A friend of mine, Jeremy Sexton, is the pastor of Christ the King, a church with a weekly attendance of 225. Interestingly, his church, located in Springfield, MO, is not an Assembly of God congregation, but a member of a Reformed denomination. While not claiming to be a Pentecostal or charismatic, Jeremy is appreciative of the movement and what it has brought to the body of Christ. We’ve been friends for several years and my wife and I had the privilege of visiting him while he pastored a newly planted church in South Carolina, enjoying his entire family’s warm hospitality as they opened up their home for our stay.

My visit several years ago was planned after I had read a brilliant article by Jeremy in Westminster Theological Journal, titled “Who Was Born When Enosh Was 90?” in 2015. In the article Jeremy essentially destroyed, scripturally and gramatically, the the prevailing seminary/academic arguments for a chronological-gap theory of the chronologies of Genesis 5 and 11. The chronological-gap theory that has prevailed in the Christian academy is the result of theologians of a century ago to accommodate the Biblical account of creation to non-Christian scientific evolutionary theories. The theory states that there were years, decades, even centuries, separating those listed as fathers and those listed as their immediate descendants:

For example, Genesis 5:9-11, from which Jeremy came up with the title of his article:

---

When Enosh had lived 90 years, he fathered Kenan. Enosh lived after he fathered Kenan 815 years and had other sons and daughters. ¹Thus all the days of Enosh were 905 years, and he died.

---

The chronological-gap theory would ask us to believe that Kenan was not actually born when Enosh was 90, but rather at that point someone else, and probably many more after the original “someone else,” was born that caused Kenan to be fathered way out in the future. This sleight-of-hand allows for thousands of additional years to be placed into this account, or as much time as the new evolutionary theories demanded. For the first time in Christian history theologians failed to “pull down all the vain philosophies that exalted themselves against the knowledge of God,” and sought accommodation, acceptance and admiration from their non-Christian academic peers.

Jeremy’s article, as a mere pastor, didn’t sit well with the academic-theologian establishment and he found it hard to get published, although as I mentioned, it did finally make its way into the WTJ. When it was published, the pushback was harsh and personal on the academic side, yet received with thankfulness and appreciation on the pastoral side.

I’m not going to rehash that article now, as you can read it online and watch my interview with him that is on PentecostalPastor (see Genesis). However, the debate goes on as Jeremy has recently defended and enlarged his work with an article in the Journal of Evangelical Theology Society, or JETS. I’ve placed the links to the articles below, and I want to again point out, that from my view, pastor-theologians, not academic-theologians, will be far more inclined to advance Christian thought and provide a firm foundation for scientific and cultural advancement, as they are far less hindered by long-held positions built for the enhancement of academic reputation, but rather trust God’s Word to be true and make them and their congregations understanding and wise. Jeremy’s articles are on one level easy to read, but frankly they require concentrated effort to work through all the linguistic info. However, I think all pastors, Pentecostal or otherwise, will find incredibly beneficial. It will be worth your time and effort to read these, which include one critic’s response, carefully.

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/61/61-1/JETS_61.1_5-25_Sexton.pdf

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/61/61-1/JETS_61.1_27-37_Steinmann.pdf

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/61/61-1/JETS_61.1_39-45_Sexton.pdf