A Case for the Futurist Interpretation of the Book of Revelation

Mr. Andy Woods

Introduction

While previous generations ofdispensational interpreters may have enjoyed the luxury of the widespreadassumption that the Book of Revelation primarily concerns future events, such a"golden age" has now come to an end. Today, many scholarly and popularcommentators alike are aggressively challenging the futurist interpretation ofRevelation. Perhaps the most vociferous challengers to the futurist positioncome from the works of partial preterists who contend that the futuristicsection of the book (4-22) was mostly fulfilled in the events surrounding thefall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.[1] They believethat the Book of Revelation was penned in the mid 60's and predicts God'sdivorce and A.D. 70 judgment upon harlotrous, national Israel due to her rejection ofChrist. At that time, God was also at work creating the new universal,international church to permanently replace disgraced and judged Israel (John4:21; Gal 3:9, 28-29; 6:16; Eph 2:14). However, partial preterists are quick todistinguish themselves from full preterists by still holding to a future bodilyreturn of Christ and final judgment (20:7-15).[2]

The partial preterist relies upon several keytexts in Revelation in order to portray the book as a prediction that wasessentially fulfilled two thousand years ago. However, as this paper will show,these texts actually end up arguing for futurism rather than preterism.Although time constraints prevent an exhaustive study on how preterists handlethe entirety of the book, this paper will highlight several textual argumentsrelied upon by partial preterist Kenneth Gentry in some of his recent materialsurveying the Book of Revelation.[3]While some futurists may believe that the preterist early date scheme ends thedebate, this paper will attempt to show that the preterist system should berejected regardless of whether one holds a Neronic (A.D. 65) or Domitianic date (A.D. 95) for the composition ofthe book since the text itself favors futurism over preterism.

Hermeneutics

As with most theologicalcontroversies, differences among competing viewpoints are rooted in differenthermeneutical methodologies.[4]This principle holds true in the dispute between preterists and futurists. Thefuturist applies a consistently literal or normal[5]interpretive grid. This method attaches to every word the same meaning that itwould have in normal usage, whether employed in speaking, writing, or thinking.[6]It also entails interpreting the Apocalypse according to the same hermeneuticalrules that one employs when interpreting any other section of Scripture.[7]

Although its theologicalopponents often malign the normal hermeneutical method as a wooden andinflexible literalism that fails to consider Revelation's symbolic characterand multiple figures of speech,[8]such a characterization is erroneous. As in ordinary communication, the normalinterpretive method recognizes symbolism and figures of speech when they areconspicuous in the text. Clues such as the adverb "spiritually" (11:8), thenoun "sign" (12:1), the comparative words "like" or "as" (8:8), directcorrespondence with Old Testament concepts (Rev 13:2; Dan 7), andinterpretations of visions found within the same context (17:18) all alert theinterpreter to the reality that symbolism and figures of speech are beingemployed. When the interpreter encounters such language he is assisted byeither the immediate context (12:3, 9), the Old Testament (12:1; Gen 37:9-10),and the notion of comparison inherent in a simile (8:8) in order to discern themeaning of the figure of speech or symbol being used.

A consistent application of aliteral approach to Revelation logically leads the interpreter away fromviewing the book's contents as being fulfilled in the past and instead leads tothe futurist interpretation.[9]A relationship exists between literalism and futurism because the ordinaryimport of Revelation's words and phrases make it impossible to argue thatRevelation's contents have already been fulfilled. The destruction of half ofthe world's population (Rev 6:8; 9:15) and the greatest earthquake in humanhistory (Rev 16:18) obviously have never taken place. In fact, we might ask howelse God could have possibly communicated global, futuristic concepts if thislanguage is not allowed to do so?

However, the preterist escapes the normal meaningof language by assuming that Revelation is part of the "apocalyptic genre."This classification presupposes that Revelation belongs to a special group ofnon-canonical writings that flourished from the intertestamental period intothe first century[10]"where symbolism is the rule and literalism is the exception."[11]This categorization functions as a sort of "get out of jail for free card."Whenever the details of Revelation's text do not square with the A.D. 70 events, the apocalyptic assumption allowsthe preterist to theorize that John is merely employing elevated apocalyptichyperbole. Such a device allows the preterist to "cram" Revelation's contentsback into the first century regardless of the text's global language.[12]

Byway of analogy, during my law school days my professors used to say that theUnited States Constitution is a "living and breathing document." Such a genrecategorization is popular among legal academics because it allows them todispense with authorial intention and simultaneously gives them the literarylicense to read their own ideology into the text. Classifying Revelation asapocalyptic literature similarly allows the preterist to reach his theologicalconclusion of an A.D. 70 realization regardless of inconvenienttextual details. However, the assumption that Revelation is part of theapocalyptic category can be countered by noting that any similarities it haswith these non-canonical works are outweighed by notable differences betweenthe two.[13]

Theargument most relied upon by preterists to contend for a first centuryfulfillment is Revelation's so called "time texts." Because Revelation makesuse of the words "shortly" or "quickly" or tavcos (Rev1:1; 2:16; 3:11; 11:14; 22:6, 7, 12, 20), "near" or "at hand" or ejgguvs (Rev 1:3; 22:10), and "about to" or mevllw (1:19; 3:10), preterists believe that theyhave the literary license to locate the fulfillment of most of John'sprophecies in A.D. 70.[15]However, the preterist errs in assuming that these words are technicalexpressions that always have the same definition every time they are used. Infact, each of these terms has a broad semantic range and therefore its meaningmust be determined by its context rather than through the imposition of anartificial "one size fits all" grid.

Forexample, besides always understanding these words chronologically indicatingwhen Christ will return, it is also possible to understand them adverbially orqualitatively indicating the manner of Christ's return. In other words, when the action comes it will come suddenly or with greatrapidity.[16] TheNew Testament allows for such a usage. For example, while it is true thatScripture often uses "shortly" or "quickly" (tacos) in a chronological sense toindicate "when" (1 Timothy 3:14), Scripture also uses the same word in aqualitative sense to indicate "how." For instance, Acts 22:18 uses tacos toindicate manner when it says, "Make haste, and get out of Jerusalem quickly,because they will not accept your testimony about me." The LXX also displays anadverbial use of these expressions by using them in prophetic contexts thatwould not be fulfilled for hundreds and sometimes thousands of years or moreinto the future (Isa 13:22; 51:5; Zeph 1:7, 14; Obad 15; cf. Isa 5:26; 13:6; 58:8; Joel 1:15; 2:1; 3:14).[17]Given the broad semantic range of these terms, "context is king" in determiningwhether the chronological or adverbial meaning is applicable. Because thecontext of Revelation involves global events that have not yet come to pass, anadverbial rather than a chronological meaning should be assigned to thesewords.[18]

WhileRevelation's "timing texts" pose no obstacle to the futurist interpretation,these texts pose considerable problems for the preterist interpreter. Partialpreterist interpretive problems are created by the fact that Revelation's"timing texts" are found at the end of the Book of Revelation as well as thebeginning (Rev 22:6, 7, 10, 12, 20). The partial preterist system still wantsto hold to a future bodily appearing and final judgment (Rev 20:7-15). However,the use of tavcos and ejgguvs in Revelation 22 is injurious to the partialpreterist system, because the existence of these words at the end of the booklogically leads to the conclusion that the entire Book of Revelation wasfulfilled in A.D. 70 rather than just most of it. If the use of tavcos and ejgguvs in the early chapters of Revelation leadpartial preterists to conclude that most of the book's prophecies werefulfilled in A.D. 70, then surely these identical words found atthe end of the book should also lead to the conclusion that the entire book wasfulfilled in A.D. 70.

Inessence, it is impossible to be a consistent partial preterist because thelogical corollary of partial preterism is full preterism. In actuality, thedesignations "partial preterist" and "full preterist" are misnomers. Rather,partial preterists should be labeled "inconsistent preterists" while fullpreterists should be referred to as "consistent preterists." This inconsistencyis evident even to some partial preterists, such as David Chilton, whoabandoned his partial preterist system in favor of full preterism.

Because of the use of tavcos and ejgguvs in Revelation 22, in order for partialpreterists to be consistent, they also must believe that the Second Advent andfinal judgment have already taken place. Such a belief is at odds with thegreat ecumenical church creeds, which teach a future bodily appearing ofChrist. Denying the Second Advent takes one outside the pale of orthodoxy andinto the camp of heterodoxy or heresy. Thus, the partial preteristunderstanding of Revelation's timing texts flirts dangerously with unorthodoxy.[19]

Theme of theBook of Revelation (Rev 1:7)

Rather than seeing Revelation 1:7 as speaking ofChrist's Second Advent, preterists believe this verse signals Revelation'stheme as God's A.D. 70 judgment upon apostate Israel. The verse supposedly teaches thatChrist came non-bodily through the Roman armies to judge Israel for herrejection of Him. Preterists attempt to make their case by appealing toScripture's frequent use of cloud imagery to depict non-bodily, divine judgment(Isa 19:1), the Jewish guilt borne by the Jews for crucifying Christ (Acts2:22-23), associating "tribes" with Jews, and interpreting "earth" (gh') as the land of Israel.[20]However, there are at least two problems with this interpretation.[21]

First, the phrase "all thetribes of the earth" (pa`sai aiJ fulai th`s gh`s) always has a universal ratherthan local nuance whenever it is employed in the Old Testament (Gen. 12:3;28:14; Ps 72:17; Zech 14:17). This phrase refers to all the nations in everyone of its Septuagint occurrences and never refers to the Israelite tribes.[22]Second, the term "earth" (gh's) most likely has a universal meaning rather thana local meaning in the context of Revelation 1:7. Although the term "earth" (gh's)can have a local meaning by referring to the nation of Israel (1 Sam 13:19;Zech 12:12; Matt 2:6), it can also have a universal meaning by referring to allthe earth (Gen 1:1; Matt 5:18). In fact the universal use of the word "earth"is found just a few verses earlier (1:5) as well as at the end of the book(21:1).

Thus, the meaning of theterm depends upon the context in which it is used. Because of the globalcontext of 1:7 ("every eye" and "all the tribes of the earth") as well as therest of the book, the universal rather than local meaning of "earth" fits best.By interpreting the phrase "earth" (gh's) in Revelation 1:7 to mean exactly thesame thing that it means in a few other isolated contexts (1 Sam 13:19; Zech12:12; Matt 2:6), preterists are guilty of committing a hermeneutical errorknown as "illegitimate totality transfer." This error arises when the meaningof a word as derived from its use elsewhere is then automatically read into thesame word in a foreign context.[23]

Relevance tothe Seven Churches of Asia Minor (Rev 2-3)

Preteristscontend that interpreting Revelation's prophecies as concerning the distantfuture is to make the book irrelevant to the seven churches, which were John'soriginal addressees. Preterists contend that interpreting Revelation in such amanner is to engage in a cruel "mockery" of the adverse circumstances of theseven churches.[24] Such acontention is without merit. It is quite common throughout the Old Testamentprophetic material for God to comfort His people in the present by furnishingthem with a vision of the distant future. The Book of Isaiah amply refutes theidea that the prophecy must relate to the writer's original audience. Isaiahnot only sought to address the needs of his own day (Isa 1-35) but also theneeds of a future generation of Jews in Babylonian Captivity (Isa 40-55). Also,Isaiah's futuristic prophecies as recorded in Isaiah 40-66 were designed tocomfort Israel in her present adverse circumstances in 700 B.C.

Thissame pattern is seen in other Old Testament prophetic material (Ezek 34-48;Amos 9:11-15; Zech 12-14). Revelation simply follows this Old Testament patternby providing the persecuted churches (Rev 2-3) with a futuristic visioncommunicating that God will ultimately conquer all forces oppressing the churchat the end of history (Rev 4-22). In fact, even the partial preterist systemrecognizes this practice. While partial preterists hold to a future return andjudgment in Revelation 20:7-15,[25]many of the exhortations that Christ gave to the seven churches are drawn fromthat section of Scripture (3:5 and 20:15; 2:11 and 20:14).

Inactuality, it is the preterist interpretation that makes Revelation irrelevantto the seven churches. For example, although the preterist understands thepersecution of the beast in Revelation 13 as the Neronian persecution, that persecution was confined to the city of Romeand consequently never reached Asia Minor.[26]Regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, "What does a localized judgmenthundreds of miles away have to do with the seven churches of Asia?the promiseto shield the Philadelphia church from judgment is meaningless if that judgmentoccurs far beyond the borders of that city."[27]

Preteristsattempt to overcome this relevance problem by appealing to local enemies taking advantage of the generalanti-Christian sentiment ushered in by the emperor's Roman persecution[28]as well as the "aftershocks" of Jerusalem's destruction.[29]However, these solutions are unsatisfying since they fail to tightly connectthe predicament of the churches with either the Neronian persecution or the A.D. 70 events. Also without merit is the notionthat the destruction of Jerusalem was relevant to the churches by ridding themof their tendency to gravitate back toward Jewish customs.[30]The permanent rift between Judaism and Christianity did not begin until the90's and did not reach its final form until the events surrounding the BarCochba revolt inA.D. 135.[31]

God's Divorce Decree (Rev 5)

Mostdispensationalists understand the seven-sealed scroll as the title deed to theearth that will bring about first of all judgment and then the kingdomincluding Israel's ultimate restoration. However, the preterist understandsthis scroll as "God's divorce decree against his Old Testament wife for herspiritual adultery" and ultimate sin of rejecting Christ.[32]Gentry attempts to bolster his case by appealing to various Old Testamentconcepts. For example, he sees a connection between the seven-fold nature ofthe seal judgments and the seven-fold nature of Israel's covenant curses (Lev26:18, 24, 28). However, the rest of the chapter does not predict God'spermanent casting aside of Israel but rather her eventual restoration (Lev26:40-46). Therefore, these covenant curses represent mere temporal disciplinerather than a wholesale rejection.

Moreover,Gentry parallels the scroll in Revelation 5 with the scroll of Ezekiel 2:8-3:3,which represents a message of judgment against Judah that was fulfilled in theBabylonian Captivity.[33]However, when the Book of Ezekiel is taken as a whole it does not teach apermanent divorce of Israel but rather a mere temporal discipline of God'schosen people. As depicted on the following chart, the Book of Ezekiel containsthree major sections.[34]

While the first twosections represent God's judgment upon Judah and the surrounding nations, thefinal section represents God's intention of ultimately restoring His electnation physically and spiritually. Thus, the scroll of Ezekiel 2:8-3:3represents only the discipline of the Babylonian Captivity rather than apermanent severance between God and Israel.

Nationaldiscipline rather than divorce is also the theme of the Book of Revelation,which concludes with a portrayal of Israel's restored state (Rev 20:9). Thereis little doubt that this "beloved city" that is featured prominently in themillennium is Jerusalem. The Old Testament often describes Jerusalem in thesame manner (Ps 78:68; 87:2; Jer 12:7) and also predicts her future return toglory (Isa 2:2-4; Zech 14:17). Thomas explains Israel's preeminence in themillennial age: "At the end of the Millennium that city will be Satan's primeobjective with his rebel army, because Israel will be leader again among thenations."[35] Thus, farfrom being a book about the divorce of Israel, Revelation is actually aboutIsrael's eventual restoration. The reason for the parallels between the scrollof Ezekiel 2:8-3:3 and the scroll of Revelation 5 is that the theme of temporaldiscipline leading to restoration is the theme of both books.

Tocontend that God divorced Israel in the events of A.D. 70 is to misunderstand the Abrahamic Covenant(Gen 15), which is the foundation of God's subsequent covenants with Israel.

Not only is the covenantlanguage unconditional but it also remains unfulfilled. The covenant'sunconditionality is evidenced by the fact that God alone passed through theanimal pieces in the solemn ANE covenant ratification ceremony while Abrahamremained asleep. Other evidence of unconditionality includes the lack of anystated conditions for Israel's obedience in Genesis 15, the covenant'ssubsequent designation as both eternal (Gen 17:7, 13, 19; 1 Chron 16:17; Ps 105:10) and immutable (Heb 6:13-18),and the covenant's trans-generational reaffirmation to Israel throughout hernational existence despite her perpetual disobedience.[36]This unconditional feature of Israel's covenant structure explains why afterthe giving of the New Covenant, God stated that as long as the fixed order ofthe sun, moon, and stars remained, Israel would also continuously exist (Jer31:35-37).

Preteriststypically challenge the covenant's unfulfilled aspects by contending that itwas fulfilled either in the days of Joshua (Josh 11:23; 21:43-45) or during theprosperous portion of Solomon's reign (1 Kings 4:20-21; 8:56).[37]However, several reasons make this interpretation suspect. First, the extendedcontext indicates that the land promises were not completely satisfied in thedays of Joshua (13:1-7; Judg 1). Second, the land that Israel attained in theconquest was only a fraction of what was found in the Abrahamic Covenant.[38]Third, the land promises could not have been fulfilled in Joshua's day sinceIsrael had not yet conquered Jerusalem (15:63). The conquest of Jerusalem wouldhave to wait another four hundred years until the Davidic reign (2 Sam 5).Fourth, the Abrahamic Covenant promises that Israel would possess the land forever(Gen 17:8). This eternal promise has obviously never been fulfilled due toIsrael's subsequent eviction from the land after Solomon's reign. Fifth, if theland promises were satisfied in Joshua's or Solomon's day, then why dosubsequent prophets treat these promises as if they are yet to be fulfilled(Amos 9:11-15)?[39]

Becauseof the nation's unconditional and unfulfilled covenant structure, a divinedivorce of Israel is impossible. If God can cast aside His covenant promises toHis elect nation, then His character is fickle and all of the promises He hasmade to His church are similarly untrustworthy. Thus, Paul expounds upon God'scovenant faithfulness to Israel (Rom 9-11) immediately after detailing theunconditional promises that He has made to the church age believer (Rom8:18-39). In other words, because God cannot divorce Israel, we know that Hewill never divorce the church. ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Fruchtenbaum</Author><Year>1994</Year><RecNum>34</RecNum><Pages>521-22,631-32</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>34</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArnoldG.Fruchtenbaum</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1994</YEAR><TITLE>Israelology:The Missing Link in SystematicTheology</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tustin</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ArielMinistries</PUBLISHER><EDITION>rev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>

The 144,000 (Rev 7)

Most dispensationalists understand Revelation 7 as speaking of144,000 Jews (Rev 7:1-8) who will evangelize the world in the futuretribulation period (Rev 7:9-17). However, the preterist understands Revelation7 as conveying a pause in the action involving Jerusalem's A.D. 70 destruction when God begins to form "newIsrael" or the church to permanently replace harlotrous Old Testament Israel.[40]However, the preterist must rely on several tenuous propositions in order toreach this conclusion. First,he must deliteralize the numbers 12,000 and 144,000. However, one wonders howGod could have possibly communicated the idea of 144,000 Jews emanating fromeach of Israel's twelve tribes if the language of Revelation 7:1-8 isinsufficient for the task? Moreover, these numbers must be taken as specificnumbers rather than as mere generalities since John was quite adept atexpressing generalizations when it was his desire to do so. Even within thissame chapter, John uses the phrase "a great multitude which no one could count"(Rev 7:9) to express a general figure. Yet in Revelation 7:4-8, John does notuse a similar generality but rather provides specific numbers.

Second, thepreterist understands those mentioned in Revelation 7:4-8 to also includenon-Jews. While Gentry understands those in Revelation 7:4-8 as "Jewishconverts in Israel" that "are the beginning of the new covenant phase of thechurch,"[41] Hanegraaffsees the 144,000 as just another description of the innumerable multitude thatappear later on in the same chapter.[42]However, this is a strange interpretation coming from someone who claims that"the background music of the Old Testament" informs his reading of Revelation.[43]The Old Testament itself presents the tribes as literal, historic entities (Gen29-30). Furthermore, the 144,000 (7:1-8) and the innumerable multitude (7:9-17)should not be intermingled or confused as the chapter plainly presents them astwo separate groups.[44]

Third, thepreterist understands the 144,000 as the church. However, this assertion ismade in spite of the fact that the word church or ekklēsia is not found within the chapter and is alsovirtually absent in Revelation's third major section (4-22). While the wordchurch is found 19 times in the book's first three chapters (1-3), the worddisappears almost entirely in chapters 4-22 and does not reappear untilRevelation 22:16 when John concludes the book. Fourth, the preterist must understand the 144,000 andthe innumerable multitude as the new or "true Israel."[45]This contention is made in spite of the fact that the New Testament uses theword Israel 73 times and never once is this word used as a synonym for theGentiles or the church.[46]

Fifth, thepreterist must ignore the global language of Revelation 7:9. Here, John usesfour terms (nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues) to describe the innumerablemultitude. Interestingly, John uses these identical words earlier to refer tothose for whom Christ died (5:9). If these four terms connote universalism in5:9, then surely these same four terms must also convey universality ratherthan locality just a few chapters later. Sixth, the preterist dismisses the futuristinterpretation of Revelation 7 on the grounds that the tribes of Israel werelost after 722 B.C. and A.D. 70 andtherefore could not be regathered as mandated by a futuristic interpretation ofthe chapter.[47] However,while these tribes may be lost to man they are not lost to God. To doubt anomnipotent God's ability to preserve and regather Israel's tribes isreminiscent of the Sadducees in Christ's day that doubted God's future abilityto resurrect the dead (Matt 22:23, 29). Interestingly, a number of NewTestament passages written long after 722 B.C. indicatethat the tribes were not lost (Jas 1:1b; Acts 26:7).

The Temple(Rev 11)

Ratherthan seeing the temple of Revelation 11 as the third rebuilt Jewish temple thatthe antichrist will desecrate mid-way through the future tribulation period,the preterist interprets it as the second Herodian temple that was allegedlystanding in John's day.[48]However, this analysis suffers from atleast four inadequacies.[49]First, it is entirelypossible for a biblical writer to refer to a temple that is yet future from theperspective of the writer. Biblical writers at times describe future eventsthat are divinely relayed to them in a vision.

Forexample, both Daniel and Ezekiel make reference to a temple (Daniel 8:11-14;9:27; 11:31: 12:11; Ezekiel 40-48). Chronological information revealed in thesebooks leads to the conclusion that these exilic prophets experienced theirtemple visions during a time when there was no physical temple standing inJerusalem. For example, Daniel's temple visions occurred in 551, 538, and 536 B.C. (Dan 8:1; 9:1; 10:1). Similarly, Ezekiel'stemple vision transpired in 573 B.C. (Ezek40:1). Since the Jerusalem temple was destroyed in 586 B.C. (Ezek 33:21) and was not rebuilt until 515 B.C. (Ezra 6:15) both Ezekiel and Daniel aredescribing a future temple rather than an existing one. Why cannot John bedoing the same thing in Revelation 11? The fact that Revelation constitutes sucha futurist vision rather than merely a recounting of contemporary historicalcircumstances is evident from the repetitive use of the verbs "I saw" (oJravw) and "I heard" (ajkouvw) found throughout the book.[50]

Second, how could John be expected to recount detailedinformation about the temple that was allegedly standing in Jerusalem when hewas confined hundreds of miles away on Patmos at the time of writing? To arguethat John recorded the information in Revelation 11 based upon memory (John14:26) or a vision does not help the preterist cause since these sources ofinformation do not require the contemporary existence of the Jerusalem temple. Third, even if it is assumed that Revelation 11:1-2refers to Herod's temple that was destroyed in A.D. 70,how is it possible to fit the rest of the contents of Revelation 11 into theevents of A.D. 70? For example, much of the rest of Revelation11 is devoted to a discussion of the two witnesses who perform miracles, areslain, are gazed upon by the world, lie dead for three and a half days,resurrect, and ascend to heaven. These events are not even hinted at inJosephus' detailed accounts that discuss the siege of Jerusalem.[51]Gentry explains that the two witnesses "probablyrepresent a small body of Christians who remained in Jerusalem to testifyagainst" the temple. "They are portrayed as two, in that they are legal witnesses to thecovenant curses."[52]However, why should a literal hermeneutic be used to understand the temple andthe 42 months in the early part of the chapter (Rev 11:1-2) while a spiritualizing hermeneutic is appliedto interpret the two witnesses in the very next unit of the same chapter (Rev11:3-14)?

Fourth, Gentry contends that the trampling down of the templeby the Gentiles for 42 months (11:2) refers to the conclusion of the "Times ofthe Gentiles" from A.D. 67-70. According to this scenario, the "Times of the Gentiles" ended inA.D. 70.The temple's destruction prevented the Gentiles from trampling any longer uponthe material worship of God because now such worship was to be sourced in God'sinternational, universal kingdom/church (John 4:21).[53]However, this view requires an inconsistent hermeneutic in interpreting thestatue portraying the "Times of the Gentiles" in Dan 2.[54]

While acknowledging that the four Gentile empires givenin Nebuchadnezzar's dream (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome) wereliteral, geopolitical empires,[55]Gentry's interpretation requires that the smiting stone recorded at theconclusion of the dream be given a spiritualized interpretation. In otherwords, most of the statue must be read with one hermeneutical lens while thestatue's feet, destruction, and replacement must be read with anotherhermeneutical lens. Furthermore, Pentecost notes inconsistencies associatedwith locating the fulfillment of the smiting stone aspect of the dream in thefirst century. At that time, "Christianity did not suddenly 'fill the wholeearth' (Dan 2:35)," Rome was not destroyed, the Roman Empire did not consist often simultaneous kings, Christ was not a smiting stone, Christ did not put anend to all the kingdoms of the world, and Christ did not usher in a politicalkingdom.[56]

The Woman in the Wilderness (Rev 12)

Whilethe dispensationalist understands the woman in Revelation 12 as Israel fleeingfrom Satan during the second half of Daniel's 70^th week, Gentrybelieves that this chapter represents the persecution of the mother Jerusalemchurch (the woman) by Satan. Gentry notes, "In Revelation 12 John backs upchronologically in order to show the 'mother' church in Jerusalem, which wasbeing protected from Satan inspired resistance. This would cover the time framefrom Christ's ministry through the Book of Acts up until the destruction ofJerusalem."[57] However,equating the woman with the church is problematic because the word "church" or ekklēsia appears nowhere in the chapter, and, aspreviously stated, is virtually absent from the book's third section (4-22).Equating the woman with the church also raises a chronological problem sinceRevelation 12:5 portrays the woman giving birth to Christ. However, it wasChrist who gave birth to the church (Matt 16:18) not the church who gave birthto Christ. Thomas explains, "It would be impossible to regard the JewishMessiah of 12:5 as a child of the Christian community, as he clearly is of theJewish community."[58]

Onaccount of the similarities between John's description of the woman (Rev 12:1)and Joseph's dream (Gen 37:9-10), viewing the woman as national Israel isbetter than viewing her as the Jerusalem church. John associates the woman withthe sun, moon, and twelve stars (Rev 12:1) and Joseph's dream interprets theserespective luminaries as the patriarch (Jacob), matriarch (Rachel or Leah), andtwelve tribes of Israel (Gen 37:9-10).[59]Interpreting the woman as Israel rather than the church is strengthened by theJewish context of the immediately preceding chapter, which mentions the Jewishtemple (11:1-2), witnesses (11:3-13), and Ark (11:19).[60]Furthermore, it is difficult to locate the events of this chapter in pre A.D. 70 history. Chilton believes "the Woman'sflight into the wilderness is a picture of the flight of the Judean Christiansfrom the destruction of Jerusalem"[61]However, when did the miraculous preservation occur as recorded in Revelation12:14-16? Also, the eagle's wings imagery (12:14) is reminiscent of the Exodusevent (Exod 19:4) where millions of Jews were preserved. Yet no miraculouspreservation of similar magnitude transpired prior to A.D. 70.[62]

The Beast = Nero (Rev 13)

Ratherthan seeing the first beast as the antichrist, preterists interpret him asNero.[63]The main selling point of this view is gematria, which is the reality that alphabets of theancient world not only served a phonetic purpose but also served as numerals.

Thus, a person's namecould be converted into a number simply by adding up all of the mathematicalvalues of the letters of their name. Transliterating the Greek title "CaesarNero" into Hebrew yields the name rsq nwrn. The numerical sum of these lettersyields the total 666 (Rev 13:18).

However, the Nero calculation is fraught withproblems.[64] First, why do preterists treat Revelation's othernumbers (1,000; 12,000; 144,000; etc) symbolically while simultaneouslyapproaching 666 with such iron clad literalism that it supposedly yields aperson's name? Gentry's explanation that Revelation's large rounded numbers aresymbolic while the shorter unrounded numbers are literal[65]is unsatisfying and leaves readers with the impression that he isinconsistently vacillating between hermeneutical methods in support of apredetermined theological outcome. Second, the transliteration from Greek into Hebrew is problematic giventhe fact that the Book of Revelation was written to a Greek speaking audience(Rev 2-3). Gentry attempts to counter thisassertion by pointing out Revelation's Hebraic character.[66]However, when John uses Hebrew words in Revelation, he makes a special note ofit in order to bring it to his readers' attention (Rev 9:11; 16:16). Yet nosimilar special designation is even hinted at in Revelation 13:18 regarding thenumber 666.[67] Third, the Neronic calculation was never suggested asa solution by any of the ancient commentators[68]including Irenaeus, who was discipled by Polycarp who in turn was discipled byJohn.[69]Fourth, it appears thatpreterists have "cherry picked" a peculiar Neronic spelling in an attempt toreach an ordained result given the fact that Nero had many other names andtitles[70]and that rsq can also be spelled with an additional yod (rsyq).[71]

Besides these problems, the rest of the events ofRevelation 13 do not fit the known facts of history. For example, while arguingthat the Neronic persecution lasted 42 months, Gentry tacitly admits that thepersecution was not an exact 42 months through his use of the expression "butfor a few days."[72] Suchambiguity contradicts prophecy's track record of past literal fulfillment (Dan9:24-26; Luke 19:42).[73]Also, Nero did not force the entire world to take a mark on their right hand orforehead in order to participate in the global economy (13:16-18), coerce theentire world to worship a singular image of him (13:15), resurrect from thedead (13:14), associate with the miracle working false prophet (13:13, 15), andreceive veneration from the entire planet (13:8).[74]

The global nature of this chapter is undeniable. As isthe case in 7:9, the same four terms that are used earlier by John to describeChrist's universal atonement (Rev 5:9) are also used in 13:7 to depict thescope of the beast's worldwide rule.[75]Even partial preterists recognize the global nature of the terms used in thischapter. Unfortunately, while recognizing the global nuance of the merism"great and small" in 20:11, they fail to appreciate the global significance ofthe nearly identical expression in 13:16. In sum, the Nero view is built upon afew commonalities between his reign and chapter 13 while ignoring the vastdifferences between the two. While futurists are sometimes guilty of forcingunwarranted biblical connections on the basis of recent headlines, preteristsare no less guilty of such "newspaper exegesis" when they force the text ofRevelation 13 to fit a predetermined scenario based upon the first centurynewspapers of Josephus and others.

The Babylonian Harlot = Jerusalem (Rev17-18)

Ratherthan interpreting Babylon of Revelation 17-18 as something that will exist inthe future, the preterist understands Babylon as the city of Jerusalem that wasdestroyed in A.D. 70. The Babylon = Jerusalem view forms the"epicenter" of the preterist interpretation since it represents the punishmentof God's harlotrous Old Testament wife Israel for her rejection of Christ thusliberating God to raise up his new bride or the universal, internationalchurch, in her place (Rev 20-22). The main rationale for the view is thatearlier John describes Jerusalem as "the great city" (11:8). Since Babylon isalso depicted as "the great city" (18:10) Babylon must be Jerusalem.[76]

However,this procedure represents a hermeneutical error known as "illegitimate totalitytransfer." This error arises when themeaning of a word or phrase as derived from its use elsewhere is thenautomatically read into the same word or phrase in a foreign context.[77]Jerusalem advocates commit such an error when they define "the great city" inRevelation 17-18 from how the same phrase is used in totally different contextselsewhere in Revelation. Such a hermeneutical approach neglects the possibilitythat Revelation could be highlighting two "great cities," both Jerusalem and Babylon. The phrase "great city" doesnot uniquely identify Jerusalem since both Babylon (Dan 4:30) and Rome[78]were given the same designation. Another rationale behind the Babylon =Jerusalem view is that because national Israel is routinely portrayed as aharlot throughout the pages of the Old Testament (Jer 2-3; Ezek 16; 23; Hos9:1), the harlot of Revelation 17-18 must also be Israel or Jerusalem.[79]However, the mere existence of harlot imagery does not uniquely identifyJerusalem since the Old Testament also uses harlot imagery in connection withthe Gentile cities of Tyre (Isa 23:16-17) and Nineveh (Nah 3:4).[80]

TheJerusalem view suffers from at least three weaknesses. First, there is no reason why the word "Babylon" asused in chapters 17-18 cannot retain its ordinary meaning. Although not allnames in Revelation are meant to be understood literally (Rev 2:20), it doesseem to be a general rule that the names of cities and geographical regions areliteral. For example, most interpreters typically understand the followingplaces and cities in Revelation literally: Asia (1:4), Patmos (1:9), Ephesus(2:1), Smyrna (2:8), Pergamum (2:12), Thyatira (2:18), Sardis (3:1),Philadelphia (3:7), Laodicea (3:14), the Euphrates (Rev 9:14; 16:12) and Armageddon(16:16).[81] Why shouldthe city of Babylon, depicted in Revelation 17-18, not be given the sameliteral interpretation?

Moreover,when John wants to communicate that he is using a city in a non-literal sense,he makes this explicit as in 11:8 where he says "the great city which isspiritually called Sodom andEgypt."[82]Because no similar formula is found in Revelation 17-18 to alert the reader tothe reality that John is speaking of the city of Babylon figuratively, there isno reason that Babylon should be interpreted non-literally.[83]Interestingly, all the way through Scripture Babylon always means Babylon andJerusalem always means Jerusalem. These two cities are even distinguished fromone another as late as Revelation 16:19.[84]However, when interpreting Revelation 17-18, the preterist inverts theconsistent and natural meaning of these words as "Babylon" abruptly takes onthe new meaning "Jerusalem."

Thepreterist seeks to get around this problem by positing that Babylon is merely acode word for Jerusalem. However, to refer Jerusalem to Babylon is"unprecedented."[85] WhileScripture typically relates Jerusalem to the people of God, it relates Babylonto the world.[86] AlthoughSodom and Egypt have precedent for being used as a metaphor for Jerusalem (11:8),Babylon is never used in this way. Also, there is no example in Jewishliterature of the name "Babylon" ever being used as a code for Jerusalem.[87]

Moreover,preterists consistently quote Bible versions that portray the title on theharlot's forehead as "Mystery Babylon the Great" (KJV, NIV).[88]They probably do so because this title conveys this meaning of non-literal,mystic, spiritual, or symbolic Babylon (11:8).[89]However, other versions read "mystery, Babylon the Great" (NASB) thus treating"mystery" in an appositional relationship to "name" rather than part of theharlot's title. This latter translation favors viewing Babylon as a literalplace rather than as a mere symbol and gives the impression that the title issimply a "mystery" or new truth.[90]The latter translation is preferred since John elsewhere always refers toBabylon as "Babylon the Great" rather than "Mystery Babylon the Great" (14:8, 16:19, 18:2, 10, 21)[91]and "the gender of both 'name' and 'mystery' are neuter while the gender of'Babylon' is feminine."[92]

Second, if Babylon of Revelation 17-18 is reallyJerusalem, then when were the prophecies predicting Babylon's destructionfulfilled (Isa 13-14; Jer 50-51)?[93]It is common to also "preterize" these prophecies by arguing that theyhyperbolically predict Babylon's historic fall in 539 B.C.[94]However, it is difficult to similarly "preterize" the prediction of Babylon'sfuture found in Zechariah 5:5-11 since this prophecy was given in 519 B.C. (Zech 1:7) or 20 years after Babylon's historicfall.

Third, the details of Revelation 17-18 bear littleresemblance to first century Jerusalem. For example, Jerusalem did not sit onmany waters (17:15), reign over the kings of the earth or even herself (17:18),[95]or resemble an economic power (18).[96]Furthermore, although the description of the harlot seems to communicate herheavy involvement with idolatry ("spiritual adultery," "unclean things," and"abominations") this is an odd description of first century Jerusalem in lightof the fact that the city of that era was strictly monotheistic.[97]Also, how could Jerusalem be considered the "mother of harlots" or the sourceof all harlotry when harlotry existed (Gen 11:1-9)[98]long before the city of Jerusalem existed?[99]Thus, calling Jerusalem a daughter harlot rather than the "mother of harlots"seems a more appropriate designation.[100]Moreover, if the Babylon = Jerusalem hypothesis is correct then Jerusalem willnever be rebuilt again (Rev 18:21). Yet,how can this be a description of Jerusalem when Scripture repeatedly speaks ofthis city's return to prominence during the millennial reign (Isa 2:3; Zech14:16; Rev 20:9)?[101]Finally, while the preterist attempts to argue that Babylon = Jerusalem basedupon a few nebulous connections between Revelation 17-18 and Ezekiel 16,[102]he ignores the far more striking parallels between Revelation 17-18 andJeremiah 50-51.[103]

Christ's Thousand Year Reign (Rev 20:1-10)

Rather than understanding Rev 20:1-10 asdescribing the one thousand year earthly reign of Christ following His bodilyreturn (premillennialism), Gentry sees these verses as speaking of a spiritualkingdom that began in the earthly ministry of Christ, was proved in thedestruction of Jerusalem,[104]and progresses all the way until the Second Advent that is said to occur in 20:9(postmillennialism). This spiritual kingdom also represents Christ's new bride(Rev 21-22) that replaces harlotrous Israel (Rev 17-18).[105]Because Gentry believes that the millennium and the eternal state are spiritualrealities that began in the first century and continue until the present dayand beyond, by his own admission, he understands Revelation 20-22 more in themanner of an idealist than a preterist.[106]However, the assertion of a spiritualized millennium is built upon problematicassumptions.

First, the preterist ignores the chronologicalarrangement of Revelation's last eight events. The repetition of the verb "Isaw" in Revelation's closing chapters yields the following chronology.[107]

The preterist ignoresthis chronology by placing Satan's binding (Matt 12:28-29) and the believer'sresurrection before the events of Revelation 19:11-18, which supposedlyrepresent the fall of Jerusalem. He has the same problem with his interpretationof the new bride (Rev 21-22). Since it is an alleged ongoing reality, he placesit before Satan's release and defeat (Rev 20:4-10) as well as the Great WhileThrone Judgment setting (Rev 20:11) and sentencing (Rev 20:12-15).

Second, the preterist must "deliteralize" the figureone thousand years that occurs six times in Revelation 20:1-10.[108]Yet this practice is questionable. When a specific number is used with the word"years" it always refers to a literal number throughout the entire NewTestament.[109]Furthermore, although John is skilled at using indefinite concepts even withinthis same chapter, such as "a short time" (20:3), he instead gives a specificnumber when discussing the millennium's length.[110]Thus, John could have just as easily used the expression "a long time" (Matt25:19) if he wanted to communicate a general era rather than a concrete periodof time.

WhileRevelation is a symbolic book not everything in the book is necessarilysymbolic. A textual clue must be furnished before the interpreter has licenseto treat something symbolically (11:8; 17:18).[111]No such textual clue is apparent here regarding the millennium's length. Thus,Thomas observes that, "no number in Revelation is verifiably a symbolicnumber."[112] Also, if1000 is not meant to be interpreted literally, then the door suddenly opens forevery other number in the Book of Revelation to also be construednon-literally, such as the 2 witnesses (Rev 11:3), 7000 people (Rev 11:13), 4angels (Rev 7:1), 7 angels (Rev 8:6), and 144,000 Jews (Rev 7:4).[113]

Gentry'scitation of Psalm 50:10 to prove the symbolic nature of the phrase "thethousand years"[114]does little to bolster his argument since that context involves synonymousHebrew parallelism. Thus, the phrase "cattle on a thousand hills" must beunderstood harmoniously with the preceding phrase "for every beast of theforest is mine." No similar parallelism is found involving the repetition ofthe phrase "the thousand years" in Revelation 20:1-10. Also, complaining that"only one place in all of Scripture limits Christ's rule to a thousand years"[115]is unhelpful since the time limit actually appears six times in the chapter.Besides, how many times does God have to say something before it is takenseriously?

Third, while Gentry cites a series of celestialoriented passages as proof that the kingdom has begun (Eph 1:3; 2:6; Col3:1-4),[116] Revelationis clear that the kingdom will take place "upon the earth" (Rev 1:6; 5:10).Also, Revelation nowhere portrays Christ as presently ruling from David's thronebut rather portrays Christ's present position as emanating from the Father'sthrone (Rev 12:5). In fact, decades after His Ascension,[117]Christ in Revelation 3:21 drew a sharp distinction between His present positionon His Father's celestial throne and His future, terrestrial Davidic Throne.[118]"Christ is here saying that, those who are spiritually victorious, will berewarded (future tense of didomi) by joining Him in His earthly Messianicreign, just as He overcame (aorist tense) and sat down (aorist tense) with HisFather on His throne."[119]

Fourth, regarding the two resurrections (Rev 20:4-5),Gentry says, "one is spiritual and present; the other is physical and future."[120]However, how can the first resurrection be spiritual (Rom 6:4-14; Eph 2:5-6;Col 3:1) when "resurrection" (anastasis) always refers to a physical resurrection in all of its NewTestament occurrences?[121]Furthermore, how can the same verb "to come to life" (zaō) mean different things in consecutive verses?[122]Fifth, although Gentryassociates Christ's bodily return with the fiery judgment upon the rebels atthe end of the millennium (20:9; 2 Thess 1:8),[123]the "verses contain no mention of a personal coming of Christ; they refer onlyto direct punishment from heaven"[124]

The Eternal State and New Jerusalem (Rev21-22)

Ratherthan understanding the final two chapters of the Apocalypse as the new creationthat will follow the millennium (20:1-10) and final judgment (20:11-15), Gentryunderstands them as speaking of the new bride or the international church thatreplaces God's previously destroyed unfaithful wife, racially based Israel.[125]Thus, Gentry sees Revelation 21-22 as beginning in the first century andextending into eternity.[126]In addition to the aforementioned chronological problems, Gentry must wildlyallegorize these chapters in order to make them fit the present day.[127]Only by refusing to take the text at face value is it possible to argue thattoday there is no more Satan (Rev 20:10), sea (Rev 21:1), death, crying, pain(Rev 21:4), sun (Rev 22:5), moon (Rev 21:23), night (Rev 21:25), evil (Rev21:27), or curse (Rev 22:23).[128]Such an allegorical approach is apparent in the way Gentry inconsistentlyinterprets the word "sea" in Revelation 13:1 as a reference to the literal seain between Patmos and Rome[129]while simultaneously interpreting the word "sea" in Revelation 21:1 as sin andinternal discord.[130]

Gentrycriticizes the literal view of the New Jerusalem on the grounds that it resultsin interpreting the city as reaching a height "1,200 miles higher than thespace shuttle orbits."[131]However, this criticism reflects a uniformitarian perspective (2 Pet 3:3-7)that assumes that what is normative today will also be normative in the newcreation. Thomas explains, "the resources available to an infinite God tocreate such a city are beyond present comprehension. Far more materials areavailable to him than humans of the present era can possibly comprehend."[132]

Concluding Exhortation (Rev 22:10)

Preteristsuse the juxtaposition of the command given to Daniel to seal up the words ofthe vision (Dan 8:26; 12:4, 9) and the concluding command given to John to not seal up the words of the vision (22:10) to teachthat the prophecy had to be fulfilled within John's immediate lifespan.[133]However, this comparison involves reading more into these verses than what isactually there. "John was not told to 'unseal the revelation he received.'Rather, he was told, 'Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book,for the time is near.' This does not mean that the prophecy was fulfilled inJohn's day but that the wordsof the prophecy could be understood by those who read them in his day."[134]

In conclusion, the futurist interpretation of theBook of Revelation holds up under close scrutiny. The arguments relied upon bypreterism, futurism's closest rival, that the bulk of the book was fulfilled inthe first century are specious and unconvincing. When examined closely, these arguments,far from making a convincing case for an A.D. 70realization, actually end up favoring the futurist interpretation.

Bibliography

ADDIN EN.REFLIST Barr,James. The Semantics of Biblical Language. London: Oxford University Press, 1961.

Beale, G. K. The Book of Revelation. New International Greek Testament Commentary,ed. I. Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

Bullinger, E. W. The Apocalypse or "theDay of the Lord". GreatBritain: Hollen Street, 1935. Reprint, London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1972.

Chilton, David. The Days of Vengeance: AnExposition of the Book of Revelation.Tyler, TX: Dominion Press, 1987.

Constable, Thomas L. "Notes on Numbers." Online: www.soniclight.com. Accessed 22 May 2006.

Couch, Mal. "Progressive Dispensationalism: IsChrist Now on the Throne of David?-Part I." Conservative Theological Journal 2, no. 4 (March 1998): 32-46.

Deere, Jack. "Premillennialism in Revelation20:4-6." Bibliotheca Sacra135 (January-March 1978): 58-73.

DeMar, Gary. Last Days Madness. 4th rev ed. Powder Springs, GA: AmericanVision, 1999.

________. End Times Fiction. Nashville, TN: Harvest House, 2001.

Dyer, Charles H. "Jeremiah." In BibleKnowledge Commentary, ed. JohnF. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing,1983.

________. "The Identity of Babylon in Revelation17-18 (Part 2)." Bibliotheca Sacra144 (October-December 1987): 433-49.

__________. "Introduction to Ezekiel." Unpublishedclass notes in 304C Old Testament Prophets. Dallas Theological Seminary, Spring2000.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. Footsteps of theMessiah. rev ed. Tustin, CA:Ariel Ministries, 2003.

________. Hebrew Christianity: Its Theology,History, & Philosophy. WashingtonD.C.: Canon, 1974.

________. Israelology: The Missing Link inSystematic Theology. rev. ed.Tustin: Ariel Ministries, 1994.

Garland, Tony. A Testimony of JesusChrist-Volume 1: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Camano Island, WA: SpiritAndTruth.org, 2004.

________. A Testimony of Jesus Christ-Volume2: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Camano Island, WA: SpiritAndTruth.org, 2004.

Geisler, Norman L. "A Friendly Response to HankHanegraaff's Book, The Last Disciple." Online: http://wwwses.deu/Norm Geisler/lastdisciple.htm. Accessed22 April 2005.

Gentry, Kenneth L. Before Jerusalem Fell. Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics,1989.

________. He Shall Have Dominion. 2d and rev. ed. Tyler: TX: Institute forChristian Economics, 1997.

________. "A Preterist View of Revelation." In FourViews on the Book of Revelation,ed. C. Marvin Pate. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.

________. The Beast of Revelation. Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2002.

Gregg, Steve, ed. Revelation: Four Views: AParallel Commentary. Nashville:Thomas Nelson, 1997.

Hanegraaff, Hank. The Apocalypse Code. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2007.

Hanegraaff, Hank, and Sigmund Brouwer. TheLast Disciple. Wheaton, IL:Tyndale, 2004.

________. The Last Sacrifice. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 2005.

Hitchcock, Mark. The Second Coming of Babylon. Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2003.

________. "A Defense of the Domitianic Date ofthe Book of Revelation." Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2005.

Hitchcock, Mark, and Thomas Ice. The TruthBehind Left Behind. Sisters: OR:Multnomah, 2004.

Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects ofthe Life of Christ. GrandRapids: Zondervan, 1977.

________. "Evidence from Revelation 20." In TheComing Millennial Kingdom, ed. DonaldK. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1997.

________. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

House, H. Wayne, and Thomas Ice. DominionTheology: Blessing or Curse?Portland, OR: Multnomah, 1988.

Ice, Thomas. "Has Bible Prophecy Already BeenFulfilled? (Part 2).". Conservative Theological Journal 4 (December 2000): 291-327.

Ice, Thomas, and Kenneth L. Gentry. The GreatTribulation: Past or Future?Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1999.

Johnson, S. Lewis. "Paul and the 'Israel of God':An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-Study." In Essays in Honor of J.Dwight Pentecost, ed. Stanley D.Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody, 1986.

Morris, Henry. The Revelation Record. Wheaton, Ill: Tyndale, 1983.

Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the NewTestament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.

Murphy, Frederick J. Early Judaism: The Exileto the Time of Jesus. Peabody,MA: Hendrickson, 2002.

The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press, 2001.

The NIV Study Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985.

Oepke, Albrecht. "Kalupto." In TheologicalDictionary of the New Testament,ed. G. Kittel, trans. G.W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, 1965.

Pate, C. Marvin. "A Progressive DispensationalistView of Revelation." In Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. C. Marvin Pate. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1998.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Things to Come: A Studyin Biblical Eschatology.Findley, OH: Dunham Publishing Company, 1958.

________. "Daniel." In The Bible KnowledgeCommentary, ed. John F. Walvoordand Roy B. Zuck. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor, 1985.

Pink, Arthur. The Antichrist. Swengel, PA: I. C. Herendeen, 1923.

Ramm, Bernard. Protestant BiblicalInterpretation. Grand Rapids:Baker, 1970.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures inthe New Testament. 6 vols.Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933.

Ryrie, Charles C. Basic Theology. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1986.

________. The Ryrie Study Bible: New AmericanStandard Bible. Chicago: Moody,1995.

Smith, J. Ritchie. "The Date of the Apocalypse." BibliothecaSacra 45 (April-June 1888):297-328.

Sproul, R. C. The Last Days According to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998.

Tenney, Merrill C. Interpreting Revelation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.

Thomas, Robert L. Revelation 1 to 7: AnExegetical Commentary. Chicago:Moody Press, 1992.

________. Revelation 8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary. Chicago: MoodyPress, 1992.

________. "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation." In Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. C. Marvin Pate. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1998.

________. Evangelical Hermeneutics: The NewVersus the Old. Grand Rapids:Kregel, 2002.

Vine, W. E. Vine's Complete ExpositoryDictionary of the Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1985.

Walvoord, John F. The Millennial Kingdom. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959.

________. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

Woods, Andy. "Revelation 13 and the First Beast."In The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming under Attack, ed. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice. Eugene, OR:Harvest House, 2003.

Zuck, Roy. Basic Bible Interpretation: APractical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth. Colorado Springs: CO: Chariot Victor, 1991.

[1] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1989</Year><RecNum>70</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>70</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1989</YEAR><TITLE>BeforeJerusalem Fell</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler, TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institutefor ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Kenneth L. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>idem, He Shall Have Dominion, 2d and rev. ed. (Tyler: TX: Institute for ChristianEconomics, 1997); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>idem, "A Preterist View of Revelation," in FourViews on the Book of Revelation, ed.C. Marvin Pate (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Sproul</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>69</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>69</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>R.C. Sproul</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>TheLast Days According to Jesus</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>BakerBooks</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>R.C Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>DeMar</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>717</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>717</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>GaryDeMar</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>LastDays Madness</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Powder Springs,GA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>AmericanVision</PUBLISHER><EDITION>4threv</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness, 4th rev ed. (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision,1999); ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>DeMar</Author><Year>2001</Year><RecNum>718</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>718</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>GaryDeMar</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2001</YEAR><TITLE>EndTimes Fiction</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville, TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>HarvestHouse</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>idem, End Times Fiction (Nashville, TN: Harvest House, 2001); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2007); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>721</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>721</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Hanegraaff,Hank</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>SigmundBrouwer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2004</YEAR><TITLE>TheLast Disciple</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Wheaton,IL</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Tyndale</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer, The LastDisciple (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 2004); ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>720</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>720</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Hanegraaff,Hank</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Sigmund Brouwer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>TheLast Sacrifice</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Wheaton,IL</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Tyndale</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>idem, The Last Sacrifice (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 2005).

[2] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>86,46,n.25</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 86, 46, n.25.

[3] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>407-34</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 407-34; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>37-92</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>idem, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 37-92.

[4] "Hermeneutics" may be defined as the science and artof biblical interpretation.

[5] Ryrie further explains that literal interpretation"might also be called plain interpretation so that no one receives themistaken notion that the literal principle rules out figures of speech." ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Ryrie</Author><Year>1986</Year><RecNum>408</RecNum><Pages>86</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>408</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesRyrie</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1986</YEAR><TITLE>BasicTheology</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Wheaton</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>VictorBooks</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1986), 86.

[6] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Ramm</Author><Year>1970</Year><RecNum>4</RecNum><Pages>89-92</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>4</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>BernardRamm</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1970</YEAR><TITLE>ProtestantBiblical Interpretation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Baker</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1970), 89-92.

[7] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>67</RecNum><Pages>38</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>67</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation1 to 7: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1 to 7: An ExegeticalCommentary (Chicago: Moody Press,1992), 38.

[8] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>13-36</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 13-36.

[9] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Tenney</Author><Year>1957</Year><RecNum>146</RecNum><Pages>139,142</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>146</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MerrillC.Tenney</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1957</YEAR><TITLE>InterpretingRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 139, 142.

[10] Apocalyptic literature is an extra-biblical literarygenre that flourished around the time of Revelation's composition. The Bookof Enoch, Apocalypse of Baruch, Book of Jubilees, Assumption of Moses, Psalmsof Solomon, Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and Sibylline Oracles as well as Revelation are all considered to be part ofthis literary era. This genre is comprised of works sharing the followingcommon cluster of characteristics: extensive use of symbolism, vision as themajor means of revelation (Rev 1:10-11), angelic guides (Rev 1:1), activity ofangels and demons (Rev 12:7-8), focus on the end of the current age and theinauguration of the age to come (Rev 1:3), urgent expectation of the end ofearthly conditions in the immediate future (Rev 21:1), the end as a cosmiccatastrophe, new salvation that is paradisal in character (Rev 21-22),manifestation of the kingdom of God (Rev 11:15), a mediator with royalfunctions (Rev 3:7), dualism with God and Satan as the leaders, spiritual orderdetermining the flow of history, pessimism about man's ability to change thecourse of events, periodization and determinism of human history (Rev 6:11),other worldly journeys (Rev 4:1-2), the catchword glory (Rev 4:11), and a finalshowdown between good and evil (Rev 19:11-21). The above citations fromRevelation show that it has at least some affinities with these extra biblicalworks. This list was adapted from ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Murphy</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>115</RecNum><Pages>130-33</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>115</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>FrederickJ.Murphy</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>EarlyJudaism: The Exile to the Time ofJesus</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Peabody,MA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Hendrickson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Frederick J. Murphy, Early Judaism: The Exile to theTime of Jesus (Peabody, MA:Hendrickson, 2002), 130-33.

[11] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gregg</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>63</RecNum><Pages>11</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>9</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>63</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>SteveGregg</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation:Four Views, A ParallelCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Steve Gregg, ed., Revelation: Four Views: A ParallelCommentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson,1997), 11.

[12] This is a tactic that Gentry applies repeatedly in hissurvey of Revelation. See ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>38,47, 56, 60, 64, 72, 81, 89 </Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 38, 47, 56,60, 64, 72, 81, 89

[13] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>67</RecNum><Pages>23-28</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>67</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation1 to 7: An Exegetical Commentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 1 to 7: An Exegetical Commentary, 23-28.

[14] Adapted from ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>81</RecNum><Pages>338</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>81</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>EvangelicalHermeneutics: The New Versus the Old</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Kregel</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Robert L. Thomas, Evangelical Hermeneutics: The NewVersus the Old (Grand Rapids: Kregel,2002), 338. Oepke similarly notes, "[Revelation] has many affinities withliterature to which we now refer [i.e. apocalyptic], though it cannot be simply classified with it." ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Oepke</Author><Year>1965</Year><RecNum>507</RecNum><Pages>3:578</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>507</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>AlbrechtOepke</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1965</YEAR><TITLE>Kalupto</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>G.Kittel</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>TheologicalDictionary of the NewTestament</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><SUBSIDIARY_AUTHORS><SUBSIDIARY_AUTHOR>G.W.Bromiley</SUBSIDIARY_AUTHOR></SUBSIDIARY_AUTHORS></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Albrecht Oepke, "Kalupto," in Theological Dictionaryof the New Testament, ed. G. Kittel,trans. G.W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: 1965), 3:578.

[15] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>41-45</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 41-45.

[16] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Walvoord</Author><Year>1966</Year><RecNum>78</RecNum><Pages>35</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>78</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JohnF.Walvoord</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1966</YEAR><TITLE>TheRevelation of JesusChrist</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Chicago: Moody Press, 1966), 35.

[17] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Ice</Author><Year>December2000</Year><RecNum>79</RecNum><Pages>306</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>79</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ThomasIce</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>December2000</YEAR><TITLE>Has Bible Prophecy Already Been Fulfilled? (Part2)</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>Conservative TheologicalJournal</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>4</VOLUME><PAGES>291-327</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas Ice, "Has Bible Prophecy Already Been Fulfilled?(Part 2)," Conservative Theological Journal 4 (December 2000): 306.

[18] For a helpful survey of other views that futuristshave adopted in an attempt to handle Revelation's so called timing texts, see ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>724</RecNum><Pages>86-96</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>724</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Mark Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date ofthe Book of Revelation" (Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2005),86-96.

[19] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ice</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>722</RecNum><Pages>162-63</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>722</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Ice,Thomas</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Kenneth L.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheGreat Tribulation: Past or Future?</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Kregel</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas Ice and Kenneth L. Gentry, The GreatTribulation: Past or Future? (GrandRapids: Kregel, 1999), 162-63. Here, I am not calling partial preterism unorthodox. Iam simply saying that they must maintain an inconsistent position regardingtheir interpretation of Revelation's "time texts" in order to remain orthodox.

[20] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>45-49</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 45-49.

[21] For more problems with this interpretation, see ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>723</RecNum><Pages>80-86</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>723</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Dallas</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Ph.D.diss., Dallas TheologicalSeminary</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date of theBook of Revelation," 80-86.

[22] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Beale</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>64</RecNum><Pages>26</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>64</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>G.K.Beale</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>I.Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>NewInternational Greek TestamentCommentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, New International Greek Testament Commentary, ed. I.Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 26.

[23] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Barr</Author><Year>1961</Year><RecNum>80</RecNum><Pages>217-18</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>80</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JamesBarr</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1961</YEAR><TITLE>TheSemantics of BiblicalLanguage</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>London</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>OxfordUniversity Press</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), 217-18.

[24] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1989</Year><RecNum>70</RecNum><Pages>139-40</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>70</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1989</YEAR><TITLE>BeforeJerusalem Fell</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler,TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 139-40; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>110-11</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville, TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 110-11.

[25] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>86</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 86.

[26] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>723</RecNum><Pages>147-48</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>723</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book of Revelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Dallas</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Ph.D.diss., Dallas TheologicalSeminary</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date of theBook of Revelation," 147-48.

[27] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>225</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Robert L. Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist Viewof Revelation," in Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. C. Marvin Pate (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998),225. Preterists make much of the fact that the dictionary definition of oikoumenē in 3:10 is "inhabited land." However, this word canalso have a global nuance in some contexts (Acts 17:31) and therefore need notbe confined to a past local event. This universal understanding is buttressedthrough the accompanying adjective "whole."

[28] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gregg</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>63</RecNum><Pages>16</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>9</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>63</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>SteveGregg</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation:Four Views, A ParallelCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gregg, ed., Revelation: Four Views, a ParallelCommentary, 16.

[29] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>49</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 49.

[30] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>49,n. 33</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 49, n. 33.

[31] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Fruchtenbaum</Author><Year>1974</Year><RecNum>300</RecNum><Pages>41-44</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>300</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArnoldG.Fruchtenbaum</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1974</YEAR><TITLE>HebrewChristianity: Its Theology, History, &amp;Philosophy</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Washington D.C.</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Canon</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Hebrew Christianity: ItsTheology, History, & Philosophy(Washington D.C.: Canon, 1974), 41-44.

[32] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>51-52</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 51-52.

[33] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>51</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 51.

[34] Charles H. Dyer, "Introduction to Ezekiel,"(unpublished class notes in 304C Old Testament Prophets, Dallas TheologicalSeminary, Spring 2000), 3.

[35] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>207</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist View of Revelation,"207.

[36] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Walvoord</Author><Year>1959</Year><RecNum>42</RecNum><Pages>149-52</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>42</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JohnF. Walvoord</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1959</YEAR><TITLE>TheMillennial Kingdom</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>John F. Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959), 149-52.

[37] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>52-53,178-79</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 52-53, 178-79.

[38] See the helpful map showing what was promised in theAbrahamic Covenant in comparison to what was attained in the conquest in ThomasL. Constable, "Notes on Numbers," online: www.soniclight.com,accessed 22 May 2006, 99. Ryrie observes that the border to Egypt (4:21) is notthe same thing as the river of Egypt (Gen 15:18). ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Ryrie</Author><Year>1995</Year><RecNum>277</RecNum><Pages>533</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>277</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesC. Ryrie</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1995</YEAR><TITLE>TheRyrie Study Bible: New American StandardBible</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Moody</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Charles C. Ryrie, The Ryrie Study Bible: NewAmerican Standard Bible (Chicago:Moody, 1995), 533.

[39] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Fruchtenbaum</Author><Year>1994</Year><RecNum>34</RecNum><Pages>521-22,631-32</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>34</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArnoldG. Fruchtenbaum</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1994</YEAR><TITLE>Israelology:The Missing Link in SystematicTheology</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tustin</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ArielMinistries</PUBLISHER><EDITION>rev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Israelology: The MissingLink in Systematic Theology, rev. ed.(Tustin: Ariel Ministries, 1994), 521-22, 631-32.

[40] Interpreters of all stripes recognized that thecontents of Revelation 7 are largely given in order to answer the questionposed at the end of the previous chapter, which is "Who can stand?" (Rev 6:17).

[41] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>57,n.49</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 57, n.49.

[42] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>125-26</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville, TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 125-26.

[43] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>117</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 117.

[44] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>725</RecNum><Pages>77</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>725</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Hitchcock,Mark</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Thomas Ice</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2004</YEAR><TITLE>TheTruth Behind Left Behind</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Sisters:OR</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Multnomah</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Mark Hitchcock and Thomas Ice, The Truth Behind LeftBehind (Sisters: OR: Multnomah, 2004),77.

[45] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>125-27</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 125-27.

[46] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Fruchtenbaum</Author><Year>1994</Year><RecNum>34</RecNum><Pages>684-90</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>34</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArnoldG.Fruchtenbaum</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1994</YEAR><TITLE>Israelology:The Missing Link in SystematicTheology</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tustin</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ArielMinistries</PUBLISHER><EDITION>rev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Fruchtenbaum, Israelology: The Missing Link inSystematic Theology, 684-90. This rule holds true even with the oft cited Galatians6:16. See ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Johnson</Author><Year>1986</Year><RecNum>649</RecNum><Pages>181-96</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>649</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>S.LewisJohnson</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1986</YEAR><TITLE>Pauland the &apos;Israel of God&apos;: An Exegetical and EschatologicalCase-Study</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>StanleyD. Toussaint and Charles H.Dyer</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>Essaysin Honor of J. DwightPentecost</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Moody</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>S. Lewis Johnson, "Paul and the 'Israel of God': AnExegetical and Eschatological Case-Study," in Essays in Honor of J. DwightPentecost, ed. Stanley D. Toussaintand Charles H. Dyer (Chicago: Moody, 1986), 181-96.

[47]ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>118-24</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 126.

[48] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>65-67</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 65-67.

[49] For a more detailed refutation of this position, see ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>723</RecNum><Pages>106-36</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>723</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Dallas</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Ph.D.diss., Dallas Theological Seminary</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date of theBook of Revelation," 106-36.

[50] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>House</Author><Year>1988</Year><RecNum>726</RecNum><Pages>250</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>726</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>House,H. Wayne</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>ThomasIce</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1988</YEAR><TITLE>DominionTheology: Blessing or Curse?</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Portland,OR</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Multnomah</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>H. Wayne House and Thomas Ice, Dominion Theology:Blessing or Curse? (Portland, OR:Multnomah, 1988), 250.

[51] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Smith</Author><Year>April-June1888</Year><RecNum>73</RecNum><Pages>307-08</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>73</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>J.Ritchie Smith</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>April-June1888</YEAR><TITLE>The Date of theApocalypse</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>45</VOLUME><PAGES>297-328</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>J. Ritchie Smith, "The Date of the Apocalypse," BibliothecaSacra 45 (April-June 1888): 307-08.

[52] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>421-22</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 421-22.

[53] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>66</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 66.

[54] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Year>1985</Year><RecNum>728</RecNum><Pages>1311</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>728</REFNUM><YEAR>1985</YEAR><TITLE>TheNIV Study Bible</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>The NIV Study Bible, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985), 1311.

[55] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>66</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 66.

[56] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Pentecost</Author><Year>1985</Year><RecNum>727</RecNum><Pages>1335</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>727</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>J.Dwight Pentecost</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1985</YEAR><TITLE>Daniel</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>JohnF. Walvoord and Roy B.Zuck</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>TheBible KnowledgeCommentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Colorado Springs,CO</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ChariotVictor</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>J. Dwight Pentecost, "Daniel," in The BibleKnowledge Commentary, ed. John F.Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor, 1985), 1335.

[57] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>422</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 422.

[58] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>199</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation," 199.

[59] While most would understand the matriarch as Rachel,if the contents of Genesis 35-37 are given in chronological order, then thematriarch would have to be Leah since Rachel's death is recorded in Genesis 35.Also, the reason that 37:9 only mentions eleven stars or tribes rather thantwelve is because the twelfth star or tribe represents Joseph who is narratingthe dream. He is the twelfth star that the other eleven stars bow down to.

[60] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>199</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation," 199.

[61] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Chilton</Author><Year>1987</Year><RecNum>58</RecNum><Pages>309</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>58</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>DavidChilton</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1987</YEAR><TITLE>TheDays of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler,TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>DominionPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Expositionof the Book of Revelation (Tyler, TX:Dominion Press, 1987), 309.

[62] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Garland</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>729</RecNum><Pages>482-83</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>729</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>TonyGarland</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2004</YEAR><TITLE>ATestimony of Jesus Christ-Volume 1: A Commentary on the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Camano Island, WA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>SpiritAndTruth.org</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Tony Garland, A Testimony of Jesus Christ-Volume 1:A Commentary on the Book of Revelation(Camano Island, WA: SpiritAndTruth.org, 2004), 482-83.

[63] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>72</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>72</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>TheBeast of Revelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Powder Springs,GA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>AmericanVision</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Kenneth L. Gentry, The Beast of Revelation (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2002).

[64] For a more extensive refutation of the Neronianhypothesis, see ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>723</RecNum><Pages>137-56</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>723</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Dallas</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Ph.D.diss., Dallas TheologicalSeminary</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date of theBook of Revelation," 137-56; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Woods</Author><Year>2003</Year><RecNum>700</RecNum><Pages>237-50</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>700</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>AndyWoods</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2003</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation13 and the FirstBeast</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>Tim LaHayeand ThomasIce</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>TheEnd Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Eugene,OR</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>HarvestHouse</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Andy Woods, "Revelation 13 and the First Beast," in TheEnd Times Controversy: The Second Coming under Attack, ed. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: HarvestHouse, 2003), 237-50.

[65] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1989</Year><RecNum>70</RecNum><Pages>163</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>70</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1989</YEAR><TITLE>BeforeJerusalem Fell</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler,TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 163; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>72</RecNum><Pages>181</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>72</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>TheBeast of Revelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Powder Springs,GA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>AmericanVision</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 181.

[66] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1989</Year><RecNum>70</RecNum><Pages>209-12</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>70</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1989</YEAR><TITLE>BeforeJerusalem Fell</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler,TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 209-12.

[67] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Smith</Author><Year>April-June1888</Year><RecNum>73</RecNum><Pages>317</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>73</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>J.Ritchie Smith</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>April-June1888</YEAR><TITLE>The Date of theApocalypse</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>45</VOLUME><PAGES>297-328</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Smith, "The Date of the Apocalypse," 317.

[68] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Mounce</Author><Year>1983</Year><RecNum>730</RecNum><Pages>265</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>730</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertH. Mounce</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1983</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>New International Commentary on the NewTestament</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 265; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Smith</Author><Year>April-June1888</Year><RecNum>73</RecNum><Pages>318</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>73</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>J.Ritchie Smith</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>April-June1888</YEAR><TITLE>The Date of theApocalypse</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>45</VOLUME><PAGES>297-328</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Smith, "The Date of the Apocalypse," 318.

[69] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Mounce</Author><Year>1983</Year><RecNum>730</RecNum><Pages>35</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>730</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertH.Mounce</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1983</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>New International Commentary on the NewTestament</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 35.

[70] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Beale</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>64</RecNum><Pages>719</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>64</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>G.K.Beale</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>I.Howard Marshall and Donald A.Hagner</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>NewInternational Greek TestamentCommentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Grand Rapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Beale, The Book of Revelation, 719.

[71] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Beale</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>64</RecNum><Pages>719</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>64</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>G.K. Beale</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>I.Howard Marshall and Donald A.Hagner</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>NewInternational Greek Testament Commentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Mounce</Author><Year>1983</Year><RecNum>730</RecNum><Pages>264,n.61</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>730</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertH.Mounce</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1983</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>New International Commentary on the NewTestament</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Grand Rapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 264, n.61.

[72] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>70</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 70.

[73] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hoehner</Author><Year>1977</Year><RecNum>121</RecNum><Pages>115-39</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>121</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HaroldW. Hoehner</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1977</YEAR><TITLE>ChronologicalAspects of the life of Christ</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Lifeof Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1977), 115-39.

[74] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>725</RecNum><Pages>216-17</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>725</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Hitchcock,Mark</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>ThomasIce</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2004</YEAR><TITLE>TheTruth Behind Left Behind</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Sisters:OR</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Multnomah</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock and Ice, The Truth Behind Left Behind, 216-17.

[75] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>163</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary (Chicago: Moody Press,1992), 163.

[76] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>74</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 74.

[77] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Barr</Author><Year>1961</Year><RecNum>80</RecNum><Pages>217-18</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>80</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JamesBarr</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1961</YEAR><TITLE>TheSemantics of Biblical Language</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>London</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>OxfordUniversity Press</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language, 217-18.

[78] Josephus, Wars of the Jews 4. 11.5

[79] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>118-24</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville, TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 118-24.

[80] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Dyer</Author><Year>October-December1987</Year><RecNum>97</RecNum><Pages>434</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>97</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesH. Dyer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>October-December1987</YEAR><TITLE>The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 (Part2)</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>144</VOLUME><PAGES>433-449</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Charles H. Dyer, "The Identity of Babylon in Revelation17-18 (Part 2)," Bibliotheca Sacra144 (October-December 1987): 434. Also, the harlotimagery (Rev 17:1, 5) need not automatically refer back to God's accusations ofIsrael as an unfaithful harlot. Thomas notes that the angel describing thewoman uses the term pornh (harlotry) rather than moiceia (adultery). The latter word ismore restrictive "implying a previous marital relationship." Although pornh can include adultery, it isbroader. Thus, it is possible that the "woman represents all false religions ofall time" rather than just the spiritual unfaithfulness of God's covenantpeople Israel. ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>283</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: AnExegetical Commentary, 283.

[81] Armageddon is an actual geographic area located inNorthern Israel.

[82] Emphasis mine. A similar pattern is found in Galatians4:24-25 where the text itself uses the word "allegorically" to explain that thecity of Jerusalem is being figuratively used of Hagar, Mount Sinai, and the OldCovenant. These texts in no way deny Jerusalem as a literal city. Rather, theyare simply saying that Jerusalem has a spiritual dimension in addition to beinga literal city.

[83] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>206-07</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 206-07.

[84] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>723</RecNum><Pages>177,n.3</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>723</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Dallas</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Ph.D.diss., Dallas Theological Seminary</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date of theBook of Revelation," 177, n.3.

[85] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>307</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 307.

[86] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>206</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 206.

[87] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Beale</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>64</RecNum><Pages>25</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>64</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>G.K.Beale</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>I.Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>NewInternational Greek TestamentCommentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Beale, The Book of Revelation, 25.

[88] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>77</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Grand Rapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 77; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>118</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 118.

[89] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Robertson</Author><Year>1933</Year><RecNum>92</RecNum><Pages>6:430</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>92</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArchibaldThomasRobertson</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1933</YEAR><TITLE>WordPictures in the NewTestament</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>BroadmanPress</PUBLISHER><NUMBER_OF_VOLUMES>6</NUMBER_OF_VOLUMES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the NewTestament, 6 vols. (Nashville: BroadmanPress, 1933), 6:430.

[90] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Vine</Author><Year>1985</Year><RecNum>98</RecNum><Pages>424</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>98</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>W.E. Vine</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1985</YEAR><TITLE>Vine&apos;sComplete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New TestamentWords</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>W. E. Vine, Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary ofthe Old and New Testament Words(Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1985), 424; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hoehner</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>15</RecNum><Pages>428-34</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>15</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HaroldW.Hoehner</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>Ephesians:An Exegetical Commentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Baker</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An ExegeticalCommentary (Grand Rapids: Baker,2002), 428-34.

[91] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Dyer</Author><Year>October-December1987</Year><RecNum>97</RecNum><Pages>434-36</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>97</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesH. Dyer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>October-December1987</YEAR><TITLE>The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 (Part2)</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>144</VOLUME><PAGES>433-449</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Dyer, "The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18(Part 2)," 434-36; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Walvoord</Author><Year>1966</Year><RecNum>78</RecNum><Pages>246</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>78</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JohnF. Walvoord</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1966</YEAR><TITLE>TheRevelation of JesusChrist</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 246; ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>289</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 289; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Morris</Author><Year>1983</Year><RecNum>339</RecNum><Pages>324</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>339</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HenryMorris</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1983</YEAR><TITLE>TheRevelation Record</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Wheaton,Ill</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Tyndale</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Henry Morris, The Revelation Record (Wheaton, Ill: Tyndale, 1983), 324.

[92] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Year>2001</Year><RecNum>546</RecNum><Pages>2336,n.2</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>546</REFNUM><YEAR>2001</YEAR><TITLE>TheNET Bible</TITLE><PUBLISHER>Biblical StudiesPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>The NET Bible,(Biblical Studies Press, 2001), 2336, n.2. Also, musthrion of Revelation 17:5cannot be equated with "spiritually" (pneumatikws)of Revelation 11:8 to support the notion that Babylon of Revelation 17:5deserves the same type of spiritual interpretation that is given to Jerusalemin Revelation 11:8 since "Musthrion is a noun, not an adverb like pneumatikws" and musthrion comes from a differentroot than pneumatikws. ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>288-89</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 288-89.

[93] For an exposition of these prophecies demonstratingthat they have never been fulfilled historically, see ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Dyer</Author><Year>October-December1987</Year><RecNum>97</RecNum><Pages>443-49</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>97</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesH. Dyer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>October-December1987</YEAR><TITLE>The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 (Part2)</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>144</VOLUME><PAGES>433-449</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Dyer, "The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18(Part 2)," 443-49; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Dyer</Author><Year>1983</Year><RecNum>342</RecNum><Pages>1199</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>342</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesH.Dyer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1983</YEAR><TITLE>Jeremiah</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>JohnF. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibleKnowledge Commentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>ColoradoSprings, CO</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Chariot VictorPublishing</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Charles H. Dyer, "Jeremiah," in Bible KnowledgeCommentary, ed. John F. Walvoord andRoy B. Zuck (Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1983), 1199; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2003</Year><RecNum>111</RecNum><Pages>79-91</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>111</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2003</YEAR><TITLE>TheSecond Coming of Babylon</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Sisters,OR</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MultnomahPublishers</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Mark Hitchcock, The Second Coming of Babylon (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2003), 79-91; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Morris</Author><Year>1983</Year><RecNum>339</RecNum><Pages>348</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>339</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HenryMorris</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1983</YEAR><TITLE>TheRevelation Record</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Wheaton,Ill</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Tyndale</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Morris, The Revelation Record, 348.

[94] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>232-33</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 232-33. Arguing that these prophecies are simply hyperbolic isthe only option for those who insist that they were fulfilled in 539 B.C.because they bear little resemblance to Babylon's historic fall. This becomesapparent upon comparing the language of these prophecies with the historicalrecord of Babylon's fall as recorded in the writings of Herodotus, who wrotearound 450 B.C. See Herodotus, Histories 1.191.

[95] Jerusalem was under the political control of Rome atthe time John penned the Apocalypse.

[96] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hitchcock</Author><Year>2005</Year><RecNum>723</RecNum><Pages>177,n.3</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>2</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>723</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MarkHitchcock</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2005</YEAR><TITLE>ADefense of the Domitianic Date of the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Dallas</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Ph.D.diss., Dallas Theological Seminary</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hitchcock, "A Defense of the Domitianic Date of theBook of Revelation," 177, n.3.

[97] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Beale</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>64</RecNum><Pages>885</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>64</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>G.K.Beale</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>I.Howard Marshall and Donald A.Hagner</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>NewInternational Greek TestamentCommentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Beale, The Book of Revelation, 885. First century Jews recognized idolatry had caused theBabylonian captivity. This recognition had the effect of curing the nation ofthat particular sin. ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Beale</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>64</RecNum><Pages>887</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>64</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>G.K.Beale</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheBook ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>I.Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>NewInternational Greek TestamentCommentary</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Eerdmans</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Beale, The Book of Revelation, 887.

[98] Fruchtenbaum calls Babel "the mother of idolatry, for it was here that idolatry and falsereligion began (Genesis 11:1-9)." ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Fruchtenbaum</Author><Year>2003</Year><RecNum>474</RecNum><Pages>237-38</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>474</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArnoldFruchtenbaum</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2003</YEAR><TITLE>Footstepsof the Messiah</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tustin,CA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ArielMinistries</PUBLISHER><EDITION>rev</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Footsteps of the Messiah, rev ed. (Tustin, CA: Ariel Ministries, 2003), 237-38.

[99] Jerusalem did not even fall into Jewish hands untilthe time of David (2 Sam 5) around 1004 B.C.

[100] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Garland</Author><Year>2004</Year><RecNum>731</RecNum><Pages>203-4</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>731</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>TonyGarland</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2004</YEAR><TITLE>ATestimony of Jesus Christ-Volume 2: A Commentary on the Book ofRevelation</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Camano Island,WA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>SpiritAndTruth.org</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Tony Garland, A Testimony of Jesus Christ-Volume 2:A Commentary on the Book of Revelation(Camano Island, WA: SpiritAndTruth.org, 2004), 203-4; ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Bullinger</Author><Year>1935</Year><RecNum>341</RecNum><Pages>506</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>341</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>E.W.Bullinger</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1935</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse or &quot;The Day of theLord&quot;</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GreatBritain</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>HollenStreet</PUBLISHER><REPRINT_EDITION>London: Samuel Bagster &amp;Sons, 1972</REPRINT_EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>E. W. Bullinger, The Apocalypse or "the Day ofthe Lord" (Great Britain: HollenStreet, 1935; reprint, London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1972), 506; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Pink</Author><Year>1923</Year><RecNum>345</RecNum><Pages>258-59</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>345</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>ArthurPink</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1923</YEAR><TITLE>TheAntichrist</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Swengel,PA</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>I. C. Herendeen</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Arthur Pink, The Antichrist (Swengel, PA: I. C. Herendeen, 1923), 258-59.

[101] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Pate</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>54</RecNum><Pages>169-70</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>54</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AProgressive Dispensationalist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>C. Marvin Pate, "A Progressive Dispensationalist Viewof Revelation," in Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. C. Marvin Pate (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998),169-70.

[102] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>235</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 235.

[103] Both passages associate Babylon with a golden cup (Jer51:7a; Rev 17:3-4; 18:6), dwelling on many waters (Jer 51:13; Rev 17:1),intoxicating the nations (Jer 51:7b; Rev 17:2), and having the same name (Jer50:1; Rev 17:5; 18:10). Both passages analogize Babylon's destruction to astone sinking into the Euphrates (Jer 51:63-64; Rev 18:21) and depict Babylon'sdestruction as sudden (Jer 51:8; Rev 18:8), caused by fire (Jer 51:30; Rev17:16; 18:8), final (Jer 50:39; Rev 18:21), and deserved (Jer 50:29; Rev 18:6).Both passages describe the response to Babylon's destruction in terms of God's peoplefleeing (Jer 51:6, 45; Rev 18:4) and heaven rejoicing (Jer 51:48; Rev 18:20). ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Dyer</Author><Year>October-December1987</Year><RecNum>97</RecNum><Pages>441-43</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>97</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>CharlesH. Dyer</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>October-December1987</YEAR><TITLE>The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 (Part2)</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>144</VOLUME><PAGES>433-449</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Dyer, "The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18(Part 2)," 441-43.

[104] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>84</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 84.

[105] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>82-86</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 82-86.

[106] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>86</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 86; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>426</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 426.

[107] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>204,222</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation," 204, 222; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>579-81</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 579-81.

[108] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>347</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 347.

[109] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Deere</Author><Year>January-March1978</Year><RecNum>504</RecNum><Pages>70</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>504</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JackDeere</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>January-March1978</YEAR><TITLE>Premillennialism in Revelation20:4-6</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>BibliothecaSacra</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>135</VOLUME><PAGES>58-73</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Jack Deere, "Premillennialism in Revelation 20:4-6,", BibliothecaSacra 135 (January-March 1978): 70.

[110] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hoehner</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>123</RecNum><Pages>249</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>123</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HaroldW. Hoehner</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>Evidencefrom Revelation20</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>Donald K.Campbell and Jeffrey L.Townsend</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>TheComing Millennial Kingdom</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Kregel</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Harold W. Hoehner, "Evidence from Revelation 20," in TheComing Millennial Kingdom, ed. DonaldK. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1997), 249.

[111] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Zuck</Author><Year>1991</Year><RecNum>505</RecNum><Pages>242</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>505</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RoyZuck</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1991</YEAR><TITLE>BasicBible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering BiblicalTruth</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Colorado Springs:CO</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ChariotVictor</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Roy Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation: A PracticalGuide to Discovering Biblical Truth(Colorado Springs: CO: Chariot Victor, 1991), 242.

[112] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>408</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL. Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 408.

[113] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Zuck</Author><Year>1991</Year><RecNum>505</RecNum><Pages>244-45</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>505</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RoyZuck</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1991</YEAR><TITLE>BasicBible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering BiblicalTruth</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Colorado Springs:CO</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ChariotVictor</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guideto Discovering Biblical Truth, 244-45.

[114] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>82</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 82.

[115] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>82</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid.

[116] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>85</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 85.

[117] Even if the preterist early dating scenario iscorrect, Christ uttered these words over three decades after His Ascension. Ifthe late date scenario is correct, then Christ made this statement six decadesafter His Ascension.

[118] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>67</RecNum><Pages>325</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>67</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation1 to 7: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 1 to 7: An Exegetical Commentary, 325; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Walvoord</Author><Year>1966</Year><RecNum>78</RecNum><Pages>99</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>78</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>JohnF.Walvoord</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1966</YEAR><TITLE>TheRevelation of JesusChrist</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 99. ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Bullinger</Author><Year>1935</Year><RecNum>341</RecNum><Pages>209-10</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>341</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>E.W. Bullinger</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1935</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse or &quot;The Day of theLord&quot;</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GreatBritain</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>HollenStreet</PUBLISHER><REPRINT_EDITION>London: Samuel Bagster &amp;Sons, 1972</REPRINT_EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Bullinger, The Apocalypse or "the Day of theLord", 209-10.

[119] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Couch</Author><Year>March1998</Year><RecNum>510</RecNum><Pages>43</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>510</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>MalCouch</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>March1998</YEAR><TITLE>Progressive Dispensationalism: Is Christ Now onthe Throne of David?-Part I</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>ConservativeTheological Journal</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>2</VOLUME><NUMBER>4</NUMBER><PAGES>32-46</PAGES></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Mal Couch, "Progressive Dispensationalism: Is ChristNow on the Throne of David?-Part I," Conservative Theological Journal 2, no. 4 (March 1998): 43.

[120] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>85</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 85.

[121] The only possible exception to this rule is in Luke2:34 where the word refers to a common rising.

[122] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1992</Year><RecNum>66</RecNum><Pages>206</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>66</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1992</YEAR><TITLE>Revelation8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Chicago</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>MoodyPress</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22: An Exegetical Commentary, 206.

[123] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>431</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d and rev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 431.

[124] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>205-6,n.50</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation," 205-6, n.50.

[125] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>89-90</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 89-90.

[126] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1997</Year><RecNum>551</RecNum><Pages>432</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>551</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1997</YEAR><TITLE>HeShall Have Dominion</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler:TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER><EDITION>2d andrev.</EDITION></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, 432.

[127] An allegorical approach is one that does not payattention to what the text says but instead uses the text's words as a basisfor incorporating a higher spiritual meaning. For a discussion of weaknesses ofthe allegorical approach to Scripture, see ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Pentecost</Author><Year>1958</Year><RecNum>2</RecNum><Pages>5-6</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>2</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>J.DwightPentecost</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1958</YEAR><TITLE><styles><styleface='2'></style></styles>Things to Come: A Study in BiblicalEschatology</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Findley,OH</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Dunham PublishingCompany</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study inBiblical Eschatology (Findley, OH:Dunham Publishing Company, 1958), 5-6.

[128] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Ice</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>722</RecNum><Pages>160</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>722</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Ice,Thomas</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Kenneth L.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>TheGreat Tribulation: Past or Future?</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Kregel</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ice and Gentry, The Great Tribulation: Past orFuture?, 160.

[129] ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>68</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 68.

[130] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>89</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL. Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid., 89.

[131] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>89</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book of Revelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Ibid.

[132] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Thomas</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>106</RecNum><Pages>209-10</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>106</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>RobertL.Thomas</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>AClassical Dispensationalist View of Revelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.Marvin Pate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>GrandRapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Thomas, "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation," 209-10.

[133] ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1998</Year><RecNum>59</RecNum><Pages>44</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>7</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>59</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1998</YEAR><TITLE>APreterist View ofRevelation</TITLE><SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_AUTHOR>C.MarvinPate</SECONDARY_AUTHOR></SECONDARY_AUTHORS><SECONDARY_TITLE>FourViews on the Book ofRevelation</SECONDARY_TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Grand Rapids</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Zondervan</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, "A Preterist View of Revelation," 44; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Gentry</Author><Year>1989</Year><RecNum>70</RecNum><Pages>135,n.3</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>70</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>KennethL.Gentry</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1989</YEAR><TITLE>BeforeJerusalem Fell</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Tyler,TX</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Institute for ChristianEconomics</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 135, n.3; ADDIN EN.CITE<EndNote><Cite><Author>Hanegraaff</Author><Year>2007</Year><RecNum>719</RecNum><Pages>4,92</Pages><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><REFNUM>719</REFNUM><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>HankHanegraaff</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2007</YEAR><TITLE>TheApocalypse Code</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Nashville,TN</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>ThomasNelson</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, 4, 92.

[134] Norman L. Geisler, "A Friendly Response to HankHanegraaff's Book, The Last Disciple,"online: http://wwwses.deu/Norm Geisler/lastdisciple.htm, accessed 22 April2005, 3.