Kenneth Gentry begins with a quote: "The closer we get to the year 2000, the further we move away from the events of the Apocalypse." This phrase summarizes the preterist vision well. The preterist gives weight to the historical aspect of Revelation by connecting it to its original author and audience. The author mainly dealt with the seven Churches of Asia Minor which were facing difficulties in that period. John's intended audience was neither churches nor the 21st century. As most evangelical scholars would claim, Revelation contains prophecies that will come true in John's near future. Their manifestation may not have been as graphic or literal as one might imagine, for John uses “poetic hyperbole,” yet these events were actually fulfilled in history. He argues that the use of highly figurative discourse and symbolism “is not a denial of historicity but a question of literary genre.” These were events that had to happen soon because the time was near. So Gentry uses Greek language study to support this. He argues that modern lexicons and translators agree that these terms indicate temporal proximity by indicating that they expected to see events in their lifetime. As helpful as word study can be, it can also be limiting. Certainly one cannot base the interpretation of the entire book on one loosely used term. Likewise, while the apostle Paul spoke to the Thessalonians with urgency and in simple language, we know that the Second Coming has yet to occur. He argues against a view that John is speaking of God's times rather than ours, emphasizing the concrete historicity of Revelation including the churches and the expressions used are "emphatic-declarative." As for an objection stating that the events... in the middle of the card... will be future. Likewise, Babylon will also take place in the future. One of the most distinctive features of the dispensationalist view is the millennial reign of the Apocalypse. Christ's millennial reign will take place on earth. Based on the grammatical-historical exegesis of chapter 20, Thomas provides Although Hamstra has argued that the idealist view rests on stronger hermeneutic foundations, I believe this to be true with the dispensationalist view. In other words, the classical dispensationalist view really looks at the other Scriptures and sees them as a flow of events ordained by God. One of Thomas' strengths is that he provides many side-by-side comparisons of the issues he addresses. It allows the reader to see the flaws of other previously mentioned points of view. I'm not sure if this is right, but it certainly strengthens his argument. Works Cited by Kenneth Gentry