THE FOUR APPROACHES TO THE INTERPRETATION OF THE

APOCALYPSE

__________________

A Position Paper

Presented to

Dr. Kyle D. Claunch

The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for 27080

__________________

by

Paxton Russell Cagle

[email protected]

October 23, 2022

*I affirm the honor code.

 THE FOUR APPROACHES TO THE INTERPRETATION OF JOHN’S
APOCALYPSE

Introduction
Throughout the history of the Church, Christians have taken various approaches to

Biblical prophesy in the New Testament. These methods of interpretation can see a culmination

in the book of Revelation written by the apostle John. These views are the preterist, idealist,

futurist, and historicist views of interpretation.1 These views impact the answers theologians give
in answering critical questions like: Are we in the New Heavens and New Earth now? Is Christ

reigning as King now? Who does the beast represent? Was Jesus in the Olivet Discourse talking

about the end of the world?2 Some of these questions would be answered very close and similar
no matter which view a person takes. However, most theologians will have vastly different

answers. I will begin by explaining what each position believes and provide an exegetical reason

why someone might hold that interpretive view. It should be noted here that all of the sources I

have gathered share bits and pieces of all these views but cling to one as a majority view as I will

explain later. I will demonstrate that the preterist view is the most convincing and constant view

for the biblical text and it’s prophetic Words.

Before pressing on, I must first demonstrate two main schools of thought on the dating

of this Apocalypse (ἀποκάλυψις).3 Pate in Four Views on The Book of Revelation, describes this
divide that some would claim the dates to be around the rule of Nero (A.D. 54-86) while others

1For reference, I will take the “partial preterist” for this paper as defined by Dr. Kenneth Gentry who
affirms that the Final Resurrection has not occurred yet unlike like “full preterists” would affirm. See
Kenneth L. Gentry and C. Marvin Pate, “Introduction Section II Part A,” in Four Views on The Book of
Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), pp. 12-14.
2Thiscould be an entirely separate paper and so I will only address elements in each view of Matthew 24
and 25. I will mostly focus on the Book of Revelation and it’s symbols.
3Word seen in Luke 2:32, Rom. 16:25, 1 Cor. 14:6, 26, 30, Gal. 1:12,2:2, Eph. 1:17, 3:3, 1Pet. 1:7, 1:13,
Rev. 1:1. “G602 - Apokalypsis - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV),” Blue Letter Bible, accessed October 20,
2022, https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g602/kjv/tr/0-1/. Dr. Hamilton in his commentary touches
on the use of the word in his commentary on Revelation, “apocalypse typically concerns itself with what
will take place at the end of history, whereas prophecy usually deals with what will take place in the flow
of history before it reaches its consummation.” Seen in James M. Hamilton, “Chapter 1, Rev. 1:1-8,” in
Revelation: The Spirit Speaks to the Churches (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), p. 20.
1
would claim that it is within Emperor Domitian’s reign (A.D. 81-96).4 This detail is an important
piece in determining the most convincing and consistent view for the book of Revelation.5

The Four Views

The first view I will introduce it the preterist view of interpretation as described by Dr.

Ken Gentry, Greg Bahnsen, Gary DeMar and Douglas Wilson. The preterist position holds that

prophesy in Daniel, Matthew 24 and Revelation (with the exertion of elements of the last two

chapters) have been or were being accomplished in the first century A.D.6 Gentry writes,

“Preterism” holds that the bulk of John’s prophecies occur in the first century, soon after his
writing of them. Though the prophecies were in the future when John wrote and when his
original audience read them, they are now in our past. The format of the present book
precludes a thorough analysis of Revelation and its intricate structure. Yet I am firmly
convinced that even an introductory survey of several key passages, figures, and events in
John’s majestic prophecy can demonstrate the plausibility of the preterist position.7

This is a view that must maintain the apocalypse and completion of prophecy happened before

70 A.D. Douglas Wilson affirms this idea in his commentary saying, “The things he (John) saw

are described as things that must shortly come to pass (taxos-speedily, quickly, swiftly)”.8 This

4Nero’s reign (A.D. 54-68) and Domitian’s rule (A.D. 81-96).

Zondervan. Four Views on the Book of Revelation, edited by C. Marvin Pate, HarperCollins Christian
Publishing, 2010. It should also be said that G. K. Beale makes this same distinction in his commentary
seen in Gregory K. Beale, “The Date of the Apocalypse,” in The New International Greek Testament
Commentary. A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids (Mich.): W.B. Eerdmans, 1999), p. 4.
5“Though St John the Evangelist saw many strange monsters in his vision he saw no creature so wild as
one of his own commentators.”
—G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy, 13. (GBks, 1901 ed, 19)
6“The word "preterist" is based on a Latin word "praeteritus," meaning "gone by," i.e., past.” Kenneth L.
Gentry and C. Marvin Pate, “Chapter One A PRETERIST VIEW OF REVELATION” in Four Views on
The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), pp. 24.
7Ibid
but it should be said that Gentry makes an appeal to his post millennial work seen in
Kenneth L. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion. 2d ed. Tyler, Tex.: Institute for Christian Economics, 1996.
8He and Gentry also point out phrases in Matt. 24 and others in the New Testament like time is at hand,
coming quickly, etc. Douglas Wilson, “Chapter 1,” in When the Man Comes around: A Commentary on
The Book of Revelation (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019), pp. 4-5.
2
position also takes into account the Old Testament parallels of language and symbols rooted in

the time of the prophets. Richard Bauckham contends that John is counting the the Old

Testament tradition of prophetic writing, yet he understands that the crescendo of all is about to

come to pass.9 With this understanding these pictures and allusions John demonstrates in the text,
Bauckham brings another important aspect of this view to light. He notes that since John is

writing in the tradition of Old Testament pictures and allusions it is imperative that, “we realize

that they (symbolic associations) cannot be read either as literal descriptions or as encoded literal

descriptions, but must be read for their theological meaning and their power to evoke

response”.10
The next view is the idealist view of interpretation which is also known as the spiritual

view. Beale provides a sound definition,

The idealist approach affirms that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of the conflict between
good and evil, between the forces of God and of Satan. The most radical form of this view
holds that the book is a timeless depiction of this struggle. The problem with this
alternative is that it holds that Revelation does not depict any final consummation to history,
whether in God’s final victory or in a last judgment in the realm of evil. The idealist notion
encounters the opposite problem facing the preterist and historicist views, since it identifies
none of the book’s symbols with particular historical events.11

The early church fathers Origin and St. Augustine are known as some of the first proponents of

this view.12 However, many in this view today qualify themselves to be Relative Idealists, which
according to Dr. Sam Waldron, “I believe that the literary genre of the Book of Revelation is

9John appears to be following the flow and pattern of the book of Ezekiel, seen in Richard Bauckham,
“Revelation as an Apocalypse,” in The Theology of The Book of Revelation (Cambridge: University
Press, 2011), pp. 5-7.
10Richard
Bauckham, “Revelation as an Apocalypse,” in The Theology of The Book of Revelation
(Cambridge: University Press, 2011), pp. 20.
11G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 48.
12“Four Views of Revelation,” Evidence and Answers, accessed October 21, 2022, https://
evidenceandanswers.org/article/four-views-revelation/#note4.
3
relatively symbolic as compared to most of the rest of Scripture.”13 Waldron goes on to say,
“Further, and as I have said, I do believe that both Preterism and Futurism have typically gone

too far in identifying certain prophecies in Revelation with specific historical events. At the

same time, I emphatically disown the kind of Idealism that according to Zukeran “denies the

book of Revelation any specific historical fulfillment.”14 This is one of the big distinctions
between this view compared to others.

The futurist position has a wide range of views that can take both dispensational and a

covenantal hermeneutic. A distinction in this view that sets it apart from the rest is that it takes

Revelation and its allusions literally. However, it must be said that those in this school of thought

do not take into account symbolism. J. P. Lange walks through how futurists interpret these

images,

The literalist (so called) is not one who denies that figurative language, that symbols, are
used in prophecy, nor does he deny that great spiritual truths are set forth therein; his
position is, simply, that the prophecies are to be normally interpreted (i.e., according to the
received laws of language) as any other utterances are interpreted – that which is manifestly
figurative being so regarded.15

Ron J. Bigalke Jr. and Charles Ryrie would contend that most of the early church fathers would

affirm this view up until Origin and Augustine.16 This view’s strength is in the relation to the
early church in the earliest view of the book, ironically though this becomes one of its issues.

13Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one
of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, “A Redemptive-Historical, Modified
Idealist Approach to The Book of Revelation,” Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary, February 25,
2013, https://cbtseminary.org/modified-idealist-revelation-1/.
14“FourViews of Revelation.” Evidence and Answers. Accessed October 21, 2022. https://
evidenceandanswers.org/article/four-views-revelation/#note4.
15Itshould be noted that this is the primary position of holding a “Rapture” and a coming tribulation in
our future (post 2022 A.D.) position, seen in J. P. Lange, Commentary of the Holy Scriptures: Revelation
(New York: Scribner’s, 1872), 98, quoted in Charles Rryrie, Dispensationalism (Chicago: Moody
Publishers, 2007), 91. Also see Hailey, Revelation, 50.
16Both address esp. Ryrie that, “Clement of Rome (96 A. D.), Justin Martyr (100-165 A. D.), Irenaeus
(115-202 A. D.), Tertullian (150-225 A. D.)” in Charles Rryrie, Dispensationalism (Chicago: Moody
Publishers, 2007), 18-23. And Ron J Bigalke, “Preterism and Antiquity: Was Preterism a View of the
Early Church,” Academia.edu (JOURNAL OF DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGY, August 17, 2014),
https://www.academia.edu/8007526/
Preterism_and_Antiquity_Was_Preterism_a_View_of_the_Early_Church.
4
Beale points out that this view has trouble in dealing with the first century readers in making the

claim all that John was writing was pertaining to their distant future.17 However, Beale does
point out that some futurists could make the argument that since Christ’s ascension, his return

has always been viewed as an “imminently expected” which this idea is sharing the the final

view known as the historicist.18

The historicist position can be defined as viewing Revelation as foreseeing major events

in Christian history.19 Steve Gregg gives exegetical examples of a historicist view in Revelation
14-16 in explaining that the bowl judgments were God’s wrath upon the Roman Catholic
Church.20 As noted by Beale also, this view identifies parts of the judgments and allusions in
events of history like the fall of Rome, crusades, and reformation.21 However, multiple critics
have pointed out that this view mostly focuses on the Western Church and neglects events in the

east.22 Similarly to the futurist view, this position focuses too much on events not in the first
century and does not deal with the texts like the Olivet Discourse and or the immediate

judgments in Revelation. However, Beale acknowledges a similar response to the previous in the

reality of Christ’s imminent return was just as real for the early church as it is for the church in

2022 A.D. 23 Therefore by pointing out that this interpretation could have been valid for an early
church member in the face of Nero’s persecution and vast hardship pre 70 A.D.

17G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 47.
18Ibid. Same page.
19Ibid. 46.
20PatrickZukeran uses this in his, “Four Views of Revelation,” Evidence and Answers, accessed October
21, 2022, https://evidenceandanswers.org/article/four-views-revelation/#note4. This is the original source,
Steven Gregg, Four Views of Revelation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), 31, 217, 309, &
399).
21G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 46.
22Both G.K. Beale and Dr. Zukeran point this out.
23G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 46.
5
 Support For A Preterist Interpretation

There are many reasons why I am in favor of the preterist view compared to the others

that I have described. As much as I would enjoy exegeting the book of Revelation or walk

through Matthew 24, I am limited to only point out a few strengths of this position.24 I will
describe in no particular order some of the most compelling arguments that the preterist view has

to demonstrate its consistency and coherence of the text.

I agree with the way Dr. Gentry describes the structure of Revelation itself as that of a

spiral and not a list of chronological events.25 He says, “John’s spiral structure allows occasional
backward glances and a reconsidering of events from different angles, rather than a relentless

chronological progression.”26 Gernty goes on in the same section after describing this structure
and explains that not only does the preterist view take into account these allusions that John

presents as symbolic, but that these things had a physical impact upon the readers of the first

century.27 This is the exact same language that John uses in the Gospels, the Jews ask Jesus in
John 2:18 to give him a sign of authority and Christ asks for the temple to be torn down and in

three days he would have it built again. John then gives context in John 2:21, The Lord Jesus was

talking about His body and the resurrection from the dead.28
Another point of language, the preterist view fits perfectly with the Olivet Discourse

when Christ foreshadows the coming tribulation in Matt. 24.29 John references this return in Rev.
1:7, phases like “look he is coming on the clouds” and “pierced him” which Douglas Wilson

24Fora breakdown of Rev. 13 see my, Paxton R. Cagle, “Fore The King,” Fore The King (blog), May 16,
2022, https://foretheking.blogspot.com/2022/05/exposay-of-revelation-13-post-mill.html.
25Kenneth L. Gentry and C. Marvin Pate, “Introduction Section II Part A,” in Four Views on The Book of
Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), pp. 24.
26Ibid

27Ibid. Same Page.

28More texts like “being born again” John 3:3-10, “eating of his flesh” John 6:51-56, and "Jesus as King”
John 18:33-37 all have a deeper meaning to a spiritual event that has effect on the physical world.
29Mark 13 has a very similar depiction.
6
comments are references back to Daniel 7:13 and Zechariah 12:10.30 Gentry agrees and adds that
this apocalyptic metaphor that is also utilized in Isaiah 19:1, “An oracle concerning Egypt.

Behold, the Lord is riding on a swift cloud and comes to Egypt, and the idols of Egypt will

tremble at his presence, and the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them.” Gentry adds,

“Obviously, God does not literally and visibly ride down from heaven on a cloud against Egypt.

But he does send a great judgment on the Egyptians— as by a terrible and destructive storm

cloud. Other references confirm this type of statement, known as “apocalyptic metaphor””31 This
goes with any aspect of hermeneutics, a particular text may have many applications, yet it only

holds one fundamental interpretation. This is keeping the original intent of what John was trying

to communicate.

Another strength of the preterist view is that it supports not only the historical context

but the Biblical context. Bruce Gore comments in a lecture that a fundamental rule for

hermeneutics is that of rational priority.32 The rule states that the more simple, straightforward
and plainly presented elements of the text should be interpreted first and then use those outcome

to shed some light on the more complex texts. When other views use a different hermetical

approach when it comes to Revelation and flip this principle, symbols and allusions will

naturally take on a vastly different meaning. This principle also is grounded in the local and

biblical audience of which this work was originally intended for.33 This does not mean that
elements of these prophesies do not have future implications. An example of this is the final

resurrection in Revelation 20 and the physical return of Christ are still being anticipated by those

who hold a preterist view. The “already and not yet” saying does apply in this view but in a
30Douglas Wilson, “Chapter 1,” in When the Man Comes around: A Commentary on The Book of
Revelation (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019), pp. 7.
31Kenneth L. Gentry and C. Marvin Pate, “Introduction Section II Part A,” in Four Views on The Book of
Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), pp. 29-30. See also Scripture ref. (Ps. 18:7-15; 104:3;
Isa. 13: 1, 9-13; Joel 2:1-2; Mic. 1:3-4).
32BruceW. Gore, “The Preterist View of Revelation,” The apocalypse in space and Time, accessed
October 21, 2022, https://www.brucegore.com/bwg/apocalypse.aspx.
33Richard
Bauckham, “Revelation as an Apocalypse,” in The Theology of The Book of Revelation
(Cambridge: University Press, 2011), pp. 12-15.
7
different way than others.

A good example of this is the New Heavens and New Earth in Revelation 21. I agree

with Douglas Willson that the falling away of the first heaven and earth which brings an end to

the Jewish aeon and the coming of the new heavens and new earth which is the Christian aeon.34
I also affirm Willson that the new heavens and new earth described in Revelation 21 is not post-

Second Coming but rather following the prophet Isaiah’s description,

Isaiah 65:17, 20“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things
shall not be remembered or come into mind… No more shall there be in it an infant who
lives but a few days, or an old man who does not fill out his days, for the young man shall
die a hundred years old, and the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed.”35

This picture displays that in the new heavens and a new earth that death will still be around

which will not be the case after Christ’s second coming.36 These two aeons “overlapped” which
started at Pentecost and ended at the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.37 This is a time where
the church is, to put it in wedding terms, walking down the aisle which she is in the process of

sanctification. When the groom comes to get his bride, she will be without spot or blemish (Eph.

5:27). The amazing thing is the God is using his church to evangelize the world and thus making

all thing new (Matt. 28, 2 Cor 5:17).

The preterist view can absolutely be abused and wrong interpretation as the out of such

an assurance. However, I am convinced that this view gives a sound exegetical, consistent, and
coherent approach to one of the Bible’s most arduous books to navigate. It provides a

methodology that is consistent in it’s hermeneutic with the rest of the sixty-five books of

Scripture.

34Douglas Wilson, “Chapter 21,” in When the Man Comes around: A Commentary on The Book of
Revelation (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019), pp. 244-247. Gary DeMar also makes this observation, “In
destroying Israel, Christ transferred the blessings of the kingdom from Israel to a new people, the
church.” Seen in, Gary DeMar & Peter Leithart, The Reduction of Christianity (Fort Worth: Dominion
Press, 1988), pp. 213
35 Ibid. pp. 246
36Formore Biblical support, see 2 Peter 3:13, 1 John 2:17 and Jude 17-19. It would also be a mistake for
me not to throw Her. 12 in here as well.
37 Ibid
8
 Objections To Preterism

I will address two hard objections from scholars who do not find my view to be as

sound as I have presented it to be. These objections against my view come from a place of

respect and from genuinely seeking the truth in Scripture. I will do my best to give the best

depiction of the objection and the best argument for my view.

The first objection I will present is a very common one, the dating of the apocalypse

could not have been around 70 A.D.38 Leon Morris and G. K. Beale are both skeptical of the
dating being before the destruction of the Temple. Morris explains,

The principal reason for dating the book during this reign is the fact that it seems to indicate
that emperor-worship was practiced, and this is thought to have become widespread in
Domitian’s day. The most important passages are those in which the beast, who is held to
represent the Roman emperor, demands that all worship him. This seems reasonably clear.
It is difficult to think that these passages do not refer to the demand for worship of the
emperor.39

Beale argues a similar point,

The consensus among twentieth-century scholars is that the Apocalypse was written during
the reign of Domitian around 95 A.D. A minority of commentators have dated it
immediately prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.40

Here is the issue I have with these objections, they must some how deal with who the Beast is

and his mark. Scholars who take a late date must provide an answer for Nero in some form or

fashion.41 The reason for this is in Revelation 13:15-18, John gives the number 666 to help bring
the identification of the Beast. A numerical system for transcribing numbers into letters during

this time was known as gematria, which was a practice to take numbers or letters and correspond

38G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 44.
39Leon
Morris, “Introduction/Date of Revelation,” in Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary
(Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academics, 1987), p. 4.
40G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 4-5.
41Bealemakes this very clear, Ibid. pp. 17-18. He brings up a common solution to this issue in describing,
The Myth Of Nero’s Reappearance. Rev. 13 talks about the Beast being wounded but recovering. The
myth in the first century was the Nero would return with a god like army from the dead and destroy
Rome.
9
them with a word.42 Wilson and Larry Ball point out that a the numerical value for “Nrwn Qsr” is
666.43 This cannot be just an element of myth in the late decades of the first-century, John is
presenting an explicit picture to encourage the church in the face of great persecution.44
The second objection that scholars present is that of fulfillment which comes from mostly

dispensational brothers and sisters. George Ladd points out that the early church father Irenaeus

was not expecting for Christ to return in his lifetime, but that events in history would lead to it.45
Thomas D. Ice from Liberty University also addresses that in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24), the

word for “this generation” does not necessarily connect to the Temple destruction in A.D. 70.46
Others factors are presented in this view but the main thesis is that these things in Matthew and

Revelation could provide dual fulfillment.

My answer to this objection is going to be referring back to my previous argument in

some sense. Those who raise this objection do agree that there were elements of completion

during the time of the first-century, but fundamentally reject the audience of the book. I agree

with Dr. Gentry’s observation to this objection, that it “confuses principal application with

historic event.”47 My two questions in response to this would be: Why should we look for further

42Douglas Wilson, “Chapter 13” in When the Man Comes around: A Commentary on The Book of
Revelation (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019), pp. 156-157.
43Ibid. pp. 158. And see, Larry Ball, Blessed Is He Who Reads (Fountain Inn, SC: Victorious Hope
Publishing, 2015), 150-154.
44Thisis a minor point, but the second Beast (which I take as the false priesthood of apostle Israel) would
make sense because the Sanhedrin had great authority to persecute the church but stop abruptly after 70
A.D. see ECKHARD J. SCHNABEL, “The Persecution of Christians in the First Century - Etsjets.org,”
2018, https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/61/61-3/JETS_61.3_525-547_Schnabel.pdf.
45George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 25. Also see, D. Jeffrey Bingham and Glenn R. Kreider, Eschatology:
Biblical, Historical, and Practical Approaches (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2016), pp. 198-199.
46 ““this generation” in Matthew (11:16; 12:41,42,45; 23:36) refers to Christ’s contemporaries, but that is
determined by observation from each of their contexts, not from the phrase by itself. Thus, if the
contextual factors in Matthew 24 do not refer to A.D. 70 events, then the timing of the text would have to
refer to the future.” Seen in, Thomas D. Ice, “Scholars Crossing | Liberty University Research,” Scholars
Crossing (Liberty University , May 2009), https://www.digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1001&context=pretrib_arch. pp. 15.
47Kenneth L. Gentry and C. Marvin Pate, “Introduction to Preterism” in Four Views on The Book of
Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), pp. 29.
10
fulfillments if all but the final return of Christ had been accomplished in the first century? Also,

to what extent do we take an “already/not yet” position? Referring back to the rational priority

principle in hermeneutics, there must be one singular meaning or message that text is presenting.

However, this fundamental meaning can have multiple points of application.48 These allusions
that John gives are not to be viewed as timeless images and symbols that are to come. Rather,

they are to be understood within the context of those saints who laid their eyes upon this Word

from the Lord.49

*Honor Code: I have written this paper exclusively for 27080. If I received any editing or
proofreading advice, I have made all such corrections myself. I have also documented each
paraphrase, direct quotation, and borrowed idea in compliance with the Turabian and SBTS style
manuals.

48BruceW. Gore, “The Preterist View of Revelation,” The apocalypse in space and Time, accessed
October 21, 2022, https://www.brucegore.com/bwg/apocalypse.aspx.
49Bauckham puts this more eloquently, “Thus it would be a serious mistake to understand the images of
Revelation as timeless symbols. Their character conforms to the contextually of Revelation as a letter to
the seven churches of Asia. Their resonances in the specific social, political, cultural and religious world
of their first readers need to be understood if their meaning is to be appropriated today.” Seen in,
Richard Bauckham, “Revelation as an Apocalypse,” in The Theology of The Book of Revelation
(Cambridge: University Press, 2011), pp. 19-20.
11
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ball, Larry E. Blessed Is He Who Reads: A Primer on The Book of Revelation. Fountain Inn, SC:
Victorious Hope Publishing, 2015.

Bauckham, Richard. “Revelation as an Apocalypse.” Essay. In The Theology of The Book of

Revelation, Cambridge: University Press, 2011.

Beale, Gregory K. “The Date of the Apocalypse.” Essay. In The New International Greek
Testament Commentary. A Commentary on the Greek Text, 4. Grand Rapids (Mich.): W.B.
Eerdmans, 1999.

Bigalke, Ron J. “Preterism and Antiquity: Was Preterism a View of the Early Church.”
Academia.edu. JOURNAL OF DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGY, August 17, 2014. https://
www.academia.edu/8007526/
Preterism_and_Antiquity_Was_Preterism_a_View_of_the_Early_Church.

Bingham, D. Jeffrey, and Glenn R. Kreider. Eschatology: Biblical, Historical, and Practical
Approaches. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2016.

Bruce W. Gore. “The Preterist View of Revelation.” The apocalypse in space and Time. Accessed
October 21, 2022. https://www.brucegore.com/bwg/apocalypse.aspx.

Cagle, Paxton R. “Exposay of Revelation 13 : A Post Mill Prespective.” Fore The King (blog),
May 16, 2022. https://foretheking.blogspot.com/2022/05/exposay-of-revelation-13-post-
mill.html.

12
DeMar, Gary, and Francis X. Gumerlock. The Early Church and the End of the World. Powder
Springs, GA: American Vision, 2006.

ECKHARD J. SCHNABEL. “The Persecution of Christians in the First Century - Etsjets.org,”

2018. https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/61/61-3/JETS_61.3_525-547_Schnabel.pdf.

“Four Views of Revelation.” Evidence and Answers. Accessed October 21, 2022. https://
evidenceandanswers.org/article/four-views-revelation/#note4.

“G602 - Apokalypsis - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV).” Blue Letter Bible. Accessed October 20,
2022. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g602/kjv/tr/0-1/.

G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy, 13. (GBks, 1901 ed, 19)

Gentry, Kenneth L., and C. Marvin Pate. “Introduction Section II Part A.” Essay. In Four Views
on The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999.

Hamilton, James M. “Chapter 1, Rev. 1:1-8.” Essay. In Revelation: The Spirit Speaks to the
Churches, 20. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012.

Ice, Thomas D. “Scholars Crossing | Liberty University Research.” Scholars Crossing. Liberty
University , May 2009. https://www.digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1001&context=pretrib_arch.

13
Ladd, George Eldon. The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990.

Morris, Leon. “Introduction/Date of Revelation.” Essay. In Revelation: An Introduction and

Commentary, 4. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academics, 1987.

Sam WaldronDr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic
Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro.
“A Redemptive-Historical, Modified Idealist Approach to The Book of Revelation.”
Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary, February 25, 2013. https://cbtseminary.org/
modified-idealist-revelation-1/.

Wilson, Douglas. In When the Man Comes around: A Commentary on The Book of Revelation,
Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019.

14