Revelation, Four Views: A Parallel. Schools of interpretation approach the book of Revelation. The four parallel columns allow the reader to compare. The Four Views of Revelation. An honest evaluation of the four views of the book of the Revelation leads to the conclusion that the futurist view aligns. Download Ebook: four views on the book of revelation in PDF Format. Also available for mobile reader. That book allowed the proponents of each of four different views to present an overall summary of their approach to the book of Revelation. This book by Gregg, on the other hand, is a detailed, verse-by-verse commentary, with the text divided into paragraphs, and each paragraph followed by four parallel columns.

Four Views of Revelation The Four Views of Revelation Introduction That there are differing views on the interpretation of the apocalyptic writings in the book of Revelation is no secret. The plethora of views, however, can be distilled into essentially four main categories. These categories are: the historicist view, the preterist view, the futurist view, and the idealist view.

These four views are the subject of this paper. Historicist View The historicist view contends that all of the events in the book of Revelation are history – that they were fulfilled either during the reign of Nero (54-68 AD) or Emperor Domitian (81-96 AD). Those who see the book this way claim that it is an inspired forecast of the whole of church history. Those who support this view claim that in Revelation one can find the history of the church from the days of John to the end of the age.

The proponents of the historical view claim that the symbols contained in Revelation signify the rise of the papacy, the corruption of the church, and various wars throughout church history (Ryrie 9). Gregg, in his commentary on Revelation, states (35) that one non-negotiable feature of classical historicism is the assertion that the papacy is “Antichrist.” According to Gregg, present-day supporters of historicism have all but vanished, and “hardly any new commentary can be found (today) espousing this view.” Nevertheless, historicism has had its fair share of noteworthy supporters: among them, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, John Foxe, John Wesley, Charles Finney, C.H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, and a host of others. Art Popular Acustico Mtv Gratis.

While classical historicism is not in vogue today, it has had some impressive points in its favor. It seems most of these, at least from our vantage point of looking backwards, are a result of favorable coincidences where proponents have successfully been able to align some prophetic events with actual historical occurrences. One such incident, according to Gregg (36) was the alignment of the fifth trumpet of Revelation with the rise of Mohammedanism and of the sixth trumpet with the coming of the Turks. The things described in the Revelation, says Gregg, would surely be an apt description of these great calamities – but prove nothing when taken in the system as a whole. Preterist View The second view is known as the Preterist view. The word “preter” comes from Latin, meaning ‘past,’ so this view contends that Revelation is essentially a view of the past.

The Preterist viewpoint wants to take seriously the historical interpretation of Revelation by relating it to its original author and audience. Preterists locate the timing of the fulfilling of the prophecies of Revelation in the first century AD just before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. Despite the opinion of many that Revelation was written in the 90’s during the reign of Domitian many who hold to this view would argue that the date of the book is rather much earlier during the time of Nero (54-68 AD). Those who support this view see Revelation as having already been fulfilled in the early centuries of the church.

The view differs from the historicist in that preterism sees Revelation as a panorama of church history from the apostolic era to the end of the ages. Chapters 5-11 are said to record the church’s victory over Judaism; chapters 12-19, her victory over Pagan Rome, and chapters 20-22, her glory because of these victories (Ryrie 8). The principal criticism of the preterist approach is its heavy dependence on the pre-AD 70 date of writing. While this date has some defense it is not undisputed.