As I continue our series dealing with preterism (i.e., the belief that prophecy was fulfilled in the past), we are now dealing with why they believe that the Book of Revelation was primarily fulfilled in the first century. I will pick-up with our discussion of the theme verse of Revelation which reads as follows: "Behold, He is coming 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. Even so. Amen" (Rev. 1:7). Preterists believe that this passage supports an A.D. 70 fulfillment of Revelation.

"John states his theme in his introduction at Revelation 1:7," claims Dr. Gentry, "just after he declares the nearness of the events (1:1,3), a theme that is directly relevant to the first-century circumstances."1 Not surprisingly, Dr. Gentry believes that "in its contextual setting verse 7 points to the destruction of Jerusalem and her temple in A.D 70."² Preterists do not believe that this verse speaks of Christ’s Second Coming as the church has historically understood this passage, instead they see it as another reference to the A.D. 70 destruction. Thus, in usual fashion, preterists turn the perspective of Revelation 1:7 from a global to a local perspective, from a Gentile to a Jewish outlook, and from a future to a past fulfillment. All these are reversals of its actual meaning.

In last month’s article I dealt with all of Revelation 1:7 except the part that deals with Christ coming on the clouds. That will be my topic in this issue. Dr. Gentry attempts a most strained interpretation when he calls this "a providential coming of Christ in historical judgments upon men."³ He provides the following forced explanation:

Dr. Gentry cites the following passages as examples: 2 Sam. 22:8,10; Ps. 18:7-15; 68:4,33; 97:2-3, 9; 104:3; Isa. 13:9; 19:1; 26:21; 30:27; Joel 2:1,2; Mic. 1:3; Nah. 1:2ff; Zeph. 1:14,15. He then concludes, "The New Testament picks up this apocalyptic judgment imagery when it speaks of Christ’s coming in clouds of judgment during history."⁵

There are many problems with Dr. Gentry’s declaration that Revelation 1:7 is the same as the Old Testament passages he cites. First, he cites no reasons from the context of Revelation 1:7 why it should be understood as a parallel to these Old Testament passages. He just declares them to be similar. Dr. Robert Thomas has made the following insightful observation:

Second, some of those Old Testament passages most likely are speaking of Christ’s second coming. Dr. Gentry often assumes that because they are in the Old Testament they must have already been fulfilled. Such is often not the case. I believe that Isaiah 26:21; 30:27; Joel 2:1,2 and Zephaniah 1:14-15 are second coming contexts. This means that these passages also look for a future, not a past fulfillment. Nahum 1:2ff, although less clear, could also refer to a future time.

Third, I do not think that a single one of the Old Testament passages cited by Dr. Gentry parallels Revelation 1:7. As you examine them, they describe the Lord as "riding" upon a cloud in judgment against the Lord’s enemies, much as Dr. Gentry has said. However, when compared to Revelation 1:7, there are too many differences. As Dr. Thomas notes above, Revelation 1:7 speaks of a coming to rescue someone, while those Old Testament references are all descriptive of judgment. Revelation 1:7 provides a different atmosphere than we see in the Old Testament passages. Christ’s coming in Revelation 1:7, and in its parallel passage Matthew 24:30, builds upon the Old Testament fact that the Lord established His identity in cloud comings. But, in these passages we have a description of the Lord returning to the earth. This is not found in the Old Testament citations noted by Dr. Gentry. There are too many differences between the two concepts as noted by Philip Edgcumbe Hughes:

Fourth, the preterist view of Revelation 1:7 confuses a global event for a local event. Dr. Thomas has noted in the following:

Fifth, even if there were the types of parallels between the cloud comings of the Old Testament and the text of Revelation 1:7, which I do not believe there are as Dr. Gentry has suggested, it would be meaningless because of what happened at Christ’s ascension as described in Acts 1:9-11. Notice what it says,

The whole focus of Christ’s cloud coming after this event is defined by the ascension. The next time Christ comes on the clouds, it is clearly said here to be bodily, personal, and coming with clouds. This is what Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 1:7 refers to. All of the New Testament, because of this event, looks to Christ’s return in this way. Thus, any future cloud coming from this point on would have to be seen in light of this glorious promise.

Finally, to take Dr. Gentry’s preterist interpretation of Revelation 1:7 creates many more problems with the rest of the Book of Revelation. This has been most clearly noted by Dr. Thomas:

The preterist interpretation of Revelation 1:7 in relationship to Christ’s coming is necessary if their view that Revelation was fulfilled in the first century. However, the torturous interpretation of otherwise plain and clear language must be distorted beyond clear recognition in order to attempt such a devious view. When Revelation 1:7 is combined with Revelation 19:11-21, it is more than clear that such a reference is of a global, future, bodily and literal return of Jesus the Messiah from heaven to planet earth. While the preterist notion that this passage had to be fulfilled in the first century is required of their view, they are not able to provide actual exegetical support for such a position. When examined in the light of letting Scripture interpret Scripture, it becomes most clear that these are yet future events. Events that I and like-minded believers look for. "Come quickly, Lord Jesus! Come!" Maranatha!