What do you think?
Rate this book
Counterpoints
Four Views on the Book of Revelation
Of all the books of the Bible, few are as fascinating or as bewildering as Revelation. Its images grip the imagination: four grim horsemen, the Antichrist, the ten-horned beast, the ultimate battle at Armageddon, and, of course, 666, the 'mark of the beast,' variously interpreted to signify everything from Hitler and Krushchev to credit cards and the Internet. Is the book of Revelation a blueprint for the future that needs decoding if we want to understand current events? Is it a book of powerful imagery, with warnings and promises for the church throughout the ages? Or is it essentially an imaginative depiction of historical events in the first century? Four Views on the Book of Revelation explores the four main views in which Revelation is understood: preterist, idealist, classical dispensationalist futurist, and progressive dispensationalist. The interactive Counterpoints forum allows each author not only to present his view, but also to offer brief commentary on other views presented. This evenhanded approach is ideal for comparing and contrasting stances in order to form a personal conclusion about the interpretation and meaning of Revelation. The Counterpoints series provides a forum for comparison and critique of different views on issues important to Christians. Counterpoints books address two categories: Church Life and Bible and Theology. Complete your library with other books in the Counterpoints series.
623 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 1, 1998
210 people are currently reading
412 people want to read
About the author
C. Marvin Pate
30 books4 followersC. Marvin Pate (PhD, Marquette University) is professor of biblical studies at Ouachita Baptist University. He is the author and editor of numerous works, including Four Views on the Book of Revelation; The Writings of John: A Survey of the Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse; Romans (Teach the Text Commentary Series); and From Plato to Jesus.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
February 3, 2023
read this for class
this sucked so bad
this sucked so bad
June 18, 2025
Excellent primer on the book of Revelation. Somewhat dated, but still very helpful.
May 19, 2025
Fire forskjellige syn på Åpenbaringen, føltes som jeg leste fire korte bibelkommentarer i én bok. Har sansen for disse bøkene som presenterer ulike syn, men en ting som trekker ned her er at man ikke har en responsdel fra de andre bidragsyterne, slik som de andre bøkene i denne serien. Satt også med følelsen av at alle synene slet med at de må tolke ting på en merkelig måte for å få det til å passe inn i sitt system.
June 26, 2018
This is definitely my least favorite volume in the Counterpoints series that I've read to date. On the one hand, the format of the book is strange: there are no "response" sections for authors to interact with and critique each other's essays in the book, which diminishes the book's value. Second, the authors themselves are often frustrating to read. Marvin Pate did a decent job arguing for his view in his essay, but his work as editor of the volume left much to be desired. When summarizing the four views in the book's introduction, he makes little attempt to hide which view is his own, as he paints the other views in somewhat negative language while describing his own as a sensible "middle way." In his "Conclusion" at the end of the book, Pate does little to summarize the author's views or unpack any points of substantial agreement between the authors. Hamstra's essay on Idealism spends little time actually arguing for his approach, instead focusing on unpacking his interpretation of the book and emphasizing its relevance to the modern reader. Gentry made as good of a case as can be made for his view of Revelation, but I still felt that he had to really stretch the language of the text to make it fit his preterism at several points. Thomas's essay was probably the most frustrating, filled with so many overstatements, straw men, and non sequiturs that it was difficult to take him seriously. Overall, I felt frustrated by this book as it did not particularly help me appreciate other perspectives on Revelation or develop my own views in any significant way.
July 21, 2021
A decent exploration and comparison of 4 interpretive approaches to Revelation (preterist, classical dispensationalist, progressive dispensationalist, idealist). I read the introduction, conclusion, and preterist and idealist chapters. Pate describes the book as
Notes
Introduction to Revelation
Differences between Rev and early Jewish and Christian apocalyptic materials
• Rev is prophetic book (1:3; 22:7, 10, 18-19); others don't claim to be
• Rev isn't pseudonymous (1:1; 22:8) as others are
• Rev isn't pessimistic about God's intervention in history
• John writes about future from 1st century perspective; others recast past events as if they were prophecies of future
Church fathers nearly unanimously believed that John was author of Rev (Papias, Justin Martyr, the Muratorian Fragment, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Methodius).
Rev doesn't contain a single specific OT quotation, but 278 of its 404 verses contain OT allusions.
There are fewer extant Greek manuscripts for Rev than for any other part of NT, but there are enough (~230) to be assured of its content.
Leading interpretations of Rev
• Preterist (past): Events of Rev were mostly fulfilled in early centuries AD (fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, fall of Rome in 5th century).
• Historicist: Events of Rev unfold throughout history. This view has almost disappeared.
• Futurist: Events of Rev are mostly unfulfilled; Rev 4-22 will be fulfilled in end times.
• Idealist: Rev contains timeless truths about battle between good and evil throughout church age.
Preterism
Preterism's origin can be traced to postmillennialism.
Idealism
Rev doesn't claim to be a key to the future.
• Rev is "an irresistible summons to heroic living."
• Rev "contains matchless appeals to endurance."
• Rev "tells us that evil will be overthrown in the end.
• Rev "gives us a new and wonderful picture of Christ."
• Rev reveals that history is in the mind and hands of God, Who determines human destiny.
Idealism's origin can be traced back to Alexandrian church fathers (especially Clement, Origen). Alexandrian interpretation of Rev is similar to amillennial view of Dionysius, Augustine, Jerome. Together, they became dominant approach to Rev until Reformation.
Rev's prophecies reflect actual historical events in John's near future, though they're set in apocalyptic drama and poetic hyperbole.
Arguments against literal interpretation of Rev
• 41 times John says he "sees" prophecies, and some visions are obviously symbolic. The visual nature of the book demands symbolic interpretation.
• OT prophets use figurative language to majestically relate spiritual truths or dramatically symbolize historical events.
• Consistently interpreting Rev literally leads to unreasonable and unnecessary interpretations.
Events of Rev occurred soon after it was written
• Rev frequently says its events must happen soon (1:1, 3; 22:6, 10), within lifetimes of original readers. John speaks of time from a human perspective, not from God's (as 2 Pet 3:8 does).
• John is writing to the specific churches he addresses, and he wouldn't taunt them by writing about events thousands of years distant. God's answer to "How long?" is only a little longer (6:10-11), and Rev says there will be no more delay (10:6).
• Rev matches temporal expectation of other NT teachings (e.g., Matt 24:34; 26:64; Mark 9:1). Mark 9:1 almost certainly refers to destruction of temple.
Rev's main point is that God would soon judge 1st-century Jews for rejecting and killing His Son (1:7). This occurred at destruction of Jerusalem and temple (AD 70).
"Coming with the clouds" is common apocalyptic metaphor for historical judgment on nations (Isa 13:1, 9-13; 19:1; Ps 18:7-15; 104:3; Joel 2:1-2; Mic 1:3-4).
7 seals (Rev 6)
"Decreation" in Rev 6:12-17 portrays Israel's world coming apart on the "great day of wrath (6:16-17). This is common prophetic language to describe collapse of God-cursed governments (Isa 13; 34; Ezek 32; Jer 4).
144,000 (Rev 7)
In Rev, all perfectly rounded thousands appear to be symbolic.
Eusebius and Epiphanius record Christians fled from Judea to Pella in AD 68, following Jesus' warning (Matt 24:16-22).
7 trumpets (Rev 8-9)
Josephus records storms and earthquakes that fit 8:5.
Romans burned villages and cut down trees, fitting 8:7.
Pirates caused bodies of water around to be bloody, fitting 8:8-11.
During Jewish war, Jews were cruelly barbaric, which could've been demonic activity, fitting Rev 9:3-6 and Matt 12:43-45.
Josephus and Tacitus record people seeing armies in sky in AD 70, fitting 9:14-16.
Measuring temple (Rev 11:1-2)
Rome engaged Jerusalem for 42 mos in AD 67-70.
Beast (Rev 13)
Beast is Roman empire generally, Nero specifically.
Nero persecuted Christians for 42 mos, fitting 13:5-7.
Beast's wound and recovery refers to Rome's faltering after Nero's suicide and civil war, then reviving under Flavian family.
Israel's judgment (Rev 14-16)
Rev 14-16 refers to Jewish war.
Prostitute and beast (Rev 17-18)
Prostitute and Babylon (17:1-5) is Jerusalem, which persecuted early Christians.
Marriage supper, bridegroom (Rev 19)
Fall of prostitute is destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70).
Appearance of bridegroom is Christ's judgment in Jerusalem's destruction (Mark 9:1; Matt 8:11-12; 26:64), not 2nd Coming.
Millennium (Rev 20)
Millennium began in 1st century. Number 1000 is purely symbolic (of perfection).
Binding of Satan occurred during Christ's earthly ministry (Matt 12:24-29; John 12:31; Col 2:15; Heb 2:14; 1 John 3:8), to prevent Satan from continuing to deceive Gentiles.
Christ's ruling in His kingdom began in 1st century (Matt 12:28-29; Mark 1:14-15; Luke 17:20-21; Col 1:13).
Believers reign with Christ now (Rev 1:6; 20:6; Eph 2:6; Col 3:1-4).
1st resurrection (Rev 20:6) is salvation (John 5:24-29; Rom 6:4-14; Eph 2:5-6; Col 3:1). 2nd resurrection is bodily resurrection on last day (John 5:28-29).
Bride from heaven (Rev 21-22)
New creation began in 1st century. "Soon" language in Rev requires this. New Jerusalem should soon follow destruction of old Jerusalem (AD 70). Isa 65:17, 20 describes new creation experiencing sin, aging, death, so it can't refer to heaven or eternal new creation.
Conclusion
Critique of idealism:
Message of Rev: While believers suffer in a world where evil appears to be winning, God is sovereign and Christ has won victory. God will preserve each of His children. Christ will have ultimate victory over Satan and his forces. Persevere. You will reign with Christ.
Rev is "a portrait designed to visualize great principles, not particular incidents. … [Resist] the temptation to dissect the portrait."
Rev is for believers throughout church age, not only those in 1st century or end of time.
Nearly every scholar for centuries has believed that disciple John wrote Rev, and that's consistent with book's internal evidence.
1:1-3 tells us the book is primarily apocalyptic but also prophetic (v 3) and epistolary (salutation and benediction).
In apocalyptic literature, visions communicate principles. They may not relate to any particular event, but "a symbol may find fulfillment in an historical event or person without exhausting its meaning."
7 seals (Rev 6:1 - 8:1)
7 seals aren't chronological. They deal with the entire Christian age (between Christ's 1st and 2nd coming). The symbols represent forces throughout history, not particular events.
White rider most likely represents Christ (He's portrayed as conqueror in 5:5; horse is white, a color representing holiness and heaven).
Red horse represents slaughter or war. Black horse represents economic hardship and poverty. Pale horse represents death, famine, disease.
Rev doesn't distinguish between Jewish and Gentile believers; church is one. Rev spiritualizes Jewish names and images to apply to church.
Natural disasters don't describe end of world, but mean that nature won't sustain those who reject God.
7 trumpets (Rev 8:2 - 11:19)
Trumpets represent physical and spiritual disasters throughout church age, used by God to punish persecutors and warn of coming judgment.
Persons & events (Rev 12:1 - 14:20)
This section, like seals and trumpets, covers entire church age.
Rev 1-13 pictures outward struggle between church and world. Rev 14-22 pictures deeper reality of war between Christ and Satan.
3.5 days is brief time in which Satan intensifies his attack before 2nd coming (20:11).
Beast of sea is world and governments opposed to God; persecutors.
Beast of earth is false religions/philosophies (same as false prophet of 16:13; 19:20).
7 bowls (Rev 15:1 - 16:21)
7 bowls show God using every area of creation to punish unrepentant.
Bowls are parallel in time to trumpets, each covering entire church age. Bowls are more intense.
Armageddon symbolizes every battle of Satan against church. Final battle will be on day of Satan's final judgment.
Babylon (Rev 17:1 - 19:21)
Babylon may represent ungodly world that tempts people away from God, or the ungodly world infiltrating the church.
Beast (17:3) (same as beast from sea in 13:2-10) is spirit and empires of world which seduces churches away from true worship.
Beast of earth (same as false prophet of 13:11-17) confuses many who worship him instead of God.
Judgment of Satan & wicked (Rev 20:1-15)
Binding of Satan begin during Christ's earthly ministry (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18). Satan is still permitted to influence society within his circle of imprisonment.
Believers begin to reign with Christ during their earthly lives, and reign continues in afterlife.
1,000 years is symbolic, as other numbers in Rev. It indicates completion or perfection. No other Scripture mentions 1,000 yr period.
Rev 20:1-15 gives general chronology between 1st coming and end of time: At 1st coming Christ bound Satan (1-3) and raised dead in Christ to reign with him in heaven (4-6); there will be short but intense attack on church (7-9) followed by 2nd coming, final judgment, eternal punishment of Satan and wicked (10-15).
New Creation (Rev 21:1 - 22:5)
Greek term for "new" (kainos") and 2 Pet 3:12-13 suggest new creation may be rejuvenated and transformed version of old creation.
12 gates show abundant opportunity to enter, while prohibiting entrance of wicked.
Conclusion (Rev 22:6-21)
Time between writing of Rev and end of time is short when compared to eternity.
Concluding Observations
Just as we don't interpret parables or poems literally, we shouldn't interpret apocalyptic literature literally. Treat every episode as symbolic until it proves otherwise.
Rev is apocalyptic book that presents spiritual principles through symbols. It doesn't so much forecast specific events as set forth timeless truths about battle between good and evil, which lasts throughout church age. It's about ideas, not events. Timeless truths may have several fulfillments in history. OT prophecy often uses this idealist (figurative) approach.
"The history of the interpretation of Revelation should teach one lesson: Beware of attempting to correlate apocalyptic imagery with actual events in human history." Idealism avoids this pitfall.
Conclusion
Idealism takes the "soon" words of Rev 1:1, 3 "at apparent face value, interpreting the events of the Apocalypse as immediately occurring and continually unfolding in history."
… a survey of these four hermeneutical formats, covering the following points on each: its distinction; its origin; the time frame it presumes for the prophecies in Revelation; the structure that results for the book; and the philosophy of history operative in the approach.I read this because it was recommended in Let's Study Revelation by Derek Thomas.
Notes
Introduction to Revelation
Differences between Rev and early Jewish and Christian apocalyptic materials
• Rev is prophetic book (1:3; 22:7, 10, 18-19); others don't claim to be
• Rev isn't pseudonymous (1:1; 22:8) as others are
• Rev isn't pessimistic about God's intervention in history
• John writes about future from 1st century perspective; others recast past events as if they were prophecies of future
Church fathers nearly unanimously believed that John was author of Rev (Papias, Justin Martyr, the Muratorian Fragment, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Methodius).
On balance, then, the external and internal evidence seems to point to the apostle John as the author of the Apocalypse or, at the very least, to a member of the Johannine School.Rev displays literary and conceptual unity expected from a single author.
Rev doesn't contain a single specific OT quotation, but 278 of its 404 verses contain OT allusions.
There are fewer extant Greek manuscripts for Rev than for any other part of NT, but there are enough (~230) to be assured of its content.
Leading interpretations of Rev
• Preterist (past): Events of Rev were mostly fulfilled in early centuries AD (fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, fall of Rome in 5th century).
• Historicist: Events of Rev unfold throughout history. This view has almost disappeared.
• Futurist: Events of Rev are mostly unfulfilled; Rev 4-22 will be fulfilled in end times.
• Idealist: Rev contains timeless truths about battle between good and evil throughout church age.
Preterism
Preterism's origin can be traced to postmillennialism.
Idealism
Rev doesn't claim to be a key to the future.
• Rev is "an irresistible summons to heroic living."
• Rev "contains matchless appeals to endurance."
• Rev "tells us that evil will be overthrown in the end.
• Rev "gives us a new and wonderful picture of Christ."
• Rev reveals that history is in the mind and hands of God, Who determines human destiny.
Idealism's origin can be traced back to Alexandrian church fathers (especially Clement, Origen). Alexandrian interpretation of Rev is similar to amillennial view of Dionysius, Augustine, Jerome. Together, they became dominant approach to Rev until Reformation.
Victory and defeat, success and failure, good and evil will coexist until the end, amillennialism asserts. The future is neither a heightened continuation of the present nor an abrupt contradiction to it. … both unbridled optimism and despairing pessimism are inappropriate … Rather, the amillennialist worldview calls the church to 'realistic activity' in the world.A Preterist View Of Revelation
Rev's prophecies reflect actual historical events in John's near future, though they're set in apocalyptic drama and poetic hyperbole.
Arguments against literal interpretation of Rev
• 41 times John says he "sees" prophecies, and some visions are obviously symbolic. The visual nature of the book demands symbolic interpretation.
• OT prophets use figurative language to majestically relate spiritual truths or dramatically symbolize historical events.
• Consistently interpreting Rev literally leads to unreasonable and unnecessary interpretations.
Events of Rev occurred soon after it was written
• Rev frequently says its events must happen soon (1:1, 3; 22:6, 10), within lifetimes of original readers. John speaks of time from a human perspective, not from God's (as 2 Pet 3:8 does).
• John is writing to the specific churches he addresses, and he wouldn't taunt them by writing about events thousands of years distant. God's answer to "How long?" is only a little longer (6:10-11), and Rev says there will be no more delay (10:6).
• Rev matches temporal expectation of other NT teachings (e.g., Matt 24:34; 26:64; Mark 9:1). Mark 9:1 almost certainly refers to destruction of temple.
Rev's main point is that God would soon judge 1st-century Jews for rejecting and killing His Son (1:7). This occurred at destruction of Jerusalem and temple (AD 70).
"Coming with the clouds" is common apocalyptic metaphor for historical judgment on nations (Isa 13:1, 9-13; 19:1; Ps 18:7-15; 104:3; Joel 2:1-2; Mic 1:3-4).
7 seals (Rev 6)
"Decreation" in Rev 6:12-17 portrays Israel's world coming apart on the "great day of wrath (6:16-17). This is common prophetic language to describe collapse of God-cursed governments (Isa 13; 34; Ezek 32; Jer 4).
144,000 (Rev 7)
In Rev, all perfectly rounded thousands appear to be symbolic.
Eusebius and Epiphanius record Christians fled from Judea to Pella in AD 68, following Jesus' warning (Matt 24:16-22).
7 trumpets (Rev 8-9)
Josephus records storms and earthquakes that fit 8:5.
Romans burned villages and cut down trees, fitting 8:7.
Pirates caused bodies of water around to be bloody, fitting 8:8-11.
During Jewish war, Jews were cruelly barbaric, which could've been demonic activity, fitting Rev 9:3-6 and Matt 12:43-45.
Josephus and Tacitus record people seeing armies in sky in AD 70, fitting 9:14-16.
Measuring temple (Rev 11:1-2)
Rome engaged Jerusalem for 42 mos in AD 67-70.
Beast (Rev 13)
Beast is Roman empire generally, Nero specifically.
Nero persecuted Christians for 42 mos, fitting 13:5-7.
Beast's wound and recovery refers to Rome's faltering after Nero's suicide and civil war, then reviving under Flavian family.
Israel's judgment (Rev 14-16)
Rev 14-16 refers to Jewish war.
Prostitute and beast (Rev 17-18)
Prostitute and Babylon (17:1-5) is Jerusalem, which persecuted early Christians.
Marriage supper, bridegroom (Rev 19)
Fall of prostitute is destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70).
Appearance of bridegroom is Christ's judgment in Jerusalem's destruction (Mark 9:1; Matt 8:11-12; 26:64), not 2nd Coming.
Millennium (Rev 20)
Millennium began in 1st century. Number 1000 is purely symbolic (of perfection).
Binding of Satan occurred during Christ's earthly ministry (Matt 12:24-29; John 12:31; Col 2:15; Heb 2:14; 1 John 3:8), to prevent Satan from continuing to deceive Gentiles.
Christ's ruling in His kingdom began in 1st century (Matt 12:28-29; Mark 1:14-15; Luke 17:20-21; Col 1:13).
Believers reign with Christ now (Rev 1:6; 20:6; Eph 2:6; Col 3:1-4).
1st resurrection (Rev 20:6) is salvation (John 5:24-29; Rom 6:4-14; Eph 2:5-6; Col 3:1). 2nd resurrection is bodily resurrection on last day (John 5:28-29).
Bride from heaven (Rev 21-22)
New creation began in 1st century. "Soon" language in Rev requires this. New Jerusalem should soon follow destruction of old Jerusalem (AD 70). Isa 65:17, 20 describes new creation experiencing sin, aging, death, so it can't refer to heaven or eternal new creation.
Conclusion
Critique of idealism:
Revelation appears to be so concerned with concrete history that to wholly overlook historical events seems to defy the facts. Revelation is so long and complex that it would seem that such a view as idealism, if that were John’s intent, could have been presented in a shorter space and without giving such an appearance of historical reality. Furthermore, it downplays the time-frame indicators of the book.An Idealist View of Revelation
Message of Rev: While believers suffer in a world where evil appears to be winning, God is sovereign and Christ has won victory. God will preserve each of His children. Christ will have ultimate victory over Satan and his forces. Persevere. You will reign with Christ.
Rev is "a portrait designed to visualize great principles, not particular incidents. … [Resist] the temptation to dissect the portrait."
Rev is for believers throughout church age, not only those in 1st century or end of time.
Nearly every scholar for centuries has believed that disciple John wrote Rev, and that's consistent with book's internal evidence.
1:1-3 tells us the book is primarily apocalyptic but also prophetic (v 3) and epistolary (salutation and benediction).
In apocalyptic literature, visions communicate principles. They may not relate to any particular event, but "a symbol may find fulfillment in an historical event or person without exhausting its meaning."
7 seals (Rev 6:1 - 8:1)
7 seals aren't chronological. They deal with the entire Christian age (between Christ's 1st and 2nd coming). The symbols represent forces throughout history, not particular events.
White rider most likely represents Christ (He's portrayed as conqueror in 5:5; horse is white, a color representing holiness and heaven).
Red horse represents slaughter or war. Black horse represents economic hardship and poverty. Pale horse represents death, famine, disease.
Rev doesn't distinguish between Jewish and Gentile believers; church is one. Rev spiritualizes Jewish names and images to apply to church.
Natural disasters don't describe end of world, but mean that nature won't sustain those who reject God.
7 trumpets (Rev 8:2 - 11:19)
Trumpets represent physical and spiritual disasters throughout church age, used by God to punish persecutors and warn of coming judgment.
Persons & events (Rev 12:1 - 14:20)
This section, like seals and trumpets, covers entire church age.
Rev 1-13 pictures outward struggle between church and world. Rev 14-22 pictures deeper reality of war between Christ and Satan.
3.5 days is brief time in which Satan intensifies his attack before 2nd coming (20:11).
Beast of sea is world and governments opposed to God; persecutors.
Beast of earth is false religions/philosophies (same as false prophet of 16:13; 19:20).
7 bowls (Rev 15:1 - 16:21)
7 bowls show God using every area of creation to punish unrepentant.
Bowls are parallel in time to trumpets, each covering entire church age. Bowls are more intense.
Armageddon symbolizes every battle of Satan against church. Final battle will be on day of Satan's final judgment.
Babylon (Rev 17:1 - 19:21)
Babylon may represent ungodly world that tempts people away from God, or the ungodly world infiltrating the church.
Beast (17:3) (same as beast from sea in 13:2-10) is spirit and empires of world which seduces churches away from true worship.
Beast of earth (same as false prophet of 13:11-17) confuses many who worship him instead of God.
Judgment of Satan & wicked (Rev 20:1-15)
Binding of Satan begin during Christ's earthly ministry (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18). Satan is still permitted to influence society within his circle of imprisonment.
Believers begin to reign with Christ during their earthly lives, and reign continues in afterlife.
1,000 years is symbolic, as other numbers in Rev. It indicates completion or perfection. No other Scripture mentions 1,000 yr period.
Rev 20:1-15 gives general chronology between 1st coming and end of time: At 1st coming Christ bound Satan (1-3) and raised dead in Christ to reign with him in heaven (4-6); there will be short but intense attack on church (7-9) followed by 2nd coming, final judgment, eternal punishment of Satan and wicked (10-15).
New Creation (Rev 21:1 - 22:5)
Greek term for "new" (kainos") and 2 Pet 3:12-13 suggest new creation may be rejuvenated and transformed version of old creation.
12 gates show abundant opportunity to enter, while prohibiting entrance of wicked.
Conclusion (Rev 22:6-21)
Time between writing of Rev and end of time is short when compared to eternity.
Concluding Observations
Just as we don't interpret parables or poems literally, we shouldn't interpret apocalyptic literature literally. Treat every episode as symbolic until it proves otherwise.
Rev is apocalyptic book that presents spiritual principles through symbols. It doesn't so much forecast specific events as set forth timeless truths about battle between good and evil, which lasts throughout church age. It's about ideas, not events. Timeless truths may have several fulfillments in history. OT prophecy often uses this idealist (figurative) approach.
"The history of the interpretation of Revelation should teach one lesson: Beware of attempting to correlate apocalyptic imagery with actual events in human history." Idealism avoids this pitfall.
Conclusion
Idealism takes the "soon" words of Rev 1:1, 3 "at apparent face value, interpreting the events of the Apocalypse as immediately occurring and continually unfolding in history."
August 7, 2017
I didn't expect to be laughing out loud in public while reading a book about the Revelation of John, but I did. The introduction was perfect. It was engaging and theological. It made me think, but it is still entirely accessible for the lay person.
After reading the chapter on preterism, I have a new appreciation for it. I'm not a preterist and he didn't change my mind about preterism, but he did change my mind about preterists. And I love that.
As for an idealistic approach to Revelation, I had not heard about it until Voddie Baucham was preaching through Revelation at his church near Houston. I felt his approach was intriguing and I wanted to hear more. It seemed to be much easier to apply Revelation to our modern day lives.
I found the early part of the chapter on idealism to be less than stellar as he walked through a brief idealist interpretation of the text. It seemed repetitious and generic. At the end, however, beginning with the holy city, a symbolic and spiritual reading seemed much more fitting to the text. A literal interpretation of the New Jerusalem has always irked me. The city's length is roughly the distance from Dallas to Las Angeles, but it was cubed. At that height, it would extend really far into space. It just didn't sit right with me.
After the idealist explanation of the text was a quick introduction to idealism and the hermeneutic principles used. This was by far the best part of the chapter and made me feel better about idealism. I loved where he said he disagrees with the idealist party line and goes his own way in some areas.
I still want to investigate idealism some more and finish up Voddie's sermon series.
I found that I agree the most theologically with the third chapter on "Progressive Dispensationalism" with its "already / not yet" eschatological tension. As Marvin C. Pate said in chapter three, "That is to say, with the first coming of Jesus Christ the age to come already dawned, but it is not yet complete; it awaits the Parousia for its consummation." So there is a sense in which some of the things have already happened, yet have not yet happened and await a fuller completion in the future.
He noted that the "early church did not seem to be preoccupied with the specific timing of the completion of these end-time matters." I think that's where we should be. Jesus said that no man knows the time or date, but also said that we should be ready whenever that does come. I don't want to get bogged down by analysis paralysis and forget that we have a job to do here on the earth, namely that we share the gospel and make disciples of all nations. My favorite part was in the conclusion that the progressive dispensationalist can pull from the preterist, idealist, and classical dispensationalists to synthesize a balanced and holistic view of Revelation and can not just study the book of Revelation, but to apply it to our lives.
Finally, the chapter on classical dispensationalism was, to me, the most dull. He was so sure of himself and his interpretation that it seemed a little arrogant. He also seemed the most antagonistic toward the other positions and was always attacking them rather than pointing out the good things of his view.
In conclusion, I really enjoyed this book. It's a great read for anybody who wants to know more about the book of the Revelation or who wants to understand the differences in the major views on it.
Disclosure: I was NOT paid for my review and I bought the book with my own money because I wanted to read it.
After reading the chapter on preterism, I have a new appreciation for it. I'm not a preterist and he didn't change my mind about preterism, but he did change my mind about preterists. And I love that.
As for an idealistic approach to Revelation, I had not heard about it until Voddie Baucham was preaching through Revelation at his church near Houston. I felt his approach was intriguing and I wanted to hear more. It seemed to be much easier to apply Revelation to our modern day lives.
I found the early part of the chapter on idealism to be less than stellar as he walked through a brief idealist interpretation of the text. It seemed repetitious and generic. At the end, however, beginning with the holy city, a symbolic and spiritual reading seemed much more fitting to the text. A literal interpretation of the New Jerusalem has always irked me. The city's length is roughly the distance from Dallas to Las Angeles, but it was cubed. At that height, it would extend really far into space. It just didn't sit right with me.
After the idealist explanation of the text was a quick introduction to idealism and the hermeneutic principles used. This was by far the best part of the chapter and made me feel better about idealism. I loved where he said he disagrees with the idealist party line and goes his own way in some areas.
I still want to investigate idealism some more and finish up Voddie's sermon series.
I found that I agree the most theologically with the third chapter on "Progressive Dispensationalism" with its "already / not yet" eschatological tension. As Marvin C. Pate said in chapter three, "That is to say, with the first coming of Jesus Christ the age to come already dawned, but it is not yet complete; it awaits the Parousia for its consummation." So there is a sense in which some of the things have already happened, yet have not yet happened and await a fuller completion in the future.
He noted that the "early church did not seem to be preoccupied with the specific timing of the completion of these end-time matters." I think that's where we should be. Jesus said that no man knows the time or date, but also said that we should be ready whenever that does come. I don't want to get bogged down by analysis paralysis and forget that we have a job to do here on the earth, namely that we share the gospel and make disciples of all nations. My favorite part was in the conclusion that the progressive dispensationalist can pull from the preterist, idealist, and classical dispensationalists to synthesize a balanced and holistic view of Revelation and can not just study the book of Revelation, but to apply it to our lives.
Finally, the chapter on classical dispensationalism was, to me, the most dull. He was so sure of himself and his interpretation that it seemed a little arrogant. He also seemed the most antagonistic toward the other positions and was always attacking them rather than pointing out the good things of his view.
In conclusion, I really enjoyed this book. It's a great read for anybody who wants to know more about the book of the Revelation or who wants to understand the differences in the major views on it.
Disclosure: I was NOT paid for my review and I bought the book with my own money because I wanted to read it.
June 29, 2012
This is one of the better volumes in the counter-point series. In short, it went like this:
1. Gentry presented the typical partial-preterist argument. Since Revelation says these things will soon take place, then it must mean they will quickly take place for the people to whom the letter is written. Hidden in this assumption and throughout Gentry's work is the idea that Revelation was written pre-70 A.D.
The problem with Gentry's line of reasoning is that his system gives no indicator on why some texts shouldn't have alraedy happened. For example, there is no reason to posit, on the partial preterist gloss, why the Great White Throne Judgment and the Final Resurrection haven't already happened, besides Gentry's commendable job to maintain Orthodoxy. If 1:3-4 signal a nearness and completion of time-texts, then there is no *logical* reason why chapters 20-22 should not also be included.
Further, Gentry, like the rest of amils and postmils, suffers from a strained reading of chapter 20. There is no reason in the text why the first resurrection must be spiritual, since the word *never* means that in the rest of the New Testament.
2. Hamstra's Idealism: Hamstra makes some odd claims. He says the book of Revelation is not concerned with history or time-texts, despite the book's repeated claim to both. On a practical level there is some truth to Hamstra's reading. The believer wants to apply the promises made in this book. I agree. I just don't see why we have to gut history to do so.
3. The futurists. Pate and Thomas argue for varieties of premillennialism and dispensationalism. Thomas is still stuck in the old camp of classic dispensationalism. He claims he takes the texts literally, the proceedes to decode the symbols in the book (I don't think he caught the irony). Pate presents a similar futurist case, minus the classic dispensational wackiness. Both present a strong reading of Revelation 19-20 as sequential, and the two resurrections as literal. If they are correct, and I believe they are, then premillennialism is the default position.
In conclusion, Pate delivers the real challenge to post and amillennialism:
“A spiritual resurrection can hardly explain the compensation provided for the martyrs in verse 4. From John’s perspective they are physically dead but spiritually alive. What they need is a bodily resurrection. (b) The best understanding of the verb esezan (they lived) in verse 4 is that it refers to a bodily resurrection” (Pate, “A Progressive Dispensationalist View of Revelation” in Four Views on the Book of Revelation).
1. Gentry presented the typical partial-preterist argument. Since Revelation says these things will soon take place, then it must mean they will quickly take place for the people to whom the letter is written. Hidden in this assumption and throughout Gentry's work is the idea that Revelation was written pre-70 A.D.
The problem with Gentry's line of reasoning is that his system gives no indicator on why some texts shouldn't have alraedy happened. For example, there is no reason to posit, on the partial preterist gloss, why the Great White Throne Judgment and the Final Resurrection haven't already happened, besides Gentry's commendable job to maintain Orthodoxy. If 1:3-4 signal a nearness and completion of time-texts, then there is no *logical* reason why chapters 20-22 should not also be included.
Further, Gentry, like the rest of amils and postmils, suffers from a strained reading of chapter 20. There is no reason in the text why the first resurrection must be spiritual, since the word *never* means that in the rest of the New Testament.
2. Hamstra's Idealism: Hamstra makes some odd claims. He says the book of Revelation is not concerned with history or time-texts, despite the book's repeated claim to both. On a practical level there is some truth to Hamstra's reading. The believer wants to apply the promises made in this book. I agree. I just don't see why we have to gut history to do so.
3. The futurists. Pate and Thomas argue for varieties of premillennialism and dispensationalism. Thomas is still stuck in the old camp of classic dispensationalism. He claims he takes the texts literally, the proceedes to decode the symbols in the book (I don't think he caught the irony). Pate presents a similar futurist case, minus the classic dispensational wackiness. Both present a strong reading of Revelation 19-20 as sequential, and the two resurrections as literal. If they are correct, and I believe they are, then premillennialism is the default position.
In conclusion, Pate delivers the real challenge to post and amillennialism:
“A spiritual resurrection can hardly explain the compensation provided for the martyrs in verse 4. From John’s perspective they are physically dead but spiritually alive. What they need is a bodily resurrection. (b) The best understanding of the verb esezan (they lived) in verse 4 is that it refers to a bodily resurrection” (Pate, “A Progressive Dispensationalist View of Revelation” in Four Views on the Book of Revelation).
July 29, 2011
This book presents the book of Revelation from four different perspectives. After about a 30-page overview, four different authors present their insights.
Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. covers the Preterist view. There are variations of Preterism, but the general idea is that the Bible’s eschatological promises have been fulfilled. Revelation’s bloody war scenes occurred in the first century. Gentry is an established Revelation scholar who writes clearly, but this is not his most lucid writing.
Sam Hamstra Jr. writes about an Idealist view. I would call it a “spiritual” view. Such interpreters find Revelation to be a message of “assurance, hope and victory” in its relevance to today’s struggles.
C. Marvin Pate, who serves also as the book’s general editor, discusses a “progressive dispensationalist” view. The arrival of Jesus 2,000 years ago is the dawning of a the “age to come,” but it is not yet complete; it awaits the Parousia for its consummation.
Finally, Robert L. Thomas lays out the classical Dispensationalist view, the common futuristic interpretation. While there are still many divisions in this category, Thomas strives to present a “typical” belief.
In my opinion, Steve Gregg’s book http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2010/1... on the same topic is more comprehensive and objective, and also more readable. But it’s also much longer; today’s book should be considered a compact, argumentative introduction by comparison.
Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. covers the Preterist view. There are variations of Preterism, but the general idea is that the Bible’s eschatological promises have been fulfilled. Revelation’s bloody war scenes occurred in the first century. Gentry is an established Revelation scholar who writes clearly, but this is not his most lucid writing.
Sam Hamstra Jr. writes about an Idealist view. I would call it a “spiritual” view. Such interpreters find Revelation to be a message of “assurance, hope and victory” in its relevance to today’s struggles.
C. Marvin Pate, who serves also as the book’s general editor, discusses a “progressive dispensationalist” view. The arrival of Jesus 2,000 years ago is the dawning of a the “age to come,” but it is not yet complete; it awaits the Parousia for its consummation.
Finally, Robert L. Thomas lays out the classical Dispensationalist view, the common futuristic interpretation. While there are still many divisions in this category, Thomas strives to present a “typical” belief.
In my opinion, Steve Gregg’s book http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2010/1... on the same topic is more comprehensive and objective, and also more readable. But it’s also much longer; today’s book should be considered a compact, argumentative introduction by comparison.
January 8, 2023
There is only so much a volume like this can accomplish. Far from answering all my questions or landing me in a final position in understanding the book of Revelation it did help me to get a feel for the landscape of interpretation. I'll share some brief thoughts.
Preterist: Currently I would say that I hold a preterist view of the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24 and parallels but am unsure whether I can conventionally hold that in Revelation (this may be incoherent but hey I'm still figuring this stuff out). The preterist reading of Revelation is completely dependent on a couple verses and words like "soon". It's compelling but a whole lot rides on just a very small piece.
Idealist: Honestly felt like this was the weakest of the interpretations partially because he wasn't willing to claim anything definitively. The idealist believes that Revelation is not so much about a historical event but about something that is going to happen all throughout history. Generally I was confused while reading this view.
Progressive Dispensational: Similarly to the preterist view relying completely on the understanding of the time words like "soon" the PD relies completely on the "already/not yet" paradigm, and pushes it veeerrry far. I did a lot of saying "yes, but come on... how much can you really have it both ways?" They squeeze a lot of answers into this "tension" they see all throughout scripture.
Classical Dispensational: Fully dependent on how one reads the seventy weeks of years in Daniel (which is a whole other can of worms). The gentleman that wrote this was very proud of his own hermeneutical methods. This reading claims literal reading, and he definitely interacted with the other views the most. While I don't think I'm going to end up Dispensational he did raise some far questions about Israel and the church, and different things with a reformed view of revelation that will help me in further reading.
Still a lot of work to do in understanding this book and the whole story of scripture.
Preterist: Currently I would say that I hold a preterist view of the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24 and parallels but am unsure whether I can conventionally hold that in Revelation (this may be incoherent but hey I'm still figuring this stuff out). The preterist reading of Revelation is completely dependent on a couple verses and words like "soon". It's compelling but a whole lot rides on just a very small piece.
Idealist: Honestly felt like this was the weakest of the interpretations partially because he wasn't willing to claim anything definitively. The idealist believes that Revelation is not so much about a historical event but about something that is going to happen all throughout history. Generally I was confused while reading this view.
Progressive Dispensational: Similarly to the preterist view relying completely on the understanding of the time words like "soon" the PD relies completely on the "already/not yet" paradigm, and pushes it veeerrry far. I did a lot of saying "yes, but come on... how much can you really have it both ways?" They squeeze a lot of answers into this "tension" they see all throughout scripture.
Classical Dispensational: Fully dependent on how one reads the seventy weeks of years in Daniel (which is a whole other can of worms). The gentleman that wrote this was very proud of his own hermeneutical methods. This reading claims literal reading, and he definitely interacted with the other views the most. While I don't think I'm going to end up Dispensational he did raise some far questions about Israel and the church, and different things with a reformed view of revelation that will help me in further reading.
Still a lot of work to do in understanding this book and the whole story of scripture.
July 25, 2023
As with others in this series, there isn't enough space for the authors to respond thoroughly to each other, which therefore leaves quite a bit to be desired. Robert Thomas's Dispensational take was a pretty unfortunate chapter to end on as the lines of reasoning he used were particularly weak.
He makes the assertion that the Mystery Babylon of Revelation 16-18 is to be a literally resurrected city of Babylon that will become a world power at the end of time. Seems unlikely...but possible, I guess, if it weren't for the fact that Mystery Babylon is quite plainly identified as the city that "sits on seven hills." It is one of those nice moments when John actually takes time to explain a symbol to us. Thomas's attempt to define seven hills symbolically as the extent of Babylon's power highlighted an incredible lack of self awareness, given that his principle argument was that employing the historical-grammatical approach will clearly give you a dispensational understanding of Revelation. This annoyed me to no end. How he couldn't see that Rome is precisely what that interpretive method would give you if you actually followed it, while, at the same time, straining to employ a wildly unsubstantiated metaphoric interpretation of a text and criticizing the other contributors as not really holding to that hermeneutic, was hypocritical to say the least. He criticized everyone else for allowing their presuppositions to inform their interpretation, while his own drove him to the worst of exegetical abuses.
Sorry...the others were much better, even if Pate's explanation of Progressive Dispensationalism was unclear. I am also super bummed that this book failed to include a historicist in the mix.
He makes the assertion that the Mystery Babylon of Revelation 16-18 is to be a literally resurrected city of Babylon that will become a world power at the end of time. Seems unlikely...but possible, I guess, if it weren't for the fact that Mystery Babylon is quite plainly identified as the city that "sits on seven hills." It is one of those nice moments when John actually takes time to explain a symbol to us. Thomas's attempt to define seven hills symbolically as the extent of Babylon's power highlighted an incredible lack of self awareness, given that his principle argument was that employing the historical-grammatical approach will clearly give you a dispensational understanding of Revelation. This annoyed me to no end. How he couldn't see that Rome is precisely what that interpretive method would give you if you actually followed it, while, at the same time, straining to employ a wildly unsubstantiated metaphoric interpretation of a text and criticizing the other contributors as not really holding to that hermeneutic, was hypocritical to say the least. He criticized everyone else for allowing their presuppositions to inform their interpretation, while his own drove him to the worst of exegetical abuses.
Sorry...the others were much better, even if Pate's explanation of Progressive Dispensationalism was unclear. I am also super bummed that this book failed to include a historicist in the mix.
April 13, 2020
I found this to be a very helpful primer on the wildly different ways that the book of Revelation is interpreted. This volume covers four views: preterism (Revelation's prophecies were fulfilled in the first century), idealism (Revelation refers to general spiritual truths, not specific historical events), progressive dispensationalism (Revelation's prophecies have dual fulfillment in the past and the future), and classical dispensationalism (Revelation's prophecies all await future fulfillment).
According to the pattern of the Counterpoints series, four authors present their own views and engage with the others. Each of them offers a walkthrough of Revelation, explaining the distinctives of their approach along the way. The presentation was clear, and the dialogue was (mostly) respectful and irenic. The author who presented the final view was the exception. Whereas the others spent more time unpacking their own views in a positive and constructive manner, this author attacked the alternative viewpoints at every turn. His tone was cocksure, dismissive, and full of overstatements. He even concluded that his hermeneutic is the only one free of bias and presupposition. For this reason, the book ended on a sour note, but I still came away with a much better understanding of the major issues at stake in interpreting Revelation.
According to the pattern of the Counterpoints series, four authors present their own views and engage with the others. Each of them offers a walkthrough of Revelation, explaining the distinctives of their approach along the way. The presentation was clear, and the dialogue was (mostly) respectful and irenic. The author who presented the final view was the exception. Whereas the others spent more time unpacking their own views in a positive and constructive manner, this author attacked the alternative viewpoints at every turn. His tone was cocksure, dismissive, and full of overstatements. He even concluded that his hermeneutic is the only one free of bias and presupposition. For this reason, the book ended on a sour note, but I still came away with a much better understanding of the major issues at stake in interpreting Revelation.
July 18, 2018
Read and keep. This is a helpful work for getting one's head around some of the dominant views of last things. Each writer gives a high-level survey of their framework through the major sections of Revelation. There is a small amount of interaction between them. I would like to have seen more counter-point interaction with each position. Though every system has variance within it, these seem to be fairly representative of the thought within their respective camps. I would like to have seen a "five views" book with Historic Premillennialism as that view would offer a closer comparison with the rest of the the way of viewing scripture with Preterism and Idealism, and still has a strong representation in Evangelicalism.
December 26, 2018
This is an interesting book. It kind of reminds me of how a fellow Pastor and good friend described another man's sermon on a different subject , " His sermon was like a Granny Gown, it covered everything and touched nothing." That's a very able description of this book. The gentlemen who authored this book did a good job of covering what they believed but it didn't affect how a person would look at things. Without spending a great deal of time on every detail, I will say it gave me better understanding of other views beside my own. I gave it a 4 instead of a 5 because in my opinion it's a little more wordy than necessary. I am simplistic and I like the cookies where they can be reached. I still recommend it as a valuable resource.
October 22, 2023
Revelation is a complex book, but it's all about Christ. On the whole, its message is a great encouragement: God wins. There's no debate about that. However, the "when" and "how" is precisely where one gets into the thick of it. The authors in this volume present four different approaches to understanding and interpreting the book. Each does so in a convincing manner, presenting the strongest case for his respective position while also addressing objections raised by those of other persuasions. Let the reader be warned: There's a lot to wade through and process. Reading this book is very much so like drinking from a proverbial fire hose. Advice: Take it slow and plan to revisit each position in more detail after acquainting yourself with the whole volume.
June 14, 2017
First, I didn't read the entire book because I am very familiar with the dispensational or futurist interpretation of Revelation. Second, I was disappointed that the historicist view wasn't represented. I appreciated the idealist view. It has much to commend; however, Hamstra imports his view onto the text that the visions of Revelation cover the entire history of the church. The preterist approach of Ken Gentry is the most biblically convincing view. Yet, I wonder if there is any historical precedent for his interpretation.
October 25, 2019
Good introduction to four views on the interpretation of the Book of Revelation. It would help to narrow down how one views Revelation, even if taking something from each view; and would also help to subtract those views that seem less viable when compared with the others. Each contributor's critical interaction with the other contributors is very helpful.
Revelation is a real complex and confusing book to understand, so this "Four View" may help arrange the issues in the minding some kind of order too, at least, give one a fundamental base when interpreting the text.
Revelation is a real complex and confusing book to understand, so this "Four View" may help arrange the issues in the minding some kind of order too, at least, give one a fundamental base when interpreting the text.
August 16, 2019
If you're teaching a class on Revelation, this is a great book, as it succinctly presents the 4 main interpretive schemes in easily understandable language. With the limits imposed by the format, however, each writer leaves gaps in his understanding, and these holes limit the stars in the rating! With each writer glossing over the their own trouble spots, there is not as much interaction between the multiple perspectives as is needed to get a truly good grasp on the text of Revelation itself.
February 6, 2025
Another great book in the counterpoints series. Covering 4 complex views of one of the most complex subjects in the Christian faith in less than 600 pages is a tall task. I wish there could have been more interaction between the views since, due to space, we weren’t given a deep dive into any of the 4 views. Overall I believe this book did have a significant impact on my understanding of revelation, even if more questions do arise and more study is required! One step forward!
November 29, 2020
Very informative. I think Pate’s progressive dispensationalism with the already/not yet hermeneutic was the best chapter, but I would not agree with his pretribulationism, and I wish he would have been clearer on when he thinks Revelation was written and how that relates to the AD 67-70 fulfillments.
February 2, 2023
Helpful articles from a preterist, idealist, progressive dispensationalist, and classical dispensationalist. Each are supported with Scripture so the differences really evolve from hermeneutics. Classical disp article states that his reps the most accurate via grammatical-historical. A synthesizing essay at the end/beginning would have been helpful.
June 7, 2023
My goal in reading this was to not get lost in the nitty gritty but try to get an overall picture of some of the various views. After reading, I have to say "none of the above." There are two positions I definitely don't agree with but neither of the other two seem to get there for me either. I do think I accomplished my goal in getting the big picture ideas.
August 14, 2025
I skimmed a good portion of this book, just trying to pick-up the main differences in interpretation between the four interpretive approaches offered here. I would recommend this to anyone wanting to delve deeper into the study of Revelation, to get a better grip on alternative views of the text. This series ("Counterpoints") excels in that regard!
November 26, 2025
Helpful basic explanation of the eschatological positions, but lacking in depth, and most disappointing is the missing engagement form each other with the other authors' positions. The counter-argument sections are the most helpful aspect of this book series, and I was very disappointed to see that being excluded in this one.
September 12, 2025
2.5 . The book gives an ok intro to Revelation and then 4 chapters that gives each a different view of how to interpret the book. These chapters were short and in most cases were a bit dull and did not give their views the best arguments. The third view was cleanest written
February 7, 2019
Gentry had the better argument.
June 16, 2019
I had to read that twice through before I started to get a feel for the different approaches to interpreting Revelation. Every Christian should read this.
August 20, 2019
Helpful for the broad brushstrokes; a nice primer for any interested party.
August 22, 2023
It all seems comes down to what genre you understand Revelation to be - apocalyptic or prophecy. I believe it is both.
December 17, 2023
This version was dated, and put forth four mediocre arguments. None of them were very convincing, textually.
August 6, 2025
The intro seems to do a better job of explaining the four views than those tasked with presenting their views. The majority of the book consists of their high-level commentary on Revelation, which provides a summary of the book. Unlike other x Views books, there’s little to no rebuttals which help create a better understanding of each view.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews