A Critique Of The Preterist View Of Revelation And The Jewish War

By Mark L. Hitchcock

[Mark L. Hitchcock is Pastor, Faith Bible Church, Edmond, Oklahoma.

This is the second article in a five-part series “Preterism and the Date of the Book of Revelation.”]

According to preterism the Book of Revelation was written in A.D. 65–66 in the reign of Nero with most of the prophecies in the book being fulfilled only a few years later. Thus according to preterism the book does not predict a yet-future Tribulation and return of Christ to the earth. The first article in this series discussed the position of preterists that the words “soon” (τάχος and ταχύς) and “near” (ἐγγύς) mean Christ returned soon after John wrote Revelation. Weaknesses in this view were pointed out, and it was argued that those words refer instead to the imminency of the events recorded in Revelation, events that could occur at any time.[1] The present article discusses the preterist view that several verses in Revelation predicted the Jewish War in A.D. 70.

The Thematic Focus Of Revelation 1:7

Revelation 1:7, which announces the theme of the book, states that when Jesus comes “with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him.” Preterists contend that this verse refers to the “cloud coming” of Christ in A.D. 70 in judgment on Israel with the Romans as the instrument of that judgment.[2] Thus for preterists this verse refers to the local event in A.D. 70, not a global event in conjunction with the second coming of Christ. Gentry writes, “Such being the case, only a pre-A.D. 70 date could be expected, for what event subsequent to the A.D. 70 destruction of the Temple parallels the magnitude and covenantal significance of this event? Surely the destruction of the Jewish Temple (accomplished now for over 1900 years) and the gruesome Jewish War with Rome must be in view here.”[3]

To arrive at this conclusion Gentry focuses on phrases that refer to the objects of Christ’s wrath, namely, “those who pierced Him,” and “the tribes of the earth.” These words clearly recall the words of Daniel 7:13 and Zechariah 12:10. Those who pierced the Messiah and will mourn are “the house of David” and “the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (Zech. 12:10). They clearly are the Jewish people. Therefore Gentry concludes that “the earth” in Revelation 1:7 refers to the land of Israel and that the “tribes” must be the twelve tribes of Israel who are judged by Christ in A.D. 70. However, seven difficulties render this view unlikely.

First, Gentry correctly notes that γῆ, the word rendered “earth” in verse 7, can mean “land,”[4] that is, “dry land as opposed to sea, land,”[5] and that γῆ can also refer to “portions or regions of the earth, region, country.”[6] However, when γῆ is used of Israel geographically it is normally expressed as “the land of Israel” or some similar statement to indicate that a specific land or region is referred to (Matt. 2:6; 2:21; 4:15; 14:34; Mark 6:53; John 3:22). The word γῆ is found eighty-two times in Revelation, and some of those occurrences refer to the whole earth (e.g., 21:1).[7] In 1:5 Jesus Christ is said to be “the ruler of the kings of the earth.” To limit this to the kings of the land of Israel would be contrary to the text. Since γῆ in verse 5 means “earth,” it should be given the same meaning in verse 7 since there is nothing to indicate that a more limited scope is intended.

Second, Gentry’s view of Jesus’ “cloud coming” in A.D. 70 fails to deal adequately with Christ’s promise to “come” and deliver His people from a time of terrible persecution. According to Gentry, Christ’s coming in Revelation refers to His coming in judgment in A.D. 70 on the Jews who crucifed Him. However, in 3:10–11 Jesus said to the church of Philadelphia, “Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell upon the earth. I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, so that no one will take your crown.” In what sense did the alleged “coming” of Christ in A.D. 70 in judgment bring deliverance for the church from the time of persecution? The preterist view cannot adequately answer this question.

Thomas summarizes this objection to Gentry’s thesis.

He [Gentry] also leaves other unanswered questions regarding this “cloud coming” in the sixties. He identifies the cloud coming against the Jews as judgment against Judea in 67–70. Against the church, that coming was persecution by the Romans from 64–68. The cloud coming for Rome was her internal strife in 68–69. But nowhere does he tell what the promised deliverance of the church is (e.g., 3:11). It appears to be a question without a clear-cut answer as to how this “cloud coming” could be a promise of imminent deliverance for God’s people. All he can see in it is judgment against them and the “privilege” of being clearly distinguished from Judaism forever. He finds covenantal and redemptive import for Christianity in the collapse of the Jewish order, but this falls short of a personal appearance of Christ to take the faithful away from their persecution.[8]

Third, the contexts of Daniel 7:13 and Zechariah 12:10 focus on the eschatological redemption and deliverance of Israel, not her judgment.[9] Daniel 7:13–14 points to the ultimate enthronement of the Son of Man over all the nations of the world after God will have judged the four wicked empires (vv. 1–12, 15–27).[10] Zechariah gave two prophetic oracles that set forth the long-awaited messianic future of Israel. The first oracle (chaps. 9–11) focuses primarily on the events of Messiah’s first advent, and the second oracle (chaps. 12–14) focuses on the Second Advent and the Jews’ acceptance of Messiah, the King.[11] God will then pour out the Holy Spirit of grace on the Jewish people and they will turn to the Messiah with bitter weeping (12:10). Zechariah 13:1–6 follows with a description of God’s provision for spiritual cleansing for the people.

Gentry’s response to this argument is that John was not prophetically interpreting these prophecies but was “adapting and applying it—according to his own requirements.”[12] True, Old Testament prophecies can be adapted and applied, but the essential meaning cannot be changed.

Fourth, Gentry says the phrase “all the tribes of the earth” (πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς) in Revelation 1:7 refers to the twelve tribes in the land of Israel.[13] He argues that elsewhere in Revelation where the term “tribes” (φυλαί) appears John expanded the concept by adding “every tongue, people, and nation,” in order to distinguish those references from 1:7.[14] However, Beale has demonstrated that the phrase “all the tribes of the earth” is not limited to Israel. He notes that in all its occurrences in the Septuagint the phrase never refers to the tribes of Israel but always has a universal meaning (Gen. 12:3; Ps. 71 [Heb., 72]:17; Zech. 14:17).[15]

In response to Beale, Gentry says that even Beale recognizes that sometimes John altered the meaning of an Old Testament passage.[16] Gentry also argues that in Revelation 1:7 John was not quoting the Old Testament, so the phrase does not have to carry its meaning in Zechariah into Revelation.[17] However, when an exact phrase is used in Revelation that has an established meaning in the Old Testament, it seems odd that the meaning would be altered without some clear indication of that change. In 1:7 there is no indication that πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς means something less than it meant in its corresponding Old Testament phrase.

Fifth, the statement “every eye will see Him” further universalizes the scope of verse 7. Jesus’ return will capture the attention of the entire world, not just those in Israel in A.D. 70.

If the larger group of “every eye” refers to the Jewish nation, then it does not make sense that the smaller group “even those who pierced Him,” would be a reference to the same exact people, as preterists contend. Their reading of the passage would be as follows: “every eye [Israel] will see Him, even those who pierced Him [Israel].” There would be no need to have a subgroup if both “every eye” and “even those who pierced Him” mean the same thing. If “every eye” refers to all the peoples of the world as the larger group, then the qualifying phrase “even those who pierced Him” would be emphasizing the Jewish element as the smaller subgroup. Thus, it is not surprising that virtually everyone except preterists interpret[s] this part of the passage in a global sense. It is obvious that bias, not the clear meaning of the text, is the only reason preterists interpret this part of the passage in a restricted manner.[18]

Sixth, the alleged “coming” of Christ in A.D. 70 was not a “coming” at all. Christ did not “come” in A.D. 70.[19] Gentry defends his view of a “cloud coming” of Christ in judgment by noting that God did “come” against Egypt in judgment “riding on a swift cloud” (Isa. 19:1).[20] However, the difference between this verse and Revelation 1:7 is that the latter specifically says that when He comes “every eye will see Him.” This denotes a personal, visible coming, not a coming in judgment by means of the Roman army in A.D. 70.

Seventh, the universal, futurist interpretation of verse 7 is confirmed by the worldwide scope of events on “the earth” (γῆς) in numerous other references in the Apocalypse (3:10; 6:10; 8:13; 11:10 [twice]; 13:8, 12, 14 [twice]; 14:6; 15:4; 17:2, 8). In each of these passages it is difficult to fit the described events into the local judgment of A.D. 70. For these reasons the preterist argument for an early date for Revelation based on 1:7 is untenable.

The Looming Jewish War

Preterists also argue that the prophecies of specific events and time frames in Revelation are consistent with the Neronic era.[21] Gentry first points to the correspondence of events in Revelation that he believes “fit hand-in-glove with the historical records of the Jewish War.”[22]

Alleged Correspondence Of Events

After listing a few historical correspondences, Gentry lists several events in the Jewish War that he says correspond to events predicted in Revelation.

First, Gentry believes that the four horsemen of the Apocalypse in Revelation 6:1–8 apply to the breach of the Pax Romana and its aftermath in the Jewish War. But can Gentry or others prove that one-fourth of the Jews were killed by the sword, famine, disease, and wild beasts of the earth, as stated in verse 8, and that another one-third were killed at some later point in the Jewish War (9:15)?

Second, Gentry cites Eusebius’s Ecclesiatical History (3.5.3) to support his notion that the 144,000 in 7:1–7 were Jewish Christians who escaped Jerusalem before it was too late.[23] However, the differences between Eusebius’s account and Revelation 7:1–7 are significant. First, in Eusebius’s account the people of Jerusalem were commanded by some form of revelation from God to leave the city, but Revelation 7 makes no mention of a revelation commanding the 144,000 to leave. Second, Eusebius mentions both Jerusalem and Pella, but Revelation 7 does not mention a city. Third, the preservation in Revelation 7 is accomplished by means of a divine suspension of judgment until the sealing of the 144,000 is complete, not in a miraculous flight from the city.[24] Fourth, Eusebius, the source for Gentry’s alleged correspondence of events, never gives any hint that he believed the flight to Pella was a fulfillment of Revelation 7:1–7.

Third, Gentry also sees a correspondence between the second Jewish temple before A.D. 70 and the temple mentioned in 11:1–2. (The identity of this temple in 11:1–2 will be discussed in the third article in this series.)

Fourth, Gentry contends that the bridle-deep blood in 14:19–20 corresponds to Josephus’s description of the carnage in the Jewish Revolt.[25] But this is refuted by a simple reading of Josephus’s description and the text of 14:19–20. His account simply does not match the description in Revelation.

Fifth, Gentry states that in Revelation 16:21 the one-hundred-pound hailstones were white (limestone) Roman ballista stones shot from catapults against the Jewish defenders of Jerusalem.[26] The verse reads, “And huge hailstones, about one hundred pounds each, came down from heaven upon men; and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail, because its plague was extremely severe.” Gentry categorically denies that these hailstones are literal. “It is quite impossible that such gargantuan hailstones can be accounted for under the most aggravated of meteorological conditions.”[27]

There are three problems with Gentry’s view of this verse. For one thing, the Bible includes historical and prophetic parallels of God’s use of huge hailstones from heaven as a means of judgment (Exod. 9:22–26; Josh. 10:11; Job 38:22–23; Ezek. 38:22).

For another thing, it is true that Josephus mentioned 160 artillery engines employed by the Roman legions against Jerusalem, that each ballista stone weighed one talent, and that in the early stages of the assault the stones were white in color.[28] However, significant differences can be noted between the hailstones in Revelation 16:21 and Roman ballista missiles. Hailstones are made of ice while ballista missiles are made of stone, and in Jerusalem they would be limestone. Hailstones of this magnitude are supernatural air-to-surface projectiles, while ballista stones are surface-to-surface man-made artillery shot by the Romans.[29] Furthermore Josephus wrote that after the initial stages of the assault the Romans blackened the ballista stones. Apparently when the stones were left white, the Jews were able to see them coming and could avoid their impact. So, according to Josephus, the Romans blackened the stones in order to inflict more damage.

As for the Jews, they at first watched the coming of the stone, for it was of a white colour, and could therefore not only be perceived by the great noise it made, but could be seen also before it came, by its brightness; accordingly, the watchmen that sat upon the towers gave them notice when the engine was let go, and the stone came from it, and cried out aloud, in their own country language, “the stone cometh”; so those that were in its way stood off, and threw themselves down upon the ground; by which means, and by their thus guarding themselves, the stone fell down and did them no harm. But the Romans contrived how to prevent that, by blacking the stone, who then could aim at them with success, when the stone was not discerned beforehand, as it had been till then; and so they destroyed many of them at one blow.[30]

Josephus’s description clearly establishes that in the effective and later use of the ballista stones by the Romans, the stones did not resemble white hailstones as Gentry maintains.[31] Therefore the only similarity between the hailstones in Revelation 16:21 and the Roman ballista stones is that they each weighed about one hundred pounds. This single point of similarity is insufficient to establish a correspondence between the yet-future bowl judgment and the Roman siege of Jerusalem.

A third problem in Gentry’s view of the hailstones is that verses 18–19 refer to a great earthquake that will split the city of Jerusalem into three parts. “And there were flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder; and there was a great earthquake, such as there had not been since man came to be upon the earth, so great an earthquake was it, and so mighty. And the great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell.” Since no earthquakes occurred during the time of the Jewish revolt, Gentry interprets this devastating, world-record earthquake figuratively as the division of Jerusalem “into three bickering factions” during the conquest of the city.[32] This again exposes Gentry’s inconsistent hermeneutic. In his view the earthquake is figurative in verses 18–19, but the hailstones in verse 21 are literal one-hundred-pound, white Roman ballista stones. Yet there is nothing in the context to signal this hermeneutical shift. For these reasons Gentry’s attempt to provide correspondences between the judgments of Revelation and the events of the Jewish War is unsuccessful.

Alleged Correspondence Of Time Frames

Gentry also cites three specific time frames in Revelation that he alleges are consistent with the time of Nero. These are in Revelation 9:5; 11:2; and 13:5–7.

Revelation 9:5. “And they were not permitted to kill anyone, but to torment for five months; and their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it stings a man.” This verse is part of the passage in verses 1–11 that predict a demonic invasion of the earth when the abyss is opened. The demons are said to be like locusts and scorpions. Gentry claims that verse 5 describes the five-month period from April through August A.D. 70 when Titus laid siege to Jerusalem.[33] Gentry says the locustlike creatures are not the Roman army but are demons who afflicted and possessed the Jewish people during the final siege of Jerusalem.[34] For biblical support of this view he cites Matthew 12:38–45,[35] and he concludes, “So here we have in Revelation a time period of five months that is of demonic character. The striking applicability of Revelation 9 to the five-month siege of Jerusalem by Titus is surely confirmatory of the identifying of the Revelational prophecies with the events of the Jewish War.”[36]

This view, however, has two weaknesses. First, Gentry points to the five months in verse 5 as the time of the Roman siege of Jerusalem from April through August A.D. 70, which according to Gentry’s calculations totaled 134 days.[37] However, in Revelation the apostle John employed a thirty-day-per-month calendar (42 months=1,260 days). Thus five months would be 150 days. Even assuming that Gentry’s dates for the official beginning and end of the siege are correct, the prophecy is off by at least sixteen days. Gentry’s time period for the siege is actually closer to four prophetic months (120 days) than five months (150 days), but in either case it is imprecise.

Second, there is no evidence from Josephus or anyone else that a great horde of demons was loosed from the abyss during the Roman siege of Jerusalem. Something of this magnitude would have undoubtedly been observable and would have been mentioned by Josephus. Gentry admits the strange silence of Josephus about this matter but points to the barbaric conduct of the Jews during the siege as evidence of demonic affliction.[38] The Jews resorted to the same barbaric conduct and atrocities in the past when under siege, however, with no record of demonic affliction during those times (2 Kings 6:24–33; Lam. 4:10). Gentry’s view of Revelation 9:5 is simply not supported by the evidence.[39]

Revelation 11:2. John wrote that the Gentiles “will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months.” Gentry says this time period was the Roman invasion and conquest of Israel and Jerusalem from “early spring, A.D. 67 to early September, A.D. 70.”[40] “And the fact is that it took almost exactly forty-two months for Rome to get into a position to destroy the Temple in the Jewish War of A.D. 67–70.”[41] There are two problems with this view.

First, Gentry admits that the Jewish war actually began in A.D. 66, and yet he says the forty-two-month period did not begin until the early spring of A.D. 67. Why omit all of A.D. 66? He says the answer is that “this period should not be considered a judgment against the Jews. .. because the Jewish forces actually (and mysteriously) gained the upper hand against the troops of the governor of Syria.”[42] However, there is nearly universal agreement that the First Jewish Revolt began in May 66,[43] as Josephus affirms. “Now this war began in the second year of the government of Florus, and the twelfth year of the reign of Nero.”[44] Since the war began in A.D. 66, one cannot arbitrarily move the date forward one year to achieve a predetermined outcome. Second, Gentry admits that the time frame is only close, or “almost” but not exact.[45] Therefore Revelation 11:2 does not refer to the Jewish War.

Revelation 13:5–7. For his third alleged time-frame correspondence, Gentry appeals to these verses, which read, “There was given to him a mouth speaking arrogant words and blasphemies, and authority to act for forty-two months was given to him. And he opened his mouth in blasphemies against God, to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle, that is, those who dwell in heaven. It was given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.”

Gentry contends that the “war” of the Beast against the saints in this passage depicts Nero’s persecution of Christianity.[46] Referring to the Beast’s persecution for forty-two months, Gentry alleges that “the Neronic persecution lasted just about that very length of time.”[47] He claims that the Neronic persecution against Christians began in the middle or late fall (November) of A.D. 64 and continued up to Nero’s death on June 9, A.D. 68.[48] There are two problems with this view. First, as noted by the emphasis in Gentry’s own statement, the time period he gives for the length of the Neronic persecution is not forty-two months (1,260 days). It is “just about” that length of time. This alleged time-frame correspondence with Revelation suffers from the same inexactness as the others. The specificity of the prophecy requires a literal, exact fulfillment. The best view is that this prophecy will be literally, precisely fulfilled in the end times during the forty-two-month reign of the Antichrist.[49]

The second flaw in Gentry’s view of Revelation 13:5–7 is that it militates against his own position on the date of Revelation. He states several times that Revelation had to be written sometime between November 64 (the beginning of the Neronic persecution) and the spring of 67 (Gentry’s date for the formal imperial engagement of the Jewish War).[50] He believes Revelation was written in A.D. 65–66 or the “mid-sixties.”[51] Yet he also states that Revelation 13:5–7 is a prophecy of the Neronic persecution of Christians that lasted from November 64 until the death of Nero. But if Revelation 13:5–7 is a prophecy of the Neronic persecution and its forty-two-month duration, how could Revelation be written after this event had already commenced? Revelation is described as a prophecy (1:3; 22:7), and Gentry agrees that Revelation is “a real prophecy.”[52] But how can Revelation be a prophecy of events that are “soon” to be fulfilled, as Gentry alleges, if some of the events in the book had begun to be fulfilled when the book was written?

If Gentry’s date of A.D. 65 or early 66 for Revelation is accepted, then the Neronic persecution of Christians would have been ongoing between two and fourteen months when Revelation was written. Gentry’s view of Revelation 13:5–7 and his A.D. 65–66 date for Revelation require that John “predicted” a forty-two-month period of time of which as much as one-third had already passed when he wrote. One could argue that John was simply predicting the duration of the persecution, not its beginning. However, it would seem strange to state the duration of a time period as a prediction when up to one-third of the time period had already passed.

Thus the preterist view that Revelation 1:7 predicted the “coming” of Christ in A.D. 70 and that other verses in Revelation prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans is untenable. Article three in this series will discuss the preterist view of the temple in Revelation 11:1–2.

Notes

1. Mark L. Hitchcock, “A Critique of the Preterist View of ‘Soon’ and ‘Near’ in Revelation,” Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (October–December 2006): 467–78.
2. Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation, rev. ed. (Atlanta: American Vision, 1998), 123. The preterist notion of a “cloud coming” of Christ in judgment in A.D. 70 is derived from Matthew 24:30. See David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Fort Worth, TX: Dominion, 1987), 64–67.
3. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 131–32 (italics his).
4. Ibid., 128.
5. Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 196.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Robert L. Thomas, “Theonomy and the Dating of Revelation,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 5 (1994): 192.
9. G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 26. Scholars disagree on the response of the nations in Revelation 1:7 to Christ’s coming. In keeping with the Old Testament redemption context of Zechariah 12, Beale says the response in Revelation 1:7 is positive grief and repentance (ibid., 197). Others, such as Thomas, say the mourning is the grief and remorse of the nations over the severity of their impending judgment in conjunction with Christ’s return (Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1–7: An Exegetical Commentary [Chicago: Moody, 1992], 78–79).
10. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 196.
11. Merrill F. Unger, Zechariah: Prophet of God’s Glory (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1963), 207.
12. Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., The Beast of Revelation, rev. ed. (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2002), 124.
13. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 127–31.
14. Ibid., lvi.
15. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 26.
16. Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 125.
17. Ibid.
18. Thomas Ice, “Preterist ‘Time Texts,’ ” in The End Times Controversy, ed. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2003), 98–99.
19. Thomas, Revelation 1–7: An Exegetical Commentary, 20.
20. Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 126.
21. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 256.
22. Ibid., 238–41.
23. Ibid., 245.
24. Larry Spargimino, “How Preterists Misuse History to Advance Their View of Prophecy,” in The End Times Controversy, 214–15.
25. Josephus, The Jewish War 3.10.9; 4.7.5–6; 6.8.5 (Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 245).
26. Ibid., 245–46.
27. Ibid., 246.
28. Josephus, The Jewish War 3.7.9; 5.6.3.
29. Gordon Franz, “Was ‘Babylon’ Destroyed When Jerusalem Fell in A.D. 70?” in The End Times Controversy, 234.
30. Josephus, The Jewish War 5.6.3.
31. Spargimino, “How Preterists Misuse History to Advance Their View of Prophecy,” 216.
32. Kenneth L. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), 412. Franz states that only three earthquakes have been documented in first-century Israel: one in conjunction with the death and resurrection of Jesus (Matt. 27:51–54; 28:2); one in A.D. 33 that caused slight damage to the temple (this could be the earthquake described in Matt. 27:51–54 if one holds to an A.D. 33 date for the death of Christ); and one in A.D. 48 (“Was ‘Babylon’ Destroyed When Jerusalem Fell in A.D. 70?” 232).
33. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 248.
34. Ibid., 247.
35. Ibid.
36. Ibid., 250.
37. Ibid., 248.
38. Ibid., 248–49.
39. Spargimino, “How Preterists Misuse History to Advance Their View of Prophecy,” 206–11.
40. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 253.
41. Ibid., 250 (italics added).
42. Ibid., 251.
43. Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.–A.D. 135), rev. and ed. Geza Vermes and Fergus Millar (Edinburgh: Clark, 1973), 1:485–513. Schürer also dates the official end of the Jewish War in April A.D. 73 with the fall of Masada.
44. Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews 20.11.1.
45. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 251.
46. Ibid., 254.
47. Ibid. (italics added). Both Revelation 11:1–2 and 13:5–7 refer to a forty-two-month period. Gentry views these as two different periods based on his notion that 11:1–2 speaks of persecution of Jews, whereas 13:5–7 mentions persecution of the “saints,” who he says are Christians (ibid., 253–54). He does not say why the “saints” could not also be a reference to Jewish believers (see Dan. 7:21–22, 25, 27).
48. Ibid., 254.
49. The repeated mention of forty-two months or 1,260 days in Revelation harks back to Daniel 9:27 and the last half of Daniel’s seventieth week.
50. Gentry, The Beast of Revelation, 245.
51. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 256, 336.
52. Ibid., 145.