Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating book
Review: All evangelicals KNOW that there will be a pretrib rapture, KNOW that drinking alcohol is a sin, and KNOW that Revelation was written AD 95-96. These are sacred cows of American Evangelicalism.
Gentry offers us up a tasty serving of beef from one of these sacred cows.
Gentry deals with internal and external evidence. The internal evidence is effectively argued, and is most persuasive.
The external evidence is shown to be very much inconclusive, contrary to so much late-date rhetoric. Most importantly, concerning the external evidence, Dr. Gentry deals extensively with Ireneus and his famous statement, which statement is supposed by many to settle the date question once and for all.
Anyone who seeks to understand the book of Revelation MUST deal with Gentry's Before Jerusalem Fell.
All Christians should be very careful dating the book of Revelation, for so much of its meaning is either made clear or lost depending on its date of composition. Date carefully!
Rating:
Summary: Revelation written before AD 95?
Review: All evangelicals KNOW that there will be a pretrib rapture, KNOW that drinking alcohol is a sin, and KNOW that Revelation was written AD 95-96. These are sacred cows of American Evangelicalism.
Gentry offers us up a tasty serving of beef from one of these sacred cows.
Gentry deals with internal and external evidence. The internal evidence is effectively argued, and is most persuasive.
The external evidence is shown to be very much inconclusive, contrary to so much late-date rhetoric. Most importantly, concerning the external evidence, Dr. Gentry deals extensively with Ireneus and his famous statement, which statement is supposed by many to settle the date question once and for all.
Anyone who seeks to understand the book of Revelation MUST deal with Gentry's Before Jerusalem Fell.
All Christians should be very careful dating the book of Revelation, for so much of its meaning is either made clear or lost depending on its date of composition. Date carefully!
Rating:
Summary: A must read for anyone studying Revelation
Review: As a teachable student of the Bible, one must consider reading this book. It contains all of the avialable sources of the historical record relating to the debate regarding the date of Revelation's writing. The author is clearly making a case for the pre-70AD writing, but gives weight and the benefit of the doubt to ambiguous opposing arguments. He later shows in what way these arguments are flawed. I eagerly await a response from the other side, however, Gentry's case seems air-tight. Gentry breaks the book into two major sections, external and internal evidence. The book is not for the light of heart, as it is rather detailed. I'd recommend this book for all who have the ernest desire to know what the church has had to say on this interesting subject, but not those merely wishing to understand preterism.
Rating:
Summary: A must read for anyone studying Revelation
Review: As a teachable student of the Bible, one must consider reading this book. It contains all of the avialable sources of the historical record relating to the debate regarding the date of Revelation's writing. The author is clearly making a case for the pre-70AD writing, but gives weight and the benefit of the doubt to ambiguous opposing arguments. He later shows in what way these arguments are flawed. I eagerly await a response from the other side, however, Gentry's case seems air-tight. Gentry breaks the book into two major sections, external and internal evidence. The book is not for the light of heart, as it is rather detailed. I'd recommend this book for all who have the ernest desire to know what the church has had to say on this interesting subject, but not those merely wishing to understand preterism.
Rating:
Summary: Solid, well researched, and highly convincing
Review: As in his many other books on eschatology, Gentry presents a view that is the most Biblically sound, convincing, and defensible of any that you'll encounter in Christendom today. The book presents a compelling case for the early dating of the Book of Revelation, opening the door to a preterist understanding of prophecy. It is the finest work I've seen on the dating issue of the Book of Revelation. I highly recommend it to anyone seeking to truly investigate what the Bible says about the "end times."
Rating: 
Summary: Gentry's evidence near conclusive
Review: Book of Revelation was written in 64 AD and most of the events took place during the reign of Nero and the seige of Jerusalem. This book goes a long way to prove those assertions and validate the "preterist" interpretation of Revelation. If there is a flaw in this book, and in preterism, it is the "Replacement Theology" and borderline (if not outright) Anti-Semitic overtures promoted by the preterist interpretation. Preterists tend to assume that Preterism and Replacement Theology are mutually inclusive. Revelation is not about the end of THE age but the end of AN age, the Age of Judaism. This is a half truth, and, following the advice of Paul, discernment is required. It is the end of the TEMPLE Age, the end of the Sadduccees and the Herodians and the other Judeans (the Greek word for Jew is Youdaos, and it also means Judean...the Judeans were not symbolic of the whole race). *If* Revelation was about God's revenge against those who crucified Jesus, and all the Jews are implicated in this blood libel, then God failed, because Judaism prospered relative to the number of its adherents(in spite of persecution) for 2000 years after these events. God either failed, or God's wrath was directed at a specific group of Jews, the corrupt priestly class of the Sadduccees, the "Judeans". The Pharisee Jews and the Jewish Christians were closely related. They shared the same root, the humanistic school of Hillel. Hillel said "Those things that are hateful unto you, do not do unto others." Jesus embellished this ethic w/ the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." The Hillelians conflicted w/ the ultra-conservative school of Shammai, and one of the insults the Hillelians hurled at the Shammaians, was that the Shammaians were false Jews, members of a "synagogue of Satan". Conveniently, this same vernacular is used in Revelation by Jesus himself. During the Roman persecution of the Christians, it was the Pharisees who stood up for the Christian Jews, who protested the murder of James, heck back in the books of Acts, it was Gamaliel who defended the Apostles before the Sanhedrin. Paul asked us to be respectful of the root that sustains us, the seed of Abraham. Christianity and diaspora Judaism share the same root--the Pharisee School of Hillel. It was Rabbi Ben Zakkai, a Hillelian Pharisee, who miraculously escaped from the seige of Jerusalem and built a school to keep the Jewish traditions alive while Christianity veered ever more to the Gentiles. I recommend the book "The Mystery of Romans", by Mark Nanos, because Nanos refutes Replacement Theology w/ his analysis of Romans the same way that Gentry refutes Futurism w/ this book. Like Gentry, Nanos uses textual, historical, and archaeological evidence to slam his thesis down. Other books dealing w/ the Jewishness of early Christianity, are "Yeshua: Guide to the Original Church", "Our Father Abraham", and "They Loved the Torah." Modern Christian culture dumps a false choice in our laps: either Replacement Theology Preterism or Futuristic Dispensationalism. They are both only half right.
Rating:
Summary: Gentry's evidence near conclusive
Review: Book of Revelation was written in 64 AD and most of the events took place during the reign of Nero and the seige of Jerusalem. This book goes a long way to prove those assertions and validate the "preterist" interpretation of Revelation. If there is a flaw in this book, and in preterism, it is the "Replacement Theology" and borderline (if not outright) Anti-Semitic overtures promoted by the preterist interpretation. Preterists tend to assume that Preterism and Replacement Theology are mutually inclusive. Revelation is not about the end of THE age but the end of AN age, the Age of Judaism. This is a half truth, and, following the advice of Paul, discernment is required. It is the end of the TEMPLE Age, the end of the Sadduccees and the Herodians and the other Judeans (the Greek word for Jew is Youdaos, and it also means Judean...the Judeans were not symbolic of the whole race). *If* Revelation was about God's revenge against those who crucified Jesus, and all the Jews are implicated in this blood libel, then God failed, because Judaism prospered relative to the number of its adherents(in spite of persecution) for 2000 years after these events. God either failed, or God's wrath was directed at a specific group of Jews, the corrupt priestly class of the Sadduccees, the "Judeans". The Pharisee Jews and the Jewish Christians were closely related. They shared the same root, the humanistic school of Hillel. Hillel said "Those things that are hateful unto you, do not do unto others." Jesus embellished this ethic w/ the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." The Hillelians conflicted w/ the ultra-conservative school of Shammai, and one of the insults the Hillelians hurled at the Shammaians, was that the Shammaians were false Jews, members of a "synagogue of Satan". Conveniently, this same vernacular is used in Revelation by Jesus himself. During the Roman persecution of the Christians, it was the Pharisees who stood up for the Christian Jews, who protested the murder of James, heck back in the books of Acts, it was Gamaliel who defended the Apostles before the Sanhedrin. Paul asked us to be respectful of the root that sustains us, the seed of Abraham. Christianity and diaspora Judaism share the same root--the Pharisee School of Hillel. It was Rabbi Ben Zakkai, a Hillelian Pharisee, who miraculously escaped from the seige of Jerusalem and built a school to keep the Jewish traditions alive while Christianity veered ever more to the Gentiles. I recommend the book "The Mystery of Romans", by Mark Nanos, because Nanos refutes Replacement Theology w/ his analysis of Romans the same way that Gentry refutes Futurism w/ this book. Like Gentry, Nanos uses textual, historical, and archaeological evidence to slam his thesis down. Other books dealing w/ the Jewishness of early Christianity, are "Yeshua: Guide to the Original Church", "Our Father Abraham", and "They Loved the Torah." Modern Christian culture dumps a false choice in our laps: either Replacement Theology Preterism or Futuristic Dispensationalism. They are both only half right.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Scholarship and Academic Research
Review: Dr. Gentry does what no other has attempted to do: a thorough, historical, and (shock) exegetical analysis of the dating of the book of Revelation. The date of Revelation is key to its interpretation (from anybody's perspective). Gentry shows us, beyond any doubt, that indeed Revelation was written prior to 70 AD, and he does so with precision and clarity that is greatly lacking in academic theology (especially in the dispensational community). I recommend this to anybody who is a serious Christian or serious Scholar with regard to the dating of Revelation.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Scholarship and Well Worth Wading In!
Review: Dr. Gentry has written a convincing book speaking about the pre-70 AD date for the book of Revelation. I have been convinced for some time that the whole of the NT was written prior to 70 AD due to the fact, which I read in another text that I cannot remember the title and author, that none of the authors of the various books of the NT mention the fall of Jerusalem and the temple. The fall of Jerusalem and especially the temple would have been such a significant event that it would have made it into the writting of the NT if indeed they were written post-70 AD.
I would also advise that you wade in and read through Josephus: The Jewish Wars, which helps to show the "fulfilled" prophecy of the book of Revelation. Josephus is writting either during the the time of the Judeo-Roman war or post war, but it shows how Josephus, a man who did not have a copy of Revelation, is able to show the fulfillment of the book of Revelation, since it deals with the events that occurred between 63-70 AD (roughly).
Granted, although the bulk of Revelation deals with fulfilled prophecy there is a portion at the end which deals with the second coming of Christ since it speaks about the Resurrection.
The author, John, makes it clear that he is speaking about a future event when he mentions the 1000 period of time (I am amillenialist which means that I believe that we are in this time frame and that the 1000 years does not relate to a "literal" 1000 years).
This book is a breath of fresh air in an era of "Left Behind" nonsense. This book sets the church free from doing "newspaper exegesis" and getting about the real ministry of the gospel and not wasting precious printing resources on mounds and mounds of books on premillenialism.
Rating:
Summary: When was the Revelations written?
Review: Dr. Gentry proposes a startling new date for the book of Revelations. He argues, and argues logically and well, that Revelations was written prior to 70 AD. This goes against the grain of most current biblical scholarship, which places Revelations around the time of Domitian, at the end of the first century. Dr. Gentry points our that the terrible Neronic persecution most closely fits Revelations, rather than the lackluster persecution under Domitian.
|
