# Gentry on Revelation



## bookslover (Jul 26, 2021)

Per the website of his publisher, Tolle Lege, Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.'s commentary on the Book of Revelation - a work he has been researching and writing for at least the last 20 years - is expected to be published soon, probably by the end of 2021. It is to be a two-volume work.

As he's post-mil, I probably won't agree with a lot of it, but it should be an interesting read, nonetheless.

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 1


----------



## Ed Walsh (Jul 26, 2021)

bookslover said:


> Per the website of his publisher, Tolle Lege, Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.'s commentary on the Book of Revelation - a work he has been researching and writing for at least the last 20 years - is expected to be published soon, probably by the end of 2021.


In my thread, *Is the Book of Revelation Still a Closed Book?* I said the following:

*"I think Revelation is still a closed book for the most part. Parts for the Revelation remind me of Daniel 11 and 12, which were totally hidden from Daniel's contemporaries in the 6th-century bc. Until that is, history revealed the meaning to the faithful and wise Jews during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanies after 175± BC."*​
I've thought our eschatology should probably be based on the other 65 books of the Bible and not so much on the Revelation. The church has yet to reach a consensus on a method of interpretation of the Book of Revelation. Let's take a wait-and-see policy as we continue to study it. I think time is going to open it up more than just study. When I posted this before, I get very little response. Does anybody agree with me? Does everybody disagree with me? I'd like to know.

To help you understand my question, below is a response I got and my answer.

@arapahoepark said:
Depends on whether or not you think it refers to events past, present and/or future. Even a preterist like myself still wonders how much of the latter portion is fulfilled. I.e. the millennium (is it present or future?)
@Ed Walsh
That's kinda what I mean, Trent. There are widely different views of the Revelation. Is that because some interpretations are simply off the wall? Or is it because it is not yet time for it to be unsealed, and therefore everyone's interpretation will fall short?

Still, others responded that they were quite sure of their interpretation and that others were incorrect. I suppose logically, some people may be correct, but I still think that supports my view that the church has reached no consensus as to the proper interpretation. The discussion did not go very far as I only got six responses, and one of them is mine.

Maybe I should post a poll on the subject.

(as I am about to press the Post reply button, I now realize that I have gotten off the original post's subject. If you think this is not the place for my question, don't answer it here. Thanks)


----------



## B.L. (Jul 26, 2021)

bookslover said:


> Per the website of his publisher, Tolle Lege, Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.'s commentary on the Book of Revelation - a work he has been researching and writing for at least the last 20 years - is expected to be published soon, probably by the end of 2021. It is to be a two-volume work.
> 
> As he's post-mil, I probably won't agree with a lot of it, but it should be an interesting read, nonetheless.



Gentry is a partial-preterist as well, no? Regardless, I too think it should be an interesting read.


----------



## Phil D. (Jul 26, 2021)

B.L. said:


> Gentry is a partial-preterist as well, no?


I would probably classify Gentry as being about as full preterist as possible without outright denying the Second Coming is (or could be) still in the future.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Jul 26, 2021)

Phil D. said:


> I would probably classify Gentry as being about as full preterist as possible without outright denying the Second Coming is (or could be) still in the future.



I thought Demar had that honor. I've asked Demar several times on FB will he condemn full preterism. No answer. Demar also promotes guys like Jordan. Gentry does not. Mind you, I am anti-preterist so I am not defending Gentry per se.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## arapahoepark (Jul 26, 2021)

Phil D. said:


> I would probably classify Gentry as being about as full preterist as possible without outright denying the Second Coming is (or could be) still in the future.





BayouHuguenot said:


> I thought Demar had that honor. I've asked Demar several times on FB will he condemn full preterism. No answer. Demar also promotes guys like Jordan. Gentry does not. Mind you, I am anti-preterist so I am not defending Gentry per se.


I agree with Demar.

Gentry hates full Preterism with a passion! He also believes that at Matt. 24:36 is when Christ talks of his second coming/last judgment. Demar, and many earlier 19th Century Preterists do not.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jul 26, 2021)

Phil D. said:


> I would probably classify Gentry as being about as full preterist as possible without outright denying the Second Coming is (or could be) still in the future.



Ken Gentry wrote a chapter in an edited collection against hyper-preterism. I agree with Jacob's assessment that that honour belongs to Gary DeMar.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Jul 26, 2021)

For all of my criticisms against Gentry, he never went that route. Demar is the one who looks like he is on the fence.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Phil D. (Jul 26, 2021)

I haven't read everything Gentry has written, so I may have gotten a false impression from certain things I have seen him say. But I will certainly defer to those better versed on his full corpus.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## bookslover (Jul 26, 2021)

Gentry is 71 this year, so he's probably really glad he finally got it written and (about to be) published.

Reactions: Like 2


----------

