Errors in Gentry’s Before Jerusalem Fell

Issues in Gentry’s discussion of the external evidence for Revelation’s early date.

Gentry’s Before Jerusalem Fell, which defends a preterist interpretation of Revelation, is widely considered the standard work on the early date of Revelation. It was this work that Mark Hitchcock had before him when arguing for the late date in his doctoral dissertation.

The breadth of Gentry’s survey of the external evidence for the early date is impressive, and the work is a must read for anyone with a serious interest in the issue of dating.

The reader should, however, be aware of a few errors and inaccuracies, and it is these I wish to consider in the present post. These are areas in which the book would benefit from correction; they do not seriously detract from the overall value of the book.

Continue reading “Errors in Gentry’s Before Jerusalem Fell”

The Early Reception of Revelation

Was the canonical status of Revelation disputed in the early church?

It is often thought that the canonicity of Revelation was widely disputed in the early church, along with such books as 2 Peter, Jude, James, and Hebrews. In fact, Revelation was very well received in the first few centuries, and it first seems to have been rejected by Gaius of Rome at the turn of the third century, who appears to have rejected all of the Johannine books (including John’s Gospel).

Continue reading “The Early Reception of Revelation”