★★★★★ 5
Helpful and informative
Format: Kindle
Four Views on the Book of Revelation (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology) edited by Stanley N. Gundry and C. Marvin Pate
I read this book after previously reviewing Revelation in Context: John’s Apocalypse and Second Temple Judaism. That book was helpful for me to understand Revelation as apocalyptic literature, one example of the genre with similarities to others from the first and second centuries. Interpreting Revelation as apocalyptic literature is itself a choice, and some approaches to Revelation, such as classic dispensationalism with its emphasis on grammatical-historical hermeneutics are skeptical of that approach. As Thomas writes in his chapter “To understand any passage of Scripture in a nonliteral way violates principles of grammatical-historical interpretation unless contextual features signal a need to interpret otherwise” (p. 244). I found Revelation in Context helpful for introducing various apocalyptic books of the age in providing greater context for Jewish thought up to and after John wrote Revelation.
The editors of Four Views provide a good overview of the four views presented as well as a good introduction to Revelation. The four authors and their positions are:
Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. (preterist)
Sam Hamstra, Jr. (idealist)
C. Marvin Pate (progressive dispensationalist)
Robert L. Thomas (classical dispensationalist)
Each author made a case for his position and responded briefly to points by the other authors. Thomas is the most insistent in his argument and spends the most time critiquing the others’ positions. The differences stem entirely from their hermeneutics, each has a different approach to the book and each calls “foul” with the others’ misuse or lack of consistency of their own hermeneutics.
For me, the winner was the preterist position, as I’d never truly been exposed to this paradigm. The author allows it to speak for itself, and I found it appealing because of how well the events of 68-70 AD as described (mainly) by Josephus line up eerily well with the words of Revelation. In some cases, it seems Josephus is quoting Revelation, which made me wonder whether the authors had taken liberties with the actual translation of Josephus’ works. After reading Gentry Jr.’s view, reading Revelation with a preterist’s viewpoint in mind made it a completely different book for me. Whether the position is correct or not, it allowed me to read Revelation again for the first time, so to speak– that was a gift.
Thomas drove home for me that classical dispensationalism demands a special place for the ethnic people of Israel including a rebuilding of the temple along with its sacrifices. Babylon on the Euphrates is literally the Babylon of old and must also be rebuilt, which he interprets to be a Persian/Iranian empire that will come to fruition again. I think I can see how this view is at long last falling out of favor.
Some of the writers may be somewhat heterodox. Gentry, for example, leaves open some possibilities for partial preterism or has some reasoning other preterists don’t have. Thomas is appalled at progressive dispensationalism’s “now and not yet” mentality as violating rules of grammatical-historical interpretation. Pate leaves the door open to Revelation having an earlier authorship and more sections being fulfilled in the first century than Thomas allows. Hamstra is in a field of his own, the “idealist” position sees Revelation as purely symbolic and not specific to any time period– everyone undergoing persecution is experiencing the spirit of the Antichrist, etc.
Since reading this book, I’ve been checking out podcasts on preterism while pondering how covenantalists I know seem to sound like progressive dispensationalists.
I am glad this book was published and will check out similar works in this series. Five stars.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 6, 2026
