to Joel 2 and
mentions people born in the Millennium, and these are both points that I
already responded to in my book. If anyone is “cherry picking” here, it’s
Wiltcher in what he “reviews” and what he ignores. So, to the reading audience,
I recommend that you simply take Wiltcher’s “review” with a grain of salt. His
memes, false assumptions, and false associations make him look more like Elmer
Fudd hunting a paper tiger.
To my dispensational-premillennial Apostolic brothers who have reached
out to me with honest, critical reviews (YES, I have received a few), I simply
say THANK YOU for disagreeing without being derogatory. And finally, to my
non-dispensational, Amillennial-leaning Apostolic brothers who have reached out
in support of my book (I just received another new message while composing this
blog!), again, I say THANK YOU. As I noted in my 2023 UGST Symposium
presentation, there is a seismic shift in dispensationalism and eschatology,
not only among Oneness Pentecostals but throughout all Pentecostal
denominations. I think a big part of this from a Oneness Pentecostal view is
that we have new generations of Apostolics who were not spoon-fed
dispensationalism through the old Search for Truth Home Bible Studies and are
less worried about fitting in with the evangelicals and fundamentalists and
more concerned about being Acts 2:38-centric. Finally, as I mention in my book,
my position is not necessarily a rejection of Premillennialism (although, I
would only accept historical Premillennialism like G. E. Ladd), but more
of an affirmation of Amillennialism as a valid interpretation of Revelation 20
that expresses the fewest exegetical difficulties and conforms more closely to
Apostolic Pentecostal soteriology, pneumatology, and eschatology.
