REV 1:10 AS THE LORD’S DAY (2)

Revelation September 26, 2025 Leave a comment

PMW 2025-076 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

This is the second in a two-part study of Rev. 1:10. I am continuing a presentation and defense of the view that John’s “Lord’s day” in Rev 1:10 is referring to “the Day of the Lord.” If this is so, it fits perfectly with the redemptive-historical preterist understanding of Revelation as a drama presenting Christ’s judgment-coming against Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70.

I will pick up where I left off in the last article. There I presented and briefly rebutted the argument for Rev 1:10 pointing to the Lord’s Day (the weekly day of worship). Now we are ready to look at the positive evidence for it picturing the Day of the Lord, i.e., AD 70. Continue reading →

REV 1:10 AS THE LORD’S DAY (1)

Revelation September 23, 2025 Leave a comment

PMW 2025-075 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

Rev. 1:10 is a verse that I believe widely misinterpreted and misapplied in contemporary discussion. This verse reads: “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet.” Contrary to popular opinion, I believe that John is speaking of “the Day of the Lord,” rather than “the Lord’s Day” (Sunday, the Christian day of worship). In this and the following post, I will engage the question.

John tells us here that he was in the Spirit “on the Lord’s day” (1:10a). Most commentators see the Greek phrase kuriake hemera (“Lord’s day”) as referring to when John received his vision, i.e., on the first day of the week, the Christian day of worship. Continue reading →

WHY DID JOHN MEASURE THE TEMPLE?

Revelation, Temple September 19, 2025 Leave a comment

PMW 2025-074 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The measuring of the temple in Rev. 11:1–2 is an important episode in Revelation. Here we clearly see Revelation’s focus on Israel: this “holy city” with a “temple” must be Jerusalem (Neh. 11:1; Isa. 48:2; 52:1; 64:10; Matt. 4:5; 27:53). In verse 8 John unmasks this “holy city” for what she becomes: an Egypt, a Sodom, the slayer of Christ: “Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.” Indeed, second century Christians call Jews “Christ-killers” and “murderers of the Lord” (e.g., Ignatius, Magnesians 11; Justin Martyr, First Apology 35; Irenaeus, i 3:12:2)

Significantly this passage strongly reflects Jesus’s prophecy in the Olivet Discourse (compare the italicized words):

Luke 21:24b: “Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”

Revelation 11:2: “But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.”

Continue reading →

666 AS A HEBREW MISSPELLING?

Objections, Revelation September 16, 2025 Comments: 3

PMW 2025-073 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

In this reply to preterist opponents, I will answer the question:
What about the defective spelling of Nero’s name necessary for the value 666? To get the proper value of 666 out of the name Nero Caesar requires an unusual spelling of his name.

This problem is not insuperable, for we do find this spelling in Aramaic documents from Nero’s reign. Who is to say John could not use a defective spelling, especially one which we actually find from that time period? Continue reading →

THE JUDGMENT STRUCTURE OF REVELATION

Revelation September 12, 2025 Leave a comment

PMW 2025-072 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

The Determination of Revelation’s Outline

Unfortunately, Revelation is an extremely difficult book to outline. As we might expect from both its cascading judgment visions and its climacteric spiral movement, analyzing its intricate structure is a difficult task that has tested the mettle of John’s most devoted students. Most would agree with Richard Bauckham that “the book of Revelation is an extraordinarily complex literary composition.” David Aune concurs: Revelation is “an elaborately designed and ingeniously crafted literary work.” Indeed, its structure is extremely complicated, quite fascinating – and vigorously debated. Continue reading →

1 JOHN 2:2 BY B. B. WARFIELD (3)

New Testament, Objections, Optimism September 9, 2025 Comments: 3

Cross and world“Jesus Christ the Propitiation for the Whole World” (3)
PMW 2025-071 by Benjamin B. Warfield

[Gentry note: This is part 3 of an excellent article by renowned postmillennial Princeton scholar, B. B. Warfield.]

The Meaning of “Propitiation”

The expedient made use of by many commentators in their endeavor to escape from this maze of contradictions is to distinguish between Christ as our “Advocate” and Christ as our “Propitiation,” and to connect actual salvation with him only in the former function. Thus Richard Rothe tells us that “the propitiation in Christ concerns the whole world,” but “only those in Christ have an advocate in Christ,” with the intimation that it is Christ’s advocacy which “makes the efficacy of his propitiation effective before God.” In this view the propitiation is conceived as merely laying a basis for actual forgiveness of sins, and is spoken of therefore rather as “sufficient” than efficacious—becoming efficacious only through the act of faith on the part of the believer by which he secures Christ as his Advocate. This is the view presented by B. F. Westcott also, according to whom Christ is advocate exclusively for Christians, while he is a propitiation for the whole world. His propitiatory death on earth was for all men; his advocacy in heaven is for those only who believe in him. Here, there is a universal atonement taught, with a limited application, contingent on actual faith: “the efficacy of his work for the individual depends upon fellowship with him.” Continue reading →

1 JOHN 2:2 BY B. B. WARFIELD (2)

New Testament, Objections, Optimism September 5, 2025 Leave a comment

Savior of world“Jesus Christ the Propitiation for the Whole World” (2)
PMT 2025-070 by Benjamin B. Warfield

[Gentry note: This is part 2 of an excellent article by renowned postmillennial Princeton scholar, B. B. Warfield.]

“And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.”
(1 John 2:2)

The Problem of “the World”

The search for John’s meaning naturally begins with an attempt to ascertain what he intends by “the world.” He sets it in contrast with an “our” by which primarily his readers and himself are designated: “And he is himself a propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the whole world.” John’s readers apparently are immediately certain Christian communities in Asia Minor; and it is possible to confine the “our” strictly to them. In that case it is not impossible to interpret “the whole world,” which is brought into contrast with the Christians specifically of Asia Minor, as referring to the whole body of Christians extended throughout the world. Continue reading →