Directed Study on

Eschatology:

The Science of Last Things

A Comparative and Persuasive Paper

Submitted to:

Professor Craig Hazen

CSAP 695

Fulfilling One Unit of Essential Christian Doctrine II

Submitted by:

Paul Viggiano

Completed 3/17/00
 Directed Study on Eschatology: The Science of
Last Things

Original Essay Submission, March 2000

First Printed Edition, April 2020

© Paul Viggiano (Lulu Press, Inc.)

All rights reserved.

2
 The following paper was submitted by Pastor
Paul Viggiano in March 2000 in order to fulfill a
requirement for a Master’s-level course at Biola
University in California.

Soli Deo Gloria

3
4
 Contents
Introduction Page 9

I. Is Eschatology Important Page 11

II. Approach the Scriptures Page 13

A. The Analogy of Faith and Literalism

B. Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology

III. Four Dominant Methods of Approaching Prophecy

Page 21
A. The Historicist
B. The Idealist
C. The Futurist
D. The Preterist

IV. The Millennium Page 27

A. Historic Premillennialism
B. Dispensational Premillennialism
C. Amillennialism
D. Postmillennialism

V. But What About…? Page 37

A. What About the Temple?

B. What About the Olive Tree?
C. What About the Olivet Discourse?
D. What About Daniel’s Image and the Roman Empire?
E. What About the Land?
F. What About Daniel’s Seventy Weeks?
G. When Does, or Did, the Kingdom of God Begin?
H. Are Things Supposed to Get Worse?
I. What About the Man of Sin?
J. The Thessalonian Problem
5
VI. The Revelation Page 51

Glossary Page 65

Bibliography and Recommended Reading Page 67

6
7
8
 Introduction

November 1, 1999, the cover of Newsweek donned a copy of

the painting ‘The Vision of Ezekiel’ by Raphael. It is a painting,
which shows the ominous coming of angels and God’s judgment. In
letters bigger than the title of its own magazine is the word
‘PROPHECY’ with a sub-heading, “What the Bible says about the
end of the world.”
There may not be a section in any Christian bookstore that
attracts more browsers than the shelves dedicated to eschatology (the
study or science of last things). The best-selling Christian book in the
entire decade of the seventies was The Late Great Planet Earth. This
was a book bought by Christians and non-Christians alike which
popularized the study of last things.
Although the views proposed in that book will not be found in
any confession or creed (or anywhere else) prior to 1800, the
influence of the book, and other books with the same theological
flavor, was phenomenal. So much so, that those views have become
somewhat of an untested modern orthodoxy. To hold views
inconsistent with the brand of eschatology found in LGPE will cause
not a few eyebrows to be raised. For this reason a study of the
ancient confessions on this subject should be of value to Christians.
At arguably richer theological times, none of the great masters
of the faith held to the views that dominate today’s airwaves and
bookstores. This is not to suggest that there were no disagreements
among early brilliant theologians. But it should get our attention that
in all the disagreements, no one held the view that is most popular
today. It should be an assumption among Christians that the Church
is a spiritually richer place when it holds more closely to Biblical
Christianity. We should also note that today’s dominant view is
prevailing during a period of apostasy in western evangelicalism. We,
therefore, should not be sheepish about questioning what the majority
of a lukewarm church believes about the Christian faith. None of this
makes any position right or wrong. But it should make us a little
more comfortable when giving modern notions of Christian thinking a

9
healthy critique—especially as we examine alternatives that have a
richer theological history.
We must keep in mind that our purpose here is not merely to
lay siege to one view. I mention the most popular view simply
because it has been my experience that many people who hold this
view think it is a test of orthodoxy. Our purposes here will be to
examine the value of eschatology and the differing positions of
eschatology. I will also give my slant, that is, the position that I hold
to be most Biblical. So you must keep in mind that this isn’t merely
an academic pursuit but a persuasive pursuit on my part.
Finally, I will seek to answer in advance the onslaught of
questions I anticipate will come forward. I recently taught a twelve-
week class on the Westminster Confession, which ended with the
study of eschatology. Consistent with most historical confessions, it
taught—something to this effect—that Jesus will return and that will
be the end of history. Not surprisingly all the hands flew up. The
questions “Who is the anti-Christ?”, “What about the mark of the
beast?”, “Who are the 144,000?”, “What about the millennium?” and
so on, all came to people’s minds. I will try to answer these questions
in advance, from all perspectives, and then from what I believe to be
the most biblical perspective.
The following will be, more or less, a laymen’s guide to
eschatology. The serious student can use this information as a
springboard into deeper study. At the end of this class you should be
able to understand and articulate the major eschatological positions.
You should have gained an understanding of the strengths and
weaknesses of the positions. And as you read the Scriptures you
should be able to begin to determine which position is most consistent
with the general tenor of the Old and New Testaments. Again, I will
reveal what I believe to be the most solid position. I will also reveal
what I believe to be the weaknesses of other positions.

10
 I. Is Eschatology Important?

“Blessed is he who reads and those who hear

the words of this prophecy, and keep those things
which are written in it; for the time is near”
(Revelation 1:3).

Some might question if studying eschatology has any value at

all. Many pastors I know have ducked the issue altogether. They
make jokes about being pan-millennialists. They say it will all pan
out in the end. Or they suggest that it is simply an unknowable aspect
of the Christian faith. Some wonder what difference it makes. They
assert that there doesn’t seem to be any direct application in terms of
personal behavior. There are a number of reasons, however, why
eschatology is important.
The most obvious reason eschatology is important is because
it is part of God’s word. We certainly don’t think the Holy Spirit
added a branch of theology to the Bible that was unnecessary.
Eschatology is part of God’s word, so to propose that it is useless to
the Christian is an insult to God. It is part of God’s word and it
deserves our study. It may be a difficult subject, but the entire Bible
is difficult. That certainly is no excuse for never opening it. On the
other hand it may not be as difficult as one might think. I once
thought Calvinism was difficult but now see it in the Scriptures quite
easily. Eschatology might be quite easy if approached properly.
However one views it, the Scriptures are to be studied because
they have inherent value as the word of God. Even beyond this, the
third verse of the opening chapter of Revelation promises blessings to
those who read and keep the words of this prophecy. Prophecy is a
worthy and necessary aspect of the devotions of a Christian. It is
unfortunate that prophecy, in some circles, has become little more
than Christian psychic hot-line sensationalism. Even still, the subject
must not be ignored simply because it has reached levels of absurdity
among certain sects.

11
 The argument that it is all going to pan out is a short-sighted
notion. This attitude reveals a lack of interest in participating in what
God is doing in history. Eschatology tells us what God’s plan is in
history. We are to work and pray toward that plan. As James Henley
Thornwell (1812-62) stated,

If the Church could be aroused to a deeper

sense of the glory that awaits her, she would enter
with a warmer spirit into the struggles that are
before her.1

1
Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism, An Eschatology of Hope, (P & R Publishing,
1999), p. 47.
12
 II. Approaching the Scriptures

A. The Analogy of Faith and Literalism

Before seeking to determine what the Bible teaches regarding

prophecy, we must determine how we are to approach prophetic
passages (or any passages of Scripture for that matter). Many modern
Bible teachers use literalism as their primary hermeneutic (principle
of interpretation). We can speculate as to why this might be the case,2
but it should be put forth at the beginning of this study that literalism
has not always been the driving hermeneutic of Protestant
Christianity. The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1:9 teaches,

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture

is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a
question about the true and full sense of any
Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must
be searched and known by other places that speak
more clearly.

This method of interpretation is known as the analogy of faith.

It is the idea of laying Scripture next to Scripture and letting the clear
help us understand the unclear. When an inspired writer of Scripture
interprets another passage, concept or word of Scripture a certain
way, we are free (if not required) to interpret it the same way.

1. The Temple

For example, there is much talk today about the rebuilding of

a physical temple in Jerusalem. Those who use the literal approach as
their primary hermeneutic promote this. Those who view the temple
as the body of Christ (somewhat of a spiritual application—or perhaps

2
Perhaps it is a response to the neo-orthodox tendency to spiritualize huge portions of
Scripture.
13
metaphorically) are regarded as doing injustice to the text. But
consider the words recorded by the Apostle John,

“Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy

this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to
build this temple, and will You raise it up in three
days?” But He was speaking of the temple of His
body. Therefore, when He had risen from the dead,
His disciples remembered that He had said this to
them; and they believed the Scripture and the word
which Jesus had said” (John 2:19-22).

Certainly Jesus wasn’t a theological liberal. Jesus explains the

temple a certain way. We are free (again, if not required) to
understand it the same way. This is the analogy of faith.

2. Israel

Another example has to do with the nation of Israel. Some

understand the promises given to Israel to apply across the board to
the physical nation of Israel. Once again we see the literal
hermeneutic as the primary interpretive agent. But consider the words
of the Apostle Paul:

“And if you are Christ’s, then you are

Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the
promise” (Galatians 3:29).

Christians should not take the liberty to “spiritualize” passages

or words in Scripture as it suits them. But when the Apostle Paul,
speaking by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, tells Christians they are
Abraham’s seed, we must exercise the analogy of faith and allow the
Scriptures to tell us what the Scriptures mean. This does not
necessarily mean that every time Israel or Abraham’s seed is
mentioned it is referring to New Testament Christians. But we must
certainly allow this to be a driving influence in our interpretation of
Scripture.

14
 B. Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology

Two other major distinctions must be addressed regarding the

way the Scriptures are approached. The methods in question are
called dispensationalism versus covenant theology.
Dispensationalism will generally have literalism as a driving
hermeneutic. Covenant theology will generally have the analogy of
faith as a driving hermeneutic.
The system known as dispensationalism has its roots in the
Plymouth Brethren, more specifically John Nelson Darby,3 and
started in 1830. It gained popularity through the 1800s but became
extremely popular around the turn of the century with the widespread
publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. Proponents of
dispensationalism include Clarence Larkin, Charles Ryrie, Lewis
Sperry Chafer, John Walvoord, Hal Lindsey, Chuck Smith, Chuck
Swindoll, Jack Van Impe and Chuck Missler.
In short, dispensationalism divides the bible into distinct
dispensations or eras in history. Different dispensationalists divide
things up differently, but in general they see six or seven
dispensations:

1. Innocence (before the fall)

2. Conscience (up to the flood)
3. Government (up to the tower of Babel)
4. Patriarchs (the period of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob)
5. Law (the period of Moses)
6. Grace (the church age)
7. Millennium (a future thousand year period of bliss)

Others might include the age of perfection in eternity or the age

of the church during the writing of the New Testament, etc.
We will find that covenant theology does a similar thing in
understanding eras in history (certainly we are not in an era where we
sacrifice animals any longer), but there is a difference between the
way the two understand the dispensations or eras.
Dispensationalism sees the dispensations as self-contained.
The promises, the requirements and, for some, even the means by

3
Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Baker Book House, 1984), pp.
292,293.
15
which men are saved differ and start afresh from dispensation to
dispensation.

1. Under The Law

For example, many dispensationalists will assert that if a

certain law is not repeated in the age of grace, a New Testament
Christian is under no obligation to seek to obey it.4 It is simply a law
for a different dispensation. They view the comment of the Apostle
Paul in Romans 7:14 as a proof text for this idea.

“For sin shall not have dominion over you, for

you are not under law but under grace” (Romans
6:14).

Paul anticipates this error and rapidly addresses it in the next

verse.

“What then? Shall we sin because we are not

under law but under grace? Certainly not!”
(Romans 6:15).

And how does the Christian know what sin is? John tells us in 1
John,

“Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also

the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (1
John 3:4).

New Testament writers did not view the dispensations as self-

contained. John here clearly assumes his readers knew, and would
seek to obey, the law. Dispensationalists view the dispensations as
periods where God tests men and men ultimately fail. They view the
present dispensation (the age of grace) as a period in history where
failure occurs as well.

4
Bob George, a radio talk-show host on a nationally syndicated program called People
to People makes this assertion practically on a daily basis.
16
 2. The Failure of Christianity

The failure of Christianity is perhaps a shocking concept, but

it is the title of a chart on page 771/2 of Clarence Larkin’s book on
dispensationalism. Larkin writes,

“It is evident that there are more than a 100

times as many persons born into the world each
year, as there are persons ‘New Born’, and that
thus far Christianity, as a world converting power,
is a failure, all of which proves that, if after 1900
years of gospel preaching the world is not
converted, it is not God’s purpose to convert the
world by the preaching of the gospel in this age, but
simply to gather out an ‘elect body’—the church.
The ‘Millennial Age’ will be the ‘Dispensation
of the Spirit,’ then righteousness shall cover the
earth as the waters cover the deep.”5

Larkin finishes by quoting the eleventh chapter of Isaiah and

assigning it to a future millennium. Charles Ryrie, in his study bible,
has the same interpretation. It must be noted at this point that this is
on page 1030 of Ryrie’s study bible. There is no mention, however,
of a future millennium (which is a debated subject itself) until page
1919. So even if the millennium were a yet future event (a subject we
will address later) it is not spoken of within 889 pages of the promise
recorded in Isaiah. This hardly seems to be a natural reading of the
text. Especially when just two chapters earlier these promises are
associated with the birth of a child (9:6,7). Isaiah writes of no
intervening dispensation between the birth of the child and that which
is accomplished by the child.
Larkin’s failure of Christianity is a hard concept for most
dispensationalists to accept. Indeed many of them deny this to be the
teaching at all.6 But consider the words of the founder of Dallas

5
Clarence Larkin The Greatest Book on dispensational Truth in the World (Rev.
Clarence Larkin Est. 2802 N. Park Ave., Philadelphia 32, Pa. U. S. A., 1918), p. 77 1/2
6
Revised dispensationalism and progressive dispensationalism are moving in a good
direction from the classic position. I am not sure where they will end up so I cannot address
it here.
17
Theological Seminary, perhaps the most influential seminary in
America today. Lewis Sperry Chafer states,

“Strictly speaking, the Church has no mission;

for God has never commissioned her as a corporate
body to undertake any task whatsoever. It is true
that by means of the Church, God is making known
His wisdom, and will yet make known His grace to
the angelic hosts (Eph. 3:10; 2:7); but this calls for
no effort or sacrifice on her part. All divine
commissions are to the individual believer; and this
is reasonable, since Christian service is the exercise
of a personal gift in the power of the indwelling
Spirit. It is noticeable that no service program for
the church succeeds until it becomes a service
program for the individual.
Another error to be avoided in connection with
this subject is the supposition that the divine
purpose in this age is the conversion of the world.
It is true that the world will be converted and there
is yet to be a kingdom of righteousness in the earth;
but according to the Bible, that day of a
transformed earth, so far from being the result of
Christian service, is said to follow rather than
precede the return of Christ, and is said to be made
possible only by His personal presence and
immediate power.”7

This is a hard pill for most Christians to swallow, but this is

classic dispensationalism.

3. Classifications of People

Dispensationalists also see three classifications of persons:

Jew, Gentile and Christian. The covenant theologian sees two
classifications: those in the covenant and those outside the covenant.
Whether Jew or gentile makes no difference. When the

7
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Major Bible Themes, (Dunham Publishing Company, 1926), p.
212.
18
dispensationalist approaches the Scriptures he must figure out which
person is being addressed in which dispensation. It can be a very
difficult task to keep all this straight, especially when we consider the
make-up of the future millennium. It is taught by dispensationalists to
be a time of law with the presence of the glorified Christ, glorified
saints and unbelievers.

4. Covenant Theology—A Progressive Plan

The covenant theologian looks at the dispensations quite

differently. They are progressive. God’s plan, purposes and
requirements do not change from era to era. His plan is unfolding
throughout history. God made a covenant that the seed of the woman
would crush the head of the serpent in Genesis 3:15 and the remainder
of the Scriptures gives the details of how that works itself out. Other
covenants8 we read of in Scripture relate to God’s overall covenant of
grace. They are not self-contained dispensations but all relate to
Christ. We see this in the covenants:

• In the Noachic Covenant, God promises not to destroy the

world, that the work of redemption might proceed.
• In the Abrahamic Covenant we see through whom the Savior
would come.
• In the Mosaic Covenant we see a full expression of the Law,
which contains the righteous requirements for salvation.
• In the Davidic Covenant we see the Savior as King of kings.
• In the new covenant we see all the covenants come together
and fulfilled in Christ.

The dispensations and covenants are not designed so much to

be a time of testing and failure as they are designed to foreshadow
their fulfillment in Christ. And the new covenant will not fail to
accomplish all the promises prophesied and foreshadowed in the
previous covenants.

8
Excluding the covenant of works given to Adam.
19
 5. Implied Continuity or Discontinuity

Dispensationalism is compartmental. There is an implied

discontinuity between covenants. In other words, if the laws and
promises aren’t repeated in the new covenant, it is to be assumed that
they are no longer in force. Covenant theology (although it does
recognize some discontinuities, e.g., animal sacrifices) is a
progressive understanding of the unfolding plan of God in history.
There is an implied continuity. In other words if God makes a law or
promise it is to be assumed that that law or promise is still in effect
unless He, and He alone, abrogates (repeals) it. It is critical to come
to terms with these concepts in order to approach prophetic passages.

20
 III. Four Dominant Methods of
Approaching Prophecy

Having discussed literalism, the analogy of faith,

dispensationalism and covenant theology in general, let us now
approach the subject of eschatological and prophetic hermeneutics
specifically, especially the way Revelation is approached. Men’s
attempts to interpret prophetic scripture have led them down many
paths. The four most dominant methods (or views) employed in
interpreting prophecy are: the historicist, the idealist (symbolic or
spiritual), the futurist, and the preterist.

A. The Historicist

The historicist views Revelation as a survey of the whole

history of the Church. Through the symbols of Revelation we can
discern what has and will continue to happen throughout church
history. Some historicists would assert, for example, that the breaking
of the seven seals in Revelation 6 and 7 are the barbarian invasions
that sacked the western Roman Empire. The scorpion/locusts that
come out of the bottomless pit in chapter 9 are the Arab hordes
attacking the eastern Roman Empire followed by the Turks
represented as the horses with serpents for tails and flame-throwers
for mouths. The beast of chapter 13 represents the papacy.9
Some historicists apply the “year-for-a-day principle.”
According to this principle one need only interpret the days given in
Revelation as years in order to come up with the exact dates that
events are to happen. Through the use of this, and other principles in
the historicist method, the rise of Mohammedanism has been
identified with the fifth trumpet and even the Protestant Reformation
is found in Christ’s admonitions to the church at Sardis.

9
Steve Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1997), p. 34.
21
 Some difficulties in the historicist method are: 1) the lack of
ability of its advocates to come to any original and independent
agreement regarding the specific fulfillment of the prophecies; 2) the
tendency historicists have to find the culmination of the prophecies
happening in their own generation; 3) the failure to take into
consideration things happening in the church outside of Europe; 4) the
difficulty which arises when one considers that, as history continues,
it broadens the scope of time for these prophecies to be fulfilled, thus
rendering it almost impossible to determine genuine time frames.10
The historicist approach has very few adherents today.
Though the following (some to a limited degree) have used it in their
understanding of certain events in history: John Wycliffe, John Knox,
William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Philip
Melanchthon, Sir Isaac Newton, Jan Huss, John Fox, John Wesley,
Jonathon Edwards, George Whitefield, Charles Finney, Charles
Spurgeon, Matthew Henry and other notable theologians. I must also
point out that for many theologians of antiquity, eschatology wasn’t a
completely thought-out doctrine. For example, many of those listed
above would employ the preterist, futurist or idealist method as well
as the historicist method when it came to certain passages.

B. The Idealist (Symbolic or Spiritual)

The idealist does not look for any specific historic fulfillment
of the prophecies of Revelation. What the reader finds in the
Revelation is a recurring (generally thought to be seven) expression of
the triumph of good over evil. The book is to be taken symbolically
and not literally at all. There is encouragement for believers in all
ages because the themes are continually present in the Church.
Christians can continue to take joy in Christ’s victory over Satan, the
vindication of martyrs, the sovereignty of God and love for His
Church, etc. William Hendriksen states,

“The theme is the victory of Christ and of His

Church over the dragon (Satan) and his helpers.”11

10
Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson Publishers,
1997), pp. 36,37.
11
William Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors, (Baker Book House, 1940), p. 8.
22
 According to some idealists, the beast from the sea may be
identified as the satanically inspired political opposition to the church
in any age. The Harlot represents either the compromised church or
the seduction of the world in general. Calamities, wars and plagues
are things that happen on a repetitive basis throughout history. There
is no need to identify these things with any specific historic event.12
Many good theologians have held this position through history
and it definitely has some strengths. For example, even if the events
aren’t specific in nature, that is, not physically happening during the
real course of history, it would not exclude the idealistic and spiritual
encouragement all Christians would receive with their recognition of
how their God works. If your pastor gives an illustration to make a
point during a sermon, it doesn’t make a great deal of difference
whether it is fictitious or not. You still learn the principle.
The problem with the idealist view is that the tenor of the
Revelation doesn’t seem to be merely symbolic in its entirety.
Chapter one, verse one reads as if some real event “must shortly come
to pass.” If your pastor starts telling you stories that aren’t reality and
tries to pass them off as reality, you might have a problem.

C. The Futurist

The futurist approach is clearly the most popular position

today. Adherents of this position include C. I. Scofield, Lewis Sperry
Chafer, John Walvoord, Chuck Swindoll, Chuck Smith, Billy
Graham, Charles Ryrie, Hal Lindsey and pretty much every popular,
high-profile media theologian today.
The futurist places the rapture of the Church at Revelation 4:1.
So the bulk of what happens in Revelation happens with the church
absent from the world. As the name indicates, the futurist
understands the vast majority of what is written in Revelation is to
happen in the future: not the immediate future from the Apostle
John’s perspective, but rather the distant future. Most of what one
reads in Revelation, according to the futurist, happens after the

12
Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson Publishers,
1997), p. 43.

23
rapture of the Church, which (depending on a tribulation argument
among futurists) is seven years prior to the second coming of Christ.
The futurist generally uses literalism as their primary
hermeneutic. Therefore, they must obviously reject the idealist
approach. And since there was never a time when the sun was
darkened, and the moon did not give its light or the stars fell from
heaven or a third of the sea turned to blood, it is not possible that
these things have already happened. And since the Church must be
raptured before any of this takes place the historicist must be wrong
as well.
The futurist would understand the majority of the material
found in chapters 6 through 19 of Revelation to be a seven year period
of tribulation, the second half being worse than the first. The futurist
understands the Apostle John as giving his best effort to explain the
visions he had of twentieth (or now twenty-first) century technology
through the words of a first century man. He sees literal hundred
pound hailstones, locusts that sting like scorpions, and an actual
physical mark of the beast that would be likened to a sort of tattoo.
Many futurists go so far in their literal quest that sensible
literalism disappears altogether. For example, it is not uncommon for
the futurist to find in John’s visions 200 million Chinese troops, cobra
helicopters, nuclear war and a global cash-less economic system.
None of this is literally taught in Revelation. Not only this, but the
literalism can only go so far. For example no one expects real stars to
fall out of the heavens and no one thinks they’re going to see a beast
rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his
horns ten crowns. Literalism, pushed too far actually becomes quite
absurd.
Earlier we discussed the analogy of faith. The book of
Revelation has over 500 allusions to the Old Testament (e.g. the
eating of a scroll or cherubim and seraphim). It has over 100
allusions to the New Testament. All in all there are, in merely 22
chapters, over 600 allusions to other books in the Bible.13 With
increased emphasis it must be stated that, of all the books in the Bible,
the Revelation must be interpreted by the analogy of faith.
One problem with the futurist position is that in all its attempts
to literally interpret symbolic visions, it fails to take a literal approach

13
Dr. Greg Bahnsen, The Message of the Revelation (Covenant Media, Tape Series),
tape 2.
24
to the portion of the text that is clearly to be taken literally. The
context is set in chapter one, verses one and three. Using very literal
language, without a hint of symbolism, it is asserted, “The Revelation
of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things
which must shortly take place” (italics mine). Many efforts have
been made to dismiss what this seems to say in a very straightforward
manner (something we will discuss later), but verse three buttresses
the point beyond debate: “Blessed is he who reads and those who hear
the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in
it; for the time is near” (italics mine).
Another problem with the futurist position is that it renders the
book of Revelation 90 percent irrelevant to its original readers
(another important hermeneutic) since they weren’t within 2000 years
of the fulfillment of the vast majority of subjects covered in the text.
Since the rapture occurs at chapter four, the book is also irrelevant for
the vast majority of Christians in history also, even those who are
alive in the last days, since every person who would be reading the
book, for the most part, is raptured. Other problems with this position
will be discussed as the topics demand.

D. The Preterist

The preterist sees the vast majority of what is written in the

Revelation as having been fulfilled in the past (or John’s near future).
Over and against the historic method it sees the fulfillment of these
prophecies (especially the judgments) as not happening over
thousands of years, but shortly after the time of the writing, namely
the siege of Jerusalem by Rome in A. D. 70.
It must be noted that radical preterism is considered heretical
by virtue of ecumenical creeds, councils and confessions. It denies
the second coming of Christ as an actual future event, which will be
the consummation of history. This is not an orthodox understanding
of eschatology. What will be put forth here is moderate or partial
preterism. Along with all the orthodox creeds and councils, moderate
preterism (which we will merely call preterism) believes in a future
second coming of Christ and a physical resurrection of the righteous
and unrighteous.
The strengths of the preterist view lie in the fact that: 1) it
renders the book very relevant to its original readers; they were being

25
heavily persecuted by the Jews and Rome. John was assuring them
that there would be a time of vindication. 2) It can take the opening
address (1:1,3) and closing words of chapter 22 literally. These
verses demand a soon-to-be-expected working out of the events
prophesied. 3) It is consistent with Jesus’ teaching in the Olivet
discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21) which refers to the
destruction of the temple (Matthew 24:2), which Jesus taught would
happen in that generation (Matthew 24:34). 4) A review of Josephus’
account of the fall of Jerusalem is quite consistent with the verbiage
of Revelation. Other strengths of this position will be brought to light
as topics are discussed.

26
 IV. The Millennium

The millennium is also an important issue in eschatology.

Millennium is a term which means, “a thousand years”. It is found
only in the twentieth chapter of Revelation. The four most dominant
views of the millennium are known as: historic premillennialism,
dispensational premillennialism, amillennialism and
postmillennialism. The prefix tells you when they think the second
coming will occur. The amillennial position, similar to
postmillennialists, asserts that the second coming of Christ will be
after the millennium. Both premillennial positions assert that the
second coming of Christ will happen prior to the millennium.
The methods of approaching prophecy previously discussed
(futurist, preterist, historicist, idealist) do not necessarily line up with
a specific millennial position. Some postmillennialists are preterists
and others historicists, etc. Some positions may be an easier fit with
others, but it is important to note that the differing methods of
approaching prophecy do not necessarily yield the same millennial
outcomes. It must also be noted however that all dispensational
premillennialists are futurists.

A. Historic Premillennialism

The historic premillennial position will sound quite familiar in

many ways to the dominant modern premillennial position. By the
title we know it teaches that Christ comes before the millennium. At
the end of the church age there will be the Tribulation. This will be
followed by the second coming. At this point the Antichrist will be
judged and there will be the resurrection of the righteous (but not the
unrighteous). Satan will be bound at this point also.
Also, at this point an unprecedented time of blessing will
begin for the Church for a literal thousand years. This will have been
established by the physical presence of the glorified Christ. At the
end of the thousand years Satan will be released for a short time, seek
to create a rebellion, but fail in a short period of time. Finally, there
27
will be the resurrection and judgment of the unrighteous, followed by
the eternal state. One of the strongest proponents of this position was
George Eldon Ladd. He wrote The Gospel of the Kingdom (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmands, 1959) and the Presence of the Future (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmands, 1974).
One of the biggest differences between the historic and
dispensational positions are their views regarding the physical nation
of Israel. The historic position does not see Israel as a major player in
eschatology. Their views of the dispensations would also be
markedly different.
One of the greatest short-comings of the historic premillennial
position is the splitting up of the resurrection of the righteous and the
unrighteous by a thousand years. Jesus taught,

“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming

in which all who are in the graves will hear His
voice and come forth—those who have done good,
to the resurrection of life, and those who have done
evil, to the resurrection of condemnation” (John
5:28,29).

This does not seem to allow a thousand year interval between the
resurrections. The kingdom parables seem to indicate the same thing.

“Let both grow together until the harvest, and

at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, ‘First
gather together the tares and bind them in bundles
to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn’”
(Matthew 13:30).

If anything, the tares go first.

“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and

all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the
throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered
before Him, and He will separate them one from
another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the
goats” (Matthew 25:31,32).

28
 Again, there is no gap of time between the treatment of
the sheep and the goats. Some argue that we shouldn’t get too
much theology out of a parable, but it seems that judgment
day is the very point of the parable.

B. Dispensational Premillennialism

Dispensational premillennialism is the most popular view in

western evangelicalism today. According to this view the
dispensation in which we presently live will end in dismal failure.
Evil will grow until it dominates the world. An Antichrist figure will
win the affections of most of humanity and will eventually require full
submission to him in order to function within society. Fortunately (at
least according to some who hold this view) the Church will be
raptured before the Great Tribulation that is brought on by this
Antichrist.
The Great Tribulation will be a seven-year period where being
a Christian will mean certain death. The second three and a half years
will be worse than the first. The Tribulation will end with the battle
of Armageddon. In the midst of this battle Christ will return to
destroy His enemies. At this point He will judge the nations and a
literal thousand-year millennium will begin.
The glorified Jesus will then rule the world from the throne of
David in Jerusalem where the temple sacrifices will be reinstated as a
memorial.14 Virtually all the promises made to the physical nation of
Israel will be fulfilled during this period. Israel will be given the
place of honor among the nations. The world will consist of the
glorified Christ and resurrected Christians (who have their
incorruptible bodies) alongside men and women still living in their
natural, pre-resurrected bodies. There will be both saved and unsaved
people living in the millennium. They will live to be very old but still
die.
At the end of the thousand years, Satan will be released and
lead unbelievers in rebellion against Christ and the New Jerusalem.
The rebellion will be crushed by fire from heaven. Satan will be cast
into the lake of fire and the resurrection of the unjust will take place.
After this, the eternal state will begin.

14
Charles C. Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible (Moody Press, 1976), p. 1299.
29
 The classic dispensationalist views the present dispensation as
a parenthesis in history. In short, the prophets of the Old Testament
did not see the dispensation of the church age. They saw the cross,
then the millennium but not the age in between. It has been compared
to two mountain peaks, which seem to be next to each other but are
actually separated by a great valley.15
The number of difficulties with this view are too numerous to
mention here. It has the same resurrection problem as the historic
view. Some hold to five distinct judgments and three distinct
resurrections.16 Because it necessitates a futurist view it must ignore
the clear time frames of Revelation 1:1,3; Matthew 24:34, etc. It fails
to acknowledge Paul’s teaching of the unity brought about by the
cross: that there is no longer Jew nor gentile in the eyes of God.
There was at one time a wall, which separated the two in the temple
court. Read Paul’s words in Ephesians:

“Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles

in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by
what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by
hands—that at that time you were without Christ,
being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and
strangers from the covenants of promise, having no
hope and without God in the world. But now in
Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been
brought near by the blood of Christ. For He
Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and
has broken down the middle wall of separation,
having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the
law of commandments contained in ordinances, so
as to create in Himself one new man from the two,
thus making peace, and that He might reconcile
them both to God in one body through the cross,
thereby putting to death the enmity. And He came
and preached peace to you who were afar off and to
those who were near. For through Him we both
have access by one Spirit to the Father. Now,

15
Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), p.
28.
16
Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible (Moody Press, 1976), p. 1954.
30
 therefore, you are no longer strangers and
foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and
members of the household of God, having been
built on the foundation of the apostles and
prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief
cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being
joined together, grows into a holy temple in the
Lord, in whom you also are being built together for
a dwelling place of God in the Spirit” (Ephesians
2:11-22).

Paul uses terms like “commonwealth of Israel,” creating “one

new man from the two,” “fellow citizens,” etc. It is hard to imagine
that a Jewish Christian sitting next to a gentile Christian in that church
could look across the pew and still think there are promises for him
that are not for his Christian brother, in any respect. The
dispensationalist is building up the wall that Christ tore down.
Other problems with this view are: 1) The idea that Jesus’
work on the cross was insufficient to accomplish the promises of God.
He must return and finish the job. 2) The kingdom (which is equated
with the millennium) would be fully established in a cataclysmic way
rather than like leaven or a mustard seed. They seem to be making
the same error we saw in the triumphal entry. 3) The idea of
sacrificing an animal before the glorified Christ, even as a memorial,
is abominable. 4) The requirement of the failure of Christianity
seems inconsistent with the victorious tone of the Great Commission.
5) The idea of the parenthesis would negate any notion of any
prophecy being fulfilled in the church age. If this is the case, then
Israel becoming a nation in 1948 couldn’t possibly have been
prophesied in the Old Testament. 6) The idea of the glorified Christ
living alongside non-Christians on the earth opens the door for some
difficult christological problems. Other problems with this system
will be addressed along the way.

C. Amillennialism

The amillennialist sees the millennium as the period between

the first and second advents. It is a time of the spiritual reign of
Christ. Amillennialists see the kingdom of God and the kingdom of

31
Satan both growing stronger with time. The wheat and the tares are
both forces. There will be a limited amount of influence the Christian
faith will have on the world, and the prophecies, which indicate global
conversion, are to be taken very metaphorically or spiritually.
They also see a brief rebellion by Satan at the end of the
millennium. The millennium will be followed by the final
resurrection and judgment. The eternal state will then commence.
This may be the view that has been held by the majority of Christians
in history. We see it as a dominant Roman Catholic view as well as
the view of many Reformers.
The strength of this view is found by it’s general confessional
consistency. That is, there is nothing in this view which is inherently
unorthodox or inconsistent with the way the vast majority of the
Christian Church has understood what the Bible teaches regarding all
forms of theology. For example it doesn’t require multiple
resurrections or added appearances by Jesus to finish an undone job.
Some question the legitimacy of understanding the millennium as not
being a literal thousand years. The exercise of the analogy of faith
dismisses this criticism. In Scripture, the number one thousand is
used quite freely in a metaphorical sense.

“For every beast of the forest is Mine, and the

cattle on a thousand hills” (Psalm 50:10).

“May the LORD God of your fathers make you

a thousand times more numerous than you are, and
bless you as He has promised you” (Deuteronomy
1:11).

“Therefore know that the LORD your God, He

is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and
mercy for a thousand generations with those who
love Him and keep His commandments”
(Deuteronomy 7:9).

“How could one chase a thousand, and two put

ten thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold
them, and the LORD had surrendered them”
Deuteronomy 32:30)?

32
 “Remember His covenant forever, the word
which He commanded, for a thousand generations”
(1 Chronicles 16:15).

“Truly I know it is so, but how can a man be

righteous before God? If one wished to contend
with Him, He could not answer Him one time out of
a thousand” (Job 9:2,3).

“A little one shall become a thousand, and a

small one a strong nation. I, the Lord, will hasten it
in its time” (Isaiah 60:22).

“But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that

with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a
thousand years as one day” (1 Peter 3:8).

The greatest difficulty with this view (and perhaps its biggest
distinction with postmillennialism) is its lack of acknowledgment of
the victorious effects of the gospel on the earth. The gates of hell will
not prevail against the onslaught of the kingdom of God (Matthew
16:18). There may be wheat and tares but we must remember as Dr.
Bahnsen stated, “It is, after all, a wheat field and not a tare field.”
Their understanding of Isaiah 65 being the eternal state is strained
since people die in it (Isaiah 65:20). Their general understanding of
the victory of Christ merely being in the spiritual or ethereal realm
leaves a great deal to be desired when one recognizes that the spiritual
failure of Adam and Eve affected both the spiritual and physical
world. Certainly the victory of Christ will affect both as well.

D. Postmillennialism

Similar to amillennialism, postmillennialism teaches the

millennium to be between the first and second advents of Christ.17
The greatest distinction between amillennialism and

17
Some postmillennialists believe in a literal thousand years. That is, at a certain point
in history, between the two advents of Christ, a thousand year period of blessedness will
begin and end with the second coming. That is not the view put forth here.
33
postmillennialism is one of optimism. Their time frames, in terms of
the course of events, are the same. They both believe in a general
resurrection and judgment day. They both believe in the spiritual
victories accomplished by Christ. The postmillennialist, however,
believes that the gospel will change the world the way it changes an
individual, i.e., inwardly and outwardly.
The Holy Spirit will draw multitudes to Christ by the
preaching of the gospel. This will include ethnic Israel as well.
Although they do not teach that every single person on earth will be
saved, they do assert that the kingdom of Christ will prevail in every
aspect of life and that false kingdoms which rise up against the true
kingdom will always fall. Only the kingdom of Christ stands through
history. The promises given in the Scriptures regarding a global
conversion will be realized by the power of the cross, the preaching of
the gospel and the coming of the Spirit. The Great Commission will
be fulfilled.
Some of the passages postmillennialists hold to be fulfilled in
the present age are:

“And in you all the families of the earth shall be

blessed” (Genesis 12:3).

As Mathison states, “Whatever else ‘all the families of the earth’

means, it does not mean a minuscule percentage of the families of the
earth.”18

“The LORD said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right

hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool’”
(Psalm 110:1).

This is the most quoted Old Testament passage in the New

Testament.

“All the ends of the world shall remember and

turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations
shall worship before You. For the kingdom is the

18
Mathison, Postmillennialism, An Eschatology of Hope (P & R Publishing, 1999), p.
64.
34
 Lord’s, and He rules over the nations” (Psalm
22:27,28).

This Messianic Psalm proclaims Christ’s rule after clear allusions

to the cross without an intervening dispensation. It also seems to
indicate a literal, physical, fulfillment in history.

“For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is

given; and the government will be upon His
shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful,
Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince
of Peace. Of the increase of His government and
peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David
and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it
with judgment and justice from that time forward,
even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will
perform this” (Isaiah 9:6,7).

This very familiar passage moves from the birth of the child to
the establishment of His kingdom with no mention of an intervening
period.

“They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy

mountain, for the earth shall be full of the
knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea”
(Isaiah 11:9).

The postmillennialist sees these, and other passages like these, to

be fulfilled in such a way as to genuinely affect the human race in
every aspect, both spiritually and physically. This will happen as a
result of Christ’s finished work on the cross as opposed to His
finishing the job at the second coming.
Criticisms of this position are: 1) It’s view of the length of the
millennium. This was addressed earlier in the amillennial portion.
The number one thousand is freely used in a metaphorical sense in
Scripture. 2) It’s promotion of triumphalism. It must be pointed out
that triumph (if it is triumph of good over evil) is not bad or
unbiblical. 3) It’s assertion that men will create a utopian society
through their own carnal efforts. The postmillennialist does not

35
believe that a changed world will happen as a result of the carnal
efforts of men. They believe the zeal of the LORD of hosts will
perform this. In the same way an individual Christian’s life actually
and really changes by the power of the Spirit, so will the world
actually and really change by the power of the Spirit. Men will
change the world, but only because God changes men.

36
 V. But What About…?

Now that we have discussed the importance of eschatology,

the methods of hermeneutics (analogy of faith versus literalism,
dispensationalism versus covenant theology, implied continuity
versus implied discontinuity and historicist, idealist, futurist and
preterist methods) and the millennial positions, let’s move on to some
specific topics to be understood.
As I stated earlier, I taught a class on the Westminster
Confession that concluded with the study of last things. It simply
asserted that Jesus would return to judge at the final resurrection. The
hands flew up and I was bombarded with questions. I will seek to
answer these questions (and others I anticipate) here. Again, I will
give answers from as many positions as I believe to be prudent, then I
will give what I believe to be the most Biblical.

A. What About the Temple?

“Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod.

And the angel stood, saying, “Rise and measure the
temple of God, the altar, and those who worship
there. But leave out the court which is outside the
temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given
to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city
underfoot for forty-two months” (Revelation
11:1,2).

There is a great deal of talk, among futurists, about a rebuilt

temple which is destroyed. If the Revelation were written after the
destruction of the temple in A. D. 70, it would have to be rebuilt in
order for this passage to be fulfilled. On the other hand, if the
Revelation were written prior to A. D. 70 (as many preterists
conclude) we would see a fulfillment of this prophecy in the siege of
Jerusalem by Rome. So, when was the Revelation actually written?

37
 At best, the date of Revelation is a guess. There is no place in
the book where the date is given. All who hold to a late date of
Revelation have a similar source, who is Irenaeus (A. D. 130-202).
Even what Irenaeus said was unclear. He either said the vision was
seen or John was seen during the reign of Domitian which might give
the book a late date (90s). We also must realize that Irenaeus is not
necessarily a reliable historian. He taught, for example, that Jesus’
ministry lasted almost fifteen years and that He lived to almost fifty
(Against Heresies, 2.22.5).
Ken Gentry thoroughly examines the dating of Revelation in
his book Before Jerusalem Fell.19 Gentry gives a number of
arguments for the early dating of the book. Among the arguments
are: 1) The nearness of Christ’s coming, which is a repeated theme in
the book, is inconsistent with this being fulfilled thousands of years
later. 2) The sixth king, said to be the one who is presently reigning
(Revelation 17:9,10), was Nero. Nero reigned from 54 to 68. 3) The
existence of the temple. Revelation 11:1,2 indicates the temple is still
standing. It was destroyed in 70. 4) The strong presence of Jewish
Christianity which dwindled after the Fall of Jerusalem. Gentry gives
many other reasons for the early date. One must also wonder, if the
Fall of Jerusalem had already happened, why would it not be
mentioned at all in a book like Revelation?
Historicists see the temple as the Church receiving persecution
by the papacy. Idealists see the temple as the Church as well. I
believe this is the destruction of the temple in A. D. 70, which was the
final blow to the old covenant and the full beginning of the new
covenant.

B. What About The Olive Tree?

Romans 9-11 is a matter of theological debate regarding the

future of Israel. The Olive tree discussed in Romans 11 is God’s
stream of covenant blessing which he promised to Abraham in the
Abrahamic Covenant. Dispensationalists hold that the provision of
salvation is the same for both Jew and gentile but other promises are
specifically for the ethnic nation of Israel. Idealists view Israel as the
Israel of God (Galatians 6:16) and postmillennialists see in Romans
11 a future conversion of ethnic Israel along with many other nations
19
Ken Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell.(American Visions, 1998).
38
as well. Again, I must assert that any notion that Paul was teaching
separate blessings for ethnic Israelites seems inconsistent with the
general tenor of his writings. Enclosed is a copy of a debate between
Doug Wilson (preterist and postmillennialist) and Thomas Ice
(futurist and dispensational premillennialist).

C. What About the Olivet Discourse?

In Matthew 24 we read a sermon given by Jesus.

Dispensationalists (futurists), although they can’t completely ignore
the allusion to the temple, understand this sermon as referring to the
distant future. Jesus’ allusion to false christs, rumors of wars,
famines, earthquakes, persecution, apostasy, the abomination of
desolation, the Great Tribulation, false reports of Christ’s coming, the
judgment of Christ, cosmic happenings of the sun, moon and stars, the
gathering of the elect, etc. are recorded in the first 34 verses of
Matthew 24 and are said to be things which happen just prior to the
second coming.
The biggest problem with this view is when you read verse 34.
Jesus says, “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no
means pass away till all these things take place.”
Dispensationalists will argue that “generation” is either the generation
who sees the signs (a generation which is at least 2000 years in the
future) or that “generation” can mean that race (the Jews) or era in
history which is still continuing to this day.
But for a system which seeks to use the plain, normal, literal,
historical and grammatical method of interpretation,20 this seems
strained. Especially when we consider that every other time Matthew
uses this phrase, it clearly refers to the generation of Jews to whom
Jesus was speaking.
The preterist would understand the language of Jesus in
Matthew 24 (and parallel gospels) to be normal Old Testament siege
language. The topic of conversation is the temple (Matthew 24:1,2).
The statement by Jesus is that this will take place in that generation.
The historical reality is that the temple was destroyed in that
generation, thus putting the final end to a covenant which was fading
away.

20
Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible (Moody Press, 1976), p. 1952.
39
 “When He said, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made
the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming
obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear”
(Hebrews 8:13).

But the sun hasn’t been darkened! We must understand this as

common prophetic language (Isaiah 13:10; 34:4-5; Ezekiel 32:7;
Amos 8:9) used to describe judgments fulfilled in the Old Testament.
Often times God used nations to impose judgments on other nations.
Also, consider Acts 2. Peter makes the statement in verse 16, “But
this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel.” What does Peter
include in this?

“I will show wonders in heaven above and signs

in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of
smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and
the moon into blood” (Acts 2:19,20).

Certainly Peter wasn’t a liberal theologian. He wasn’t taking

liberties with the word of God as he quoted Joel. It may be of interest
to note Peter’s comments alongside that of Ryrie. Of Acts 2:16-21
Ryrie states,

“The fulfillment of this prophecy will be in the

last days, immediately preceding the return of
Christ, when all the particulars (e.g. v. 20 and Rev.
6:12) of the prophecy will come to pass. Peter
reminded his hearers that, knowing Joel’s
prophecy, they should have recognized what they
were seeing as a work of the Spirit, not a result of
drunkeness.”21

Peter, clearly addressing Pentecost (one of the key beginnings of

the new covenant) says, “This is what was spoken by the prophet
Joel.” Ryrie says this is referring to events which will immediately
precede the second coming.

21
Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible (Moody Press, 1976), pp. 1646, 1647.
40
 D. What About Daniel’s Image and the Roman Empire?

You have probably heard that the “Roman Empire will be

revived shortly before the return of Christ to this earth.”22 This is a
very common and popular teaching today. From where does this
come? It comes from Daniel. Everybody, dispensationalist,
covenantalist, preterists, futurist, etc. sees the four kingdoms in Daniel
pretty much the same way. In interpreting the king’s dream Daniel
sees four successive kingdoms: the Babylonian, the Media-Persian,
the Greek and the Roman Empire. They also see Christ as the “stone
cut without hands” (Daniel 2:34), which becomes “a great
mountain” (Daniel 2:35) and fills “the whole earth” (Daniel 2:35).
Here’s the big difference:
The dispensationalist must somehow find the reconstituted
Roman Empire somewhere in history (sometimes associated with a
European ten-nation confederacy.23) It is in the midst of this revived
Roman Empire that Jesus will come and start His kingdom. The
covenantal theologian (which includes amillennial, postmillennial,
idealist, preterist and perhaps historicist) sees this in a less confusing
way. Simply put, Rome was in power when Jesus came and started
His kingdom. It is truly quite simple.

E. What About The Land?

Didn’t God promise land to the Israelites that they haven’t

received yet? Dispensationalists will quote from Genesis 15:18-21
where a land promise is made to the descendants of Abraham. They
will assert that God has not yet kept that promise and sometimes
accuse non-dispensationalists of maintaining that God doesn’t keep
His promises. If it weren’t so sad it would almost be humorous to
follow the notes of the Ryrie Study Bible. Ryrie’s comments on
Genesis 15:18-21 read,

“The boundaries of the promised land are now

given for the first time. the river of Egypt. I.e., the

22
Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), p. 88.
23
Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), p. 95.
41
 Nile. This promise has not yet been fulfilled, but
will be when Christ returns.”24

In Ryrie’s cross-reference notes, in his margins, Joshua 21:43 is

referenced. It reads as follows.

“So the LORD gave Israel all the land which He

had sworn to give to their fathers, and they
possessed it and lived in it. And the LORD gave
them rest on every side, according to all that He
had sworn to their fathers, and no one of all their
enemies stood before them; the LORD gave all their
enemies into their hand. Not one of the good
promises which the LORD had made to the house of
Israel failed; all came to pass” (Joshua 21:43-45).

This reads fairly dynamically. God fulfilled His old covenant

promises. It must also be noted that the land was never really the
focus of the faithful. Regarding Old Testament saints, the author of
Hebrews writes,

“These all died in faith, not having received the

promises, but having seen them afar off were
assured of them, embraced them and confessed that
they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For
those who say such things declare plainly that they
seek a homeland. And truly if they had called to
mind that country from which they had come out,
they would have had opportunity to return. But
now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country.
Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their
God, for He has prepared a city for them”
(Hebrews 11:13-16).

The land promises were a means to an end. The end was the
birth of Christ who began the heavenly kingdom.

24
Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible (Moody Press, 1976), p. 29.
42
 F. What About Daniel’s Seventy Weeks?

“Seventy weeks are determined for your people

and for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to
make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for
iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to
seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most
Holy” (Daniel 9:24).

Doing a Christian talk radio show, I was all but laughed at to

think this was actually fulfilled! I was actually ridiculed for thinking
that Christ had already accomplished this without having to come
again to finish the job. Here the amillennialist and postmillennialist
have a similar understanding of things. The dispensationalist,
however, has a radically different take on this passage.
The entire passage breaks up the seventy weeks into seven
weeks, sixty-two weeks and one week. The dispensationalist
understands it thus: 1) The fulfillment of the things mentioned in
verse 24 will not happen until the second coming of Christ. 2) The
seven weeks and the sixty-two weeks terminate shortly before the
death of Christ. 3) The parenthesis of the church age happens
between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week. 4) The seventieth week
is the Great Tribulation25 which is a seven year period of great
distress. 5) The church will be raptured prior to the seventieth week.
6) The temple will be rebuilt. 7) The seventieth week ends with the
second coming.
The traditional understanding of this passage has been that the
seventy weeks were completed in Christ’s first coming and the
destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies. There are several
reasons to maintain this understanding of the seventy weeks over and
against the dispensational understanding which surfaced in the 1800s.
1) There is no mention of an indefinite gap of time between the sixty-
ninth and seventieth week. 2) The things mentioned in verse 24 were
fulfilled in the first century (e.g. Israel’s transgression climaxed with
the crucifixion, Christ made atonement for sin, Christ established
everlasting righteousness through His work on the cross, etc.). 3) The
period of time where the Messiah is cut off (suffers the death penalty)

25
Larkin The Great Book on dispensational Truth in the World (Rev. Clarence Larkin
Est. 2802 N. Park Ave., Philadelphia 32, Pa. U. S. A., 1918), p. 133.
43
is after the sixty-ninth week and therefore in the seventieth week. 4)
Christ put an end to sacrifices by His sacrifice. Christ fulfilled the
seventy weeks of Daniel in His first advent.

G. When Does, or Did, The Kingdom of God Begin?

What is the kingdom of God and when did, or does, it begin is

a matter of much debate. This is too deep a subject to address in
detail here. Suffice it to say there are many aspects of the kingdom.
In one respect it is within us. It is also something the gates of hell
will not prevail against. It is something one cannot see apart from
being born again. It is something that starts small like a mustard seed
then grows large. It is something that will have an effect upon the
whole loaf, like leaven. It is also something you can be in, but still
not be saved (Matthew 22:12-14). The apostle Paul considered
himself to be in the kingdom already (Colossians 1:13). Since the
invisible and eternal aspects of the kingdom cannot be seen or fully
known until we are with Christ, the kingdom, according to ancient
confessions, is associated with the Church. The Westminster
Confession XXV, 2 states,

“The visible Church, which is also catholic or

universal under the Gospel (not confined to one
nation, as before under the law), consists of all those
throughout the world that profess the true religion;
and of their children: and is the kingdom of the
Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out
of which there is no ordinary possibility of
salvation.”26

Although some dispensationalists agree that the spiritual or

soteriological (salvation issues) aspects of the kingdom are present,
there is uniform agreement that the promises which the presence of
the kingdom provides on other levels will not begin until the second
coming and the future millennium. It is the assertion of
dispensationalists that Christ is prophet and priest, but that He will not
be the reigning King until He takes the throne of David and begins
His millennial kingdom. As Chafer states, “He is now serving as
26
Westminster Confession of Faith
44
Priest and not as King.”27 In short, dispensationalists do not believe
that the kingdom of God has begun.
Virtually all other millennial positions disagree with this.
Whether it is in an amillennial sense—which would be more of a
spiritual kingdom, or in a postmillennial sense—which would be a
spiritual kingdom, but having a significant effect upon the physical
world—virtually all historic confessions indicate that the kingdom has
come and is growing. Over and over again the Scriptures indicate that
the kingdom of God is “at hand.” “At hand” cannot mean thousands
of years in the future. Not only this, examine Acts 2 regarding the
throne of David:

“Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of

the patriarch David, that he is both dead and
buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God
had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of
his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up
the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this,
spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ,
that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His
flesh see corruption” (Acts 2:29-31).

Notice that the taking of the throne of David is associated with

the resurrection of Christ. The resurrection of Christ has already
happened. Therefore Jesus has taken David’s throne. Therefore the
kingdom has begun.

H. Are Things Supposed to Get Worse?

It is almost impossible to discuss issues of immorality and

tragedy on the radio these days without at least a few people calling in
with the theological mindset that these bad things, even though they
grieve us, are supposed to happen prior to the second coming. We’ve
already discussed the failure of Christianity. This failure plays right

27
Chafer, Major Bible Themes, (Dunham Publishing Company, 1926), p. 52.
45
into the dispensational understanding of how history is designed to
unfold.28
This may be one of the most destructive aspects of the
dispensational, futurist theological system. To somehow convince six
or eight generations of Christians that it is God’s design for Satan to
overcome the culture in which they live is formidable. Apart from
theological considerations I must say, from a coach’s perspective, if
you can convince your opponent that they are destined to lose, you’ve
won the game before it begins.
The idealist does not put much stock in history either. They
don’t necessarily give it over to Satan as the dispensationalist does,
but they don’t believe it will get noticeably better either. The
postmillennialist, on the other hand, sees the influence of the gospel
having its way in history. The Great Commission will be fulfilled and
this will make the world a better place.
Often times, people will look at the newspaper or the two
world wars of the twentieth century and scoff at this position, not
dissimilar to Sarah laughing. To this the postmillennialist responds a
few ways. 1) The Scriptures give us our theology, not CNN. 2)
There might be a poorer moral climate now than there was 150 years
ago (even 50 years ago), but pick a 500 year chunk of history in
which you would rather live—Spanish Inquisition? Crusades? Dark
Ages? Rome? Babylon? Egypt? Pretty much every one of these eras
would find faithful Christians in slavery, burned at the stake or fed to
lions.
The “Last Days” generally associated with the apostasy are
usually talking about the last days of the old covenant and how things
would be prior to the fall of Jerusalem. For example, 2 Timothy 3
speaks of how bad things will be in the “last days.” Futurists assign
this to the last days just prior to the second coming. This ignores the
context of Paul’s letter. Mathison gives three points which refutes
this: 1) Paul is writing about things Timothy must personally deal
with (3:10, 14). 2) In Hebrews 1:2; 1 Peter 1:20; 1 John 2:18 and
others passages in the New Testament, “last days” clearly refers to the

28
Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), pp. 114-
134.
46
last days of the Jewish age. 3) The passage itself teaches that these
evil men “will not make further progress.”29

I. What About the Man of Sin?

“Let no one deceive you by any means; for that

Day will not come unless the falling away comes
first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of
perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all
that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he
sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself
that he is God” (2 Thessalonians 2:3,4).

The dispensational premillennialist sees this person as a major

player in the days just prior to the second coming. He sets himself up
to be worshipped at a time when the church is going apostate and
when men, in general, will become more and more evil. Associating
this man of sin with the anti-Christ and the beast of Revelation is
commonly held. Taking his mark will be certain doom but without
this mark (covered elsewhere) you cannot buy or sell, etc.
Dispensationalists don’t see this as ever having taken place in history.
Of the man of lawlessness it is stated,

“This man is also called the ‘beast coming out

of the sea’ (Rev. 13:1-10), ‘a scarlet beast’ (17:3),
and simply ‘the beast’ (17:8, 16; 19:19-20). He is
the Antichrist (1 John 2:18), a pseudo-Christ hostile
to the Savior. He will be a real human being, not a
principle or a system, or a succession of individuals.
Such a person has not yet been spotlighted on the
stage of human history.”30

Contained in the quote above is the refuting of the historicist

view that the anti-Christ(s) are the popes. This view was held by

29
Mathison, Postmillennialism, An Eschatology of Hope (P & R Publishing, 1999), p.
215.
30
John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Victor Books,
1983), p. 718.
47
most of the theologians during the Reformation and is theologically
plausible when examining the anti-Christ of 1 John.
The preterist would see this man of lawlessness as Nero. At
the time of this writing, Nero was not yet emperor so he was
restrained (verse 6). He would soon become emperor and his reign
was characterized by such evil and debauchery that it disgusted even
his own constituency. Nero’s death occurred in the midst of the
judgment of Jerusalem (verse 8). Nero can easily be associated with
the beast of Revelation (covered elsewhere). Whoever this man of
lawlessness was, the futurist has a difficult time explaining how he
was being restrained during the time of Paul’s writing. “And you
know what restrains him now, so that in his time he may be
revealed” (2 Thessalonians 2:6—italics mine).

J. The Thessalonian Problem

If you haven’t figured it out yet, you will soon realize that 1
and 2 Thessalonians create a difficult problem for all eschatological
positions. First Thessalonians 4 contains the passage which all
(except full preterists) consider to be an allusion to the second
coming. The trumpet blasts, the dead in Christ are raised, then all
who remain are caught up to meet Jesus in the air, and from that point
on will always be with the Lord.
Futurists will look at chapter 5 as a continued discussion
regarding the same event. It talks about the times and seasons and the
Lord coming as a thief in the night. The futurist will also look at 2
Thessalonians 2 as referring to the same event. It talks about the
coming of the Lord, the man of lawlessness, etc. The preterist, on the
other hand, views these three chapters as allusions to two different
events. First Thessalonians 4 is the second coming. First
Thessalonians 5 and 2 Thessalonians 2 would be referring to the fall
of Jerusalem. At first glance it would seem like an imposition to
suggest that these are not all addressing the same event. Until a
couple of other things are considered.
First, it wouldn’t be difficult to understand Paul addressing
different events in these three chapters if he had already taught on
separate events in his prior meetings with them. That alone, of
course, is insufficient. So what are the strongest reasons to believe
that Paul is addressing two different events in these three chapters?

48
 One strong argument in favor of 2 Thessalonians 2 referring to
the fall of Jerusalem is its language being very similar to the words of
Jesus in the Olivet Discourse. These things, Jesus said, would occur
in that generation (Matthew 24:34). Secondly, 2 Thessalonians 2:6,7
seems to indicate that the man of lawlessness was presently being
restrained and that the mystery of lawlessness was already at work.
Thirdly, the Thessalonians were shaken in mind because they thought
the “day of Christ had come” (2 Thessalonians 2:2). Unless Paul
was a terrible teacher or they were inept learners, how could they
have possibly thought the final resurrection had already occurred?
Fourthly, why would Paul begin instructing them about the man of
lawlessness in order to ensure them the final resurrection hadn’t
happened? Why wouldn’t he merely demonstrate that their presence
on the earth was enough to show it hadn’t yet happened?
On the other hand, it is not inconceivable that the
Thessalonians had been instructed along the lines of the Olivet
Discourse.

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by

armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then
let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let
those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not
those who are in the country enter her” (Luke
21:20,21).

They could have been concerned that they missed their cue to
flee to the mountains.

49
50
 VI. The Revelation

Now we shall take a brief look at Revelation. I will attempt to

address the highlights from the varying positions, then give what I
believe to be the soundest interpretation.

Chapter One

The first three verses of Revelation are like pointing a gun at a

target that’s a mile away. If you’re off by an inch at the end of the
barrel, you’ll be off by a mile by the time the bullet reaches the target.
Twice, in the first three verses, we are told that the things written of
will shortly take place.
The historicist doesn’t have a problem with this since they
believe that the history of the Church was about to start. They do
have a bit of a problem, however, when we look at chapter 22 and
realize that the book ends by indicating that it will happen shortly.
The idealist doesn’t have a problem with this since they
believe all this was, and is, a present spiritual reality for any church in
any age. But this seems to ignore the pressing urgency of the words
themselves.
The futurist has a very difficult time with these words. They
seek to explain away verse one by asserting that the phrase, “must
shortly take place,” could possibly mean, “a rapidity of execution
after the beginning takes place.”31 In other words, once it all starts it
will happen quickly. This seems to be strained exegesis at best. The
knock out blow comes in verse three where it is said that the time is
near. The easiest way the futurist deals with these verses is to call
upon Peter’s statement regarding God’s time frame. To God a day is
as a thousand years. The only problem with this is that the letter
wasn’t written to God. It was written to men to be understood by
men. This type of interpretation would render any reference to time,

31
John Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, (Moody Press, 1966), p. 35
51
anywhere in Scripture, meaningless. Here is a classic example of the
literalist not being literal, when it doesn’t suit his system.
The preterist has the easiest time with these passages. They
simply take them at face value. John was writing to let his readers
know of something that was about to happen. This would be a source
of warning and encouragement, first, to his readers, secondly to all
who would find themselves in similar circumstances in history.
At a time when the Christian faith was relatively insignificant,
John encourages his readers that neither Jerusalem (the religious
power) nor Rome (the political power) is in charge. In 1:5 Jesus is
said here to be the ruler over the kings of the earth.
The idealist, once again, sees this in a spiritual sense without
much application or effect in terms of the physical world. The
historicist would generally see this as a true statement of a present
reality in all realms. The futurist however all but denies the truth of
this declaration. Read John Walvoords comments:

“His fulfillment of the role of ‘ruler of the kings

of the earth’ is future, to be achieved after his
victory over the beast and the false prophet (Rev.
19)…Jesus has the right to rule, though He is not
exercising this right over the kings of the earth
now…”32

The preterist takes the words at face value. Jesus is presently

the King of kings. He is the ruler over the kings of the earth.
Regardless of what the newspapers say or who seems to be in charge.
Read of Jesus in Psalm 2.
Many times in Scripture we see the idea of God, or Christ,
coming on a cloud or similar language (Ps. 18, 7-15; 104:3; Isa. 19:1,
Nah. 1:2-8; Matthew 24; etc.) We see this in 1:7. What does it
mean?
Many spiritualists, historicists and futurists see this as the
second coming.
Some spiritualist see this as any time in history when God may
visit His judgments upon men. The preterist connects this to the
context of the opening verses and sees this as part of something that

32
John Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, (Moody Press, 1966), p. 38.
52
will shortly come to pass. The Ruler of the kings of the earth will
soon exact His judgments upon the enemies of God’s people.
In the remainder of chapter one we see the deity of Christ (vs.
8); John’s presence on Patmos (vs. 9); the seven golden lampstands
which are the seven churches (vs. 12,20); the glorified Christ in the
midst of the churches (vs. 13); the seven stars which are the seven
angels, or pastors, of the churches (vs. 16, 20); and an outline of the
Revelation (vs. 19).

Chapters Two and Three

In chapters two and three we see seven letters to seven

churches. The letters generally (but not always) contain a description
of Jesus which is taken from chapter one, a commendation from
Jesus, a criticism from Jesus, an admonition to overcome, and a
promise for the one who overcomes.
The historicist and some futurists see in these seven churches
the history of the Church in general. For example, Smryna is the
persecution by the Roman emperors; Pergamum is seen as
representing the imperial church after Constantine (313-606), etc.33
The idealist sees in these seven churches situations and
conditions that can and do exist in any church in any age. They agree
that these churches did really exist, but that the letters have a
universal application throughout history.
The preterist will generally agree in principle with the idealist.
In the same way we can benefit from letters written to Galatia or
Corinth, we can benefit from letters written to the seven churches of
Revelation 2 and 3. But the preterist also acknowledges that these
letters had a primary audience. They were written for people who
were facing great persecution and were about to undergo a specific
event in history. The end of the old covenant was at hand and the
temple would soon be destroyed through a great siege.
It is also of interest to note that these seven cities were also
seven postal stops, which indicates that the letters may have been
cyclical in nature. It is also worth noting that Ephesus was the
proconsul center for the Roman Empire, Thyatira had some of the
most occult practice of the ancient world and Pergamum was a city

33
Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson Publishers,
1997), pp. 68-70.
53
dominated by trade unions where idolatry was engaged in, or you
didn’t have a job. It was also the center of the emperor cult.34 This
information answers the claims of many futurists that the government
of the first century was not capable of imposing upon Christians the
things they’re capable of doing today.

Chapter Four

If chapter one was a watershed for understanding Revelation,

chapter four is a virtual explosion. The preterist, historicist and
idealist all, in one way or another, view the beginning of chapter four
as John being introduced into a courtroom scene with the throne
depicting judgment. They may all differ on how this works itself out,
but there is similarity here.
The dispensational futurist, however, views 4:1 as the rapture
of the Church and claims that the Church is not mentioned again until
the very end of the book.35 This hardly seems to be the natural
reading of the passage,

“After this I looked, and, behold, a door was

opened in heaven: And the first voice which I heard
was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which
said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things
which must be hereafter” (Revelation 4:1).

It seems more like John, and John alone, is called up to witness a

vision.
The twenty-four elders are introduced in chapter four. The
historicist sees the elders as the Church triumphant, the idealist sees
them as celestial representatives of all the redeemed, and the futurist
sees them as raptured saints. The preterist would maintain the elders
(a term never used to describe an angel or anything other than men)
are to be understood as “representatives of God’s people, the senate
sitting in council around their bishop.”36

34
Bahnsen, The Message of the Revelation (Covenant Media, Tape Series), tape 3.
35
Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson Publishers,
1997), p. 85.
36
David Chilton, Days of Vengeance, (Dominion Press, 1987), p. 151.
54
 The remainder of chapter four is a picture of the glory of the
throne room of God. This should be an encouragement to Christians
who were, and are, tempted to think that the throne rooms of human
leaders are insurmountable. The stage is set for judgment.

Chapter Five

In chapter five we are introduced to a scroll with seven seals.

As the scroll is opened we see it to be God’s judgments. There is an
initial fear that no one is worthy to open the scroll but John is told that
the Lion of the tribe of Judah is worthy. He turns and looks; he sees,
not a Lion, but a Lamb. This is very significant when we consider
how God will advance His kingdom and defeat the kingdoms of this
world. It is by the power of Christ’s sacrifice (vs. 9,10).
The historicist sees these judgments working themselves out
in the history of the church. The idealist sees it as the redemptive
plan of God. The futurist looks at the scroll as the title deed to history
and the releasing of the scroll as events which will take place just
prior to the second coming, during the Great Tribulation. The Church
has been raptured and watches the rest of Revelation from heaven.
The preterist sees the scroll as God’s judgment upon Jerusalem.
The remainder of chapter five presents the power and glory of
the throne of God

Chapter Six

In chapter six we see the opening of the seals. The first four
seals are the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Here we, once again,
see significant divergence in interpretation. The first horse is a white
horse. He who sat on it had a crown and went out to conquer.
Although the historicist, preterist and idealist differ on what happens,
they all generally agree that the one on the white horse is Christ (see
19:11-16).
The futurist takes a radically different approach here. The one
on the white horse, according to the futurist, is just the opposite of the
other views. Read Walvoord’s words.

“While dispute as to the identity of the rider

cannot be finally settled, especially in the brief

55
 compass of this discussion, the conclusion
identifying him as the world ruler of the tribulation,
the same individual described as the beast out of the
sea in Revelation 13, is preferred.”37

In order for the futurist view to maintain any integrity it seems

they must give over to Satan that which all others see as Christ.
The second seal is the red horse who takes peace from the
earth. Historicists see this as the accession of Commodus (A. D. 180)
to the accession of Diocletian (A. D. 284). The idealist views this as
war in general. The futurist views this as the Great Tribulation just
prior to the second coming and the preterist sees this as Rome’s attack
on Jerusalem.
The third horse is a black horse which represents hardship by
example of food and drink. The historicist sees this as fiscal
oppression imposed by some of the emperors of the third century.
The idealist sees this as something that can occur at any time to any
civilization. The futurist sees this as famine, resulting from the
warfare in the future Tribulation. The preterist sees this as food
shortages suffered by the Jews in Jerusalem during the Roman siege.
Josephus records at least one case of a mother eating her infant. The
preterist understands this type of event to be consistent with the words
of Jesus when He said, “But woe to those who are… nursing babies in
those days!”
The fourth horse is a pale horse who was given the power to
kill. The historicist sees this as the period of 248 to 268, which was a
period of great tyranny in Rome. The idealist sees this horse as the
summary of all four horsemen. They view this as repeating itself in
history. The futurist views this as worldwide destruction. The
preterist sees this as similar to the four severe judgments God used in
Ezekiel to judge Jerusalem. The words of Josephus in Wars, 5:12,3-4
regarding the fall of Jerusalem, sound as if you’re reading these very
words.
The opening of the fifth seal reveals the voices of the martyrs,
whose souls are under the altar. The historicist sees this as the ordeal
of the church under Diocletian (A.D. 284). The idealist sees this as
martyrs from any age. The futurist sees these martyrs as Tribulation
saints. All but the 144,000 (covered later) converted after the rapture
37
Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, (Moody Press, 1966), p. 127.
56
must be martyred. The dispensationalist does not view these martyrs
as those martyred during the church era. This is because what they
cry out for, namely vengeance, is not very Christian. It has been said,
“Their cry for judgment indicates that they stand on other than
Christian ground.”38 Compare this statement to the words of Jesus.
Speaking of the fall of Jerusalem He states, “For these be the days of
vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled”
(Luke 21:22). When God exacts judgment, He is not stepping off
Christian ground. The preterist sees this as the martyrs crying out for
God’s justice in history. Matthew 23:35 reveals this to be consistent
with the teaching of Christ Himself.

“…that on you [Jerusalem] may come all the

righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of
righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of
Berechiah, whom you murdered between the
temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all
these things will come upon this generation.”

The sixth seal reveals major catastrophes. The sun becomes

black, stars fall from heaven, etc. The historicist sees this as the fall
of paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire, associated with
Constantine’s conversion. The idealist views this as judgment day
(finishing one of the seven cycles). The futurist sees this all very
literally (except for the stars falling). In the sixth seal the futurist sees
a nuclear exchange, causing earthquakes, etc. At this point the second
coming should be looked for soon. The preterist compares this
language to the similar language of the Olivet discourse, which was to
happen in that generation. The vision depicts the end of the Jewish
state and fall of its leaders.

Chapter Seven

Before the seventh seal we see a break. Chapter seven opens

with God having angels seal His people on their foreheads prior to the
destruction. This is very similar to what God did in Ezekiel 9, prior
to the Babylonian captivity of 586 B. C. The historicist sees this as

38
Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson Publishers,
1997), p. 119.
57
God spiritually sealing His servants prior to the revolution under
Constantine. The idealist sees this as a spiritual seal of protection.
The futurist sees this as protection for the 144,000 Israelites who are
saved during the Tribulation. The preterist sees this as God’s
protection of a certain group (covered next) during the fall of
Jerusalem.
The historicist sees the 144,000 (the ones sealed) as symbolic
of the entire church. The idealist, similarly, views the 144,000 as the
true Israel of God. The futurist views the 144,000, as Hal Lindsey
states, as 144,000 Jewish Billy Grahams during the Great Tribulation.
Preterists hold the 144,000 to be either the Jewish Christians who fled
to the hills of Judea, per the instruction of Jesus, and escaped the siege
of Jerusalem, or the Church in general which escaped the siege.
144,000 can easily be understood as the combination of the twelve
tribes of Israel and the twelve apostles (144) and all who God saves in
history (X 1000.) In verse four, John hears about the 144,000.
Arguably, what John says he sees in verse nine is a vision of what he
had just heard. What John sees in verse nine is, “…a great
multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes,
peoples, and tongues.” This comes against the 144,000 thousand
being a literal 144,000 Jews.

Chapters Eight through Ten

In chapter eight we see the opening of the seventh seal. It is a

brief time of silence in heaven, perhaps the calm before the storm.
We are now introduced to the seven trumpets. The prayers of the
martyrs will soon be answered. The seven trumpets of judgment are
catastrophic. The historicist sees this going all the way to the
Reformation and the destruction of the papacy. The idealist looks at
the trumpet judgments as a series of happenings that will occur in
history again and again. The futurist looks at these judgments as
befalling unrepentant inhabitants of the earth during the Tribulation.
Some see in these chapters things like cobra helicopters, nuclear
warfare, etc. The preterist sees these judgments as pertaining to the
fall of Jerusalem. The language used is similar to the language of the
Old Testament when a siege is described (Isa. 13:9-11, 19; 24:19-23;
34:4,5; Ezek. 32:7,8, 11-12; Joel 2:10, 28-32; Acts 2:16-21; etc,).
The 200 million seen in 9:16 is not to be taken literally and should not

58
be considered the Chinese army. History indicates that Jerusalem was
invaded by way of the Euphrates. The number 200 million should be
understood as an invincible opponent. There was no chance for
Jerusalem.
At the end of chapter ten, John is told he must prophesy again.
This time about many peoples, nations, tongues and kings. The
seventh trumpet has not yet been sounded. Not until Revelation
11:15.

Chapter Eleven

In chapter eleven the temple is measured for destruction. The

two witnesses are introduced as well as the 1260-day period. The
historicist and idealist see the temple as the true, persecuted Church.
The futurist sees the temple as a rebuilt temple, which is in existence
during the future, seven year, Great Tribulation. The preterist sees the
temple as the temple that was still standing (hence the early date of
Revelation).
The historicist sees the 1260 days as 1260 years. The futurist
sees the 1260 days as literal days. The idealist sees the 1260 days as
the entire church age and the preterist sees the 1260 days as the days
of the Jewish war and Nero’s persecution.
The historicist sees the two witnesses as two specific
individuals who resisted the papacy. The futurist sees them as future
manifestations of Elijah, Enoch or Moses. The idealist sees them as
the Church throughout the entire Church age, and the preterist sees
them as a historic, prophetic witness against the Jews. The law of
Moses required two witnesses.
In verse 15 we see the seventh trumpet is sounded, heralding
the establishment of Christ’s kingdom forever and ever. Discouraged
Christians who felt overwhelmed by the nation of Israel were to be
comforted by the proclamation of the true kingdom. But the
judgment was not yet over. The other prophecy was still to be
proclaimed.

Chapter Twelve

In chapter twelve we’re given a glimpse of a heavenly battle.

There is a woman, a child, a dragon, demons, angels, etc. The

59
historicist sees the woman as the true Church and the child as children
of the Church. Idealists see the woman as Old Testament Israel and
the child as Jesus. Futurists see the woman as Israel and the child as
Jesus. The preterist sees the woman as faithful Old Testament Israel
and the child as Jesus. From this point on there is a split among
preterists. Some believe the chapters to come continue to speak to the
fall of Jerusalem. Others believe they speak to the fall of Rome. We
will assume the latter for reasons to be shown. The historicist sees the
dragon as heathen persecution. The other positions see the dragon as
Satan.
This chapter explains the nature of Christ’s victory over Satan
and the judgments which are accomplished. The new judgment now
turns to Rome.

Chapter Thirteen

In chapter 13 we are introduced to the beast, another beast and

the mark of the beast. The historicist sees the beasts as aspects of the
papacy. The idealist sees them as political and religious powers. The
futurist sees them as political and religious individuals of the future.
The preterist sees them as Rome (Nero) and the emperor cult, which
existed in Asia Minor.
For all but the futurist view, the mark was spiritual (the way
the mark of God would be understood). The historicist sees 666 as
papal. The idealist sees 666 as representing false religion in general.
The futurist sees this as a number which will be literally (somehow)
tattooed on people. The preterist believes it to be a reference to Nero,
whose name equals the Hebrew equivalent of 666. Cross-reference
this with 17:10, which indicates that the sixth emperor was now
reigning. The sixth emperor was Nero. Even still, the mark is
spiritual.

Chapters Fourteen through Sixteen

In chapters fourteen through sixteen we see the bowls of

wrath, seven last plagues. The historicist sees the judgment of the
papacy, the French Revolution, Napoleon and the future. The idealist
sees this as a repetition in the cycles of the spiritual victory of Christ.
The futurist sees global judgments, World War III (or the battle of

60
Armageddon). The preterist sees this as a judgment on Rome, the city
on seven mountains (Rev. 17:9).

Chapters Seventeen through Nineteen

The fall of Babylon according to the historicist is the complete

and final fall of the papacy. The white horse in chapter 19 carries
Christ during His continuing victories in history. The idealist sees
Babylon as the worldly seduction of the ungodly. The white horse is
Christ at His second coming. The futurist sees Babylon as revived
Rome. In chapter 19 Jesus visibly returns, riding a white horse, to
destroy the revived Roman Empire. The preterist identifies Babylon
with the Roman Empire (not revived, but original) and Jesus, on the
white horse, as One who assures the victory of His church over Rome
and through history. The Second Coming is not until chapter 20.
The preterist, especially the postmillennialist, sees here that
the initial enemies of Christ’s church, Jerusalem and Rome, have been
deposed. History has now been opened for the fulfillment of the
Great Commission. In chapter 20 we will see that the nations will be
deceived no longer.

Chapter Twenty

Revelation 20 is said to be the most controversial chapter in

the Bible. Months can be devoted to its study. Briefly, the three
major positions (which were covered earlier in greater detail) see the
events of chapter 20 as follows:
The premillennialist sees the binding of Satan as a future event
which brings in the literal 1000 year millennium. At the end of the
millennium, Satan will be loosed for a while then destroyed. This
will usher in the resurrection of the wicked only, since the righteous
have already been resurrected. The new heavens and new earth will
be after the millennium.
The amillennialist sees the binding of Satan as having
happened at the cross in a very spiritual sense. The 1000 years
represents a long period of time; the time between the first and second
advents of Christ. Satan will be loosed briefly at the end of the
present age. At the end of the present age there will be a general

61
resurrection and judgment of the evil and the good. This will be
followed by the eternal state.
There are varying positions among postmillennialists. Some
see the millennium as actually starting at a certain time in history,
ushering in a time of unprecedented acceptance of the gospel. We
would not hold to that position. Rather, we see the millennium in
very much the same time frame as the amillennialist. The millennium
is the period between the first and second advents of Christ. At the
end of the age, Satan will be loosed for a short time and then defeated
and judged. There is a general resurrection and judgment followed by
the eternal state. The main distinction between the amillennialist and
the postmillennialist is the general optimism about the success of the
gospel and all it accomplishes in history. Some passages that sound
optimistic the amillennialist views as either spiritual or in eternity,
where the postmillennialist will see many of these in history.

Chapters Twenty-One and Twenty-Two

These chapters cannot be divided along the lines of the four

approaches or the millennial views. Some take these words very
literally and others very symbolically. Some understand this time to
be the Church in the present era of the new covenant. Generally
speaking, most all views, in one way or another, understand these last
two chapters as the glory of the eternal state. To this we say,
“Amen.”

62
63
64
 Glossary of Terms

Amillennial: Second coming after millennium

Analogy of Faith: Checking Scripture with Scripture

Covenantal: Progressive view of Scripture

Dispensationalist: Compartmental view of Scripture

Eschatology: Study of last things

Futurist: Revelation will be fulfilled in the future

Hermeneutics: How to interpret the Scriptures

Historicist: Revelation works itself out through history

Idealist: Revelation is mainly spiritual and symbolic of Christ’s

victory

Literalism: Taking the Scriptures literally

Millennium: Thousand years

Postmillennial: Second coming after millennium with greater

effect on earth

Premillennial: Second coming before millennium

Preterist: Most of Revelation was fulfilled in A. D. 70

65
66
 Bibliography

Greg Bahnsen, The Message of the Revelation (Covenant Media,

Tape Series).

Lewis Sperry Chafer, Major Bible Themes, (Dunham Publishing

Company, 1926).

David Chilton, Days of Vengeance, (Dominion Press, 1987).

Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Baker

Book House, 1984).

Ken Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell.(American Visions, 1998).

Steve Gregg, Revelation, Four Views, A Parallel Commentary

(Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997).

William Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors, (Baker Book

House, 1940).

Clarence Larkin The Great Book on dispensational Truth in the

World (Rev. Clarence Larkin Est. 2802 N. Park Ave., Philadelphia 32,
Pa. U. S. A., 1918.

Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Zondervan Publishing

House, 1970).

Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism, An Eschatology of Hope,

(P & R Publishing, 1999).

Charles C. Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible (Moody Press, 1976).

R. C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, (Baker Books,

1998).
67
 John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, The Bible Knowledge
Commentary, (Victor Books, 1983).

John Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, (Moody Press,

1966).

Westminster Confession of Faith

68