Einstein wrongPMW 2022-097 By Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

John states in his opening of Revelation that the events within “must soon take place” (Rev 1:1) because “the time is at hand” (Rev 1:3). This has caused commentators to trip all over themselves to explain what John “really” meant. In the preceding articles I reviewed six proposed answers, starting with those that are the least likely.

I will now present the final four answers in this article. These are the most reasonable ones. But of course, only one of them will be the correct one. And since it is the correct one, I have decided to choose it as my own.

7. The events are certain

The events are certain irrespective of when they occur. S. S. Smalley (27) states that “this phrase indicates the sure accomplishment of God’s purposes, rather than a ‘hasty consummation’ of history.” L. Brighton (642–43) concurs: “The events described will certainly take place: human evil and the resulting sufferings under God’s judgment, and the church of Christ completing her mission. It is necessary that these events take place.”

But again, John could have better expressed this view by simply stating that he was referring to “the things which must take place.” The word “soon” simply confuses the matter. Or he could have used the simple future: “the things which will take place.” Or he could have used amen to affirm its certainty, especially since John is fond of amen both in Rev (1:6, 7; 3:14; 5:14; 7:12; 19:4; 22:20, 21), as well as in his Gospel where he always doubles it (25 x): “the things which must take place. Amen.”

Four Views on the Book of RevelationFour View Rev
(ed. by Marvin Pate)

Helpful presentation of four approaches to Revelation. Ken Gentry writes the chapter on the preterist approach to Revelation, which provides a 50 page survey of Revelation .

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

8. John speaks from the future

G. R. Beasley-Murray emphasizes “imminence” (168) and “no more delay” (170) but not for the original audience. Actually “in his vision John stands near the close of the period of messianic judgments” (Beasley-Murray 170). Thus, he sees John as speaking from within the future context when the events are about to explode on the seen.

This is highly unlikely for John opens his book with these words of temporal nearness before anyone knows what he will be saying. And even before he gets caught up “in the Spirit” (1:10; 4:1–2) or transported into the scenes (17:1; 21:9–10). This approach might be more plausible if he said something to the effect: “I was carried in the Spirit into the future to see things that were soon to come to pass.” Or: “the Spirit entered me and set me in the Day of the Lord where I saw things that were soon to take place.” Besides, in 1:3 he blessed the original reader of Rev and the original hearers who would “heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near” (1:3). Surely the time was near for the reader and hearers.

9. The events are inaugurated

The events have already been inaugurated and are gradually unfolding through history. G. K. Beale (182) presents this view, which is quite widely held in the current scholarly discussion: “the focus of ‘quickness’ and ‘’nearness’ in vv 1–3 is primarily on inauguration of prophetic fulfillment and its ongoing aspect, not on nearness of consummated fulfillment, though the latter is secondarily in mind as leading from the former.” Thus, “the beginning of fulfillment and not final fulfillment is the focus.”

G. Osborne (55) agrees: “In salvation history the events indicated in the book have already begun to ‘come to pass’ and await the final consummation.” This is basically the view held by G. R. Beasley-Murray (46), J. P. M. Sweet (58), S. Kistemaker (77), and V. Poythress (70).

This approach is semi-preteristic and acceptable as a partial answer to the question of John’s meaning. But its application by scholars is generally rather nebulous in allowing recurring events throughout history continually to unfold. John’s terminology, however, seems more concrete and constraining. Indeed, he uses the aorist infinitive genesthai (“take place,” i.e., come to be) which should be translated “must have come to pass” (H. Alford 545). This dei . . . genesthai wording occurs seven times in Scripture (including 1:1; 22:6) and signifies fulfillment, not the beginning of fulfillment. It speaks of the fulfillment of Scripture prophecies of Jesus’ death (Mt 26:64) and the wars and rumors of wars that must occur before the “end” (Mk 13:7; Lk 21:9). (Rev 4:1 cannot serve as evidence one way or the other because it is a part of the question as to whether the things in Rev must occur soon.)

As I will show below in defending the preteristic understanding of the phrase here, John expects the actual fulfillment of the overwhelming majority of his prophecies. In fact, in only one place does he glance into the distant future to reveal the long-term consequences of its first-century fulfillment: in 20:1–15. But there he expressly states that the events will not occur soon, for he states that some of them will transpire after 1000 years are “completed” (20:3, 5, 7).

Navigating the Book of Revelation: Special Studies on Important Issues

Navigating the Book of Revelation (by Ken Gentry)

Technical studies on key issues in Revelation, including the seven-sealed scroll, the cast out temple, Jewish persecution of Christianity, the Babylonian Harlot, and more.

See more study materials at: www.KennethGentry.com

10. The events will occur soon

The events will occur soon — within the lifetime of John’s audience. P. Carrington (vii) expresses this approach clearly: “When the Revelation was written it was naturally accepted as an account of current events and of events ‘shortly to come to pass’; that is how it describes itself, and that is how it was naturally taken.” He later states: “we cannot, however, do justice to his very plain opening statement (cf. 1.3; iv:1; xxii. 10) by saying that he foresaw a long series of events covering centuries, which could be described as imminent because they were to begin shortly. Whatever earthly realities correspond to John’s symbols, he expected them to be accomplished quickly in their entirety” (Carrington 12).

M. Stuart (1:5) calls this the “plain and obvious sense” of the phrase. Kurt Aland (1985: 1:88) observes:

In the original text, the Greek work used is tachu, and this does not mean “Soon,” in the sense of “sometime,” but rather “now,” “immediately.” Therefore, we must understand Rev. 22:12 in this way: “I am coming now, bringing my recompense.” The concluding word of Rev. 22:20 is: “He who testifies to these things says, ‘surely I am coming soon.” Here we again find the word tachu, so this means: I am coming quickly, immediately. This is followed by the prayer: “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” . . . The Apocalypse expresses the fervent waiting for the end within the circles in which the writer lived — not an expectation that will happen at some unknown point X in time (just to repeat this), but one in the immediate present.

F. W. Farrar (1884: 432) captures the frustration preterists feel when interacting with the alternative positions: “it is curious to see with what extraordinary ease commentators explain the perfectly simple [un]ambiguous expression ‘speedily’ (en tachei), to mean any length of time which they may choose to demand.” Indeed, the “language is simply meaningless if it is to be so manipulated by every successive commentator as to make the words ‘speedily’ and ‘near’ imply any number of centuries of delay.” For the preterist “the primary focus is on John’s own generation” (I. Boxall 24).

In addition to Carrington, Stuart, Farrar, and Boxall, this view is held by F. J. A. Hort (6), W. Milligan (2), M. S. Terry (276), J. E. Adams (50), J. M. Ford (373), D. Chilton (52), E. Corsini (72), and B. Malina (31).



  1. Christopher Johansson December 27, 2022 at 4:59 am

    Your understanding is too carnal. If you had the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, then you would realize that all Scripture is only spiritually discerned! Has Babylon fallen in you yet?

  2. Kenneth Gentry January 3, 2023 at 12:51 pm

    Not recently. And it is causing some indigestion.

  3. Noble Berean II January 23, 2023 at 8:13 am

    The last paragraph is a good concluding statement. The concerning thing is if the other commentators play as fast and loose with their interpretations of the rest of the scriptures as they do with Revelation.

  4. Fred V. Squillante January 30, 2023 at 10:14 am

    The problem, as I see it, is most commentators view the Apocalypse as written in Domitian’s reign and thus, post A.D. 70. If written in Nero’s reign, but probably after 66, there would have been: (a) already ~35 years of Jewish persecution of Christians, (b) Nero’s attempt to exterminate Christianity after being blamed for the fires in Rome, which he placed on the Christians, and (c) all-out war between Rome and the Jews after their revolt – a total conflagration, for sure, with God’s judgment on apostate Israel coming soon – in 70.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: