Author: Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Th.D.

Book Review by Ed Stevens

About the Author: Dr. Kenneth Gentry, Jr. is the senior pastor of the Reedy River Presbyterian Church, located in Mauldin, South Carolina. He and his wife, Melissa, have three children: Amanda, Paul, and Stephen. Dr. Gentry has written a number of books, including: The Christian Case Against Abortion (1982), The Christian and Alcoholic Beverages (1986), and The Charismatic Gift of Prophecy: A Reformed Analysis (1986), House Divided: The Break-up of Dispensational Theology, and The Beast of Revelation (1989).

This last book, The Beast of Revelation, is a shortened version of Gentry’s doctoral dissertation, which was published in its full length as Before Jerusalem Fell (the subject of this review).

As the title and subtitles suggest, Dr. Gentry wrote this work to establish, once and for all, the date of Revelation. One of the main “proofs” used by the premillennial/dispensational view of eschatology is that John did not write the book of Revelation until 26 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (i.e. A.D. 96), and that, therefore, it could not be referring to that event. It naturally follows, then (according to the premillenialists’ reasoning), that if the events written about in Revelation were something after 96 AD, they must not have occurred yet, and must therefore still be future. This, in fact, has been one of the main arguments used by those who hold to the dispensational futurist viewpoint.

In Before Jerusalem Fell, Dr. Gentry begins by discussing some of the difficulties involved in the study of Revelation, and lists some of the advocates of both the early and late dates. (The list of early date advocates is impressive, including 137 names). He then goes on to examine the arguments in favor of the later date of AD 96, such as the testimony of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and other “external witnesses.” These witnesses are examined minutely (in much more detail than in The Beast), and their faults exposed.

The author’s next area of research involves internal evidence (those evidences for a pre-70 date contained within the book of Revelation itself). These include:

1. The still-standing Temple (used by premills as “proof” of a future rebuilt Temple). It is interesting that the premills would attach a physical significance to this temple, since they are thereby admitting that it can indeed be interpreted in a physical fashion and not just a figurative judgmental usage of some kind (Rev. 11:1, 2).

2. The time limitations recorded by John (i.e. “must shortly take place,” “the time is at hand,” “I am coming quickly,” etc. cf. Rev. 1:1-3; 22:6,7,10,12,20).

3. The identity of the Sixth King in Rev. 17. This is where Dr. Gentry presents the evidence for Nero’s being the Beast in the book of Revelation.

4. Dr. Gentry concludes by placing the evidence allegedly supporting a Domitianic date under intense scrutiny and criticism.

As an introduction to the preterist view of the book of Revelation, this book is very helpful and convincing. We certainly differ over the identity of the Beast, and the timing of the events in Rev. 20-22. And we wish Gentry would go all the way into a completely consistent “Strict Preterist” position. But, for those looking for an additional well-written presentation of both internal and external evidence for the pre-70 A.D. date of Revelation from a somewhat preterist and solidly reconstructionist perspective, this is a good one.

Articles