Problem: Critics argue that the “firmament” described in Genesis 1:6 refers to a covering over the Earth which is “strong as a molten mirror” (Job 37:18) or “like a curtain” (Is. 40:22). They argue that the Jews believed the sky was hard like iron, and God lived above this solid covering. Likewise, critics claim that the Jews believed that the lower story was Sheol or hell. However, since we have been to outer space and deep within the Earth’s crust, we now know that these are just pre-scientific myths.
Continue reading →

Problem: The Bible certainly teaches creation out of nothing. Consider some scholarly commentary on the opening verse of Genesis:
Continue reading →

Problems: Genesis 1:1 states that God created “the heavens and the Earth.” However, the “heavens” usually refers to the sky in Hebrew—not the entirety of the physical universe.
Continue reading →

Problem: John writes, “Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city. 15 Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying” (Rev. 22:14-15). Lordship theologians use this verse to claim that sinful, rebellious people will not enter into heaven. Is this the case?
Continue reading →

Problem: Amillennials often argue that premillennials can’t agree with each other, and premillennial theology leads to contradictory conclusions. For instance, the book of Ezekiel states that Gog and Magog rebel against God before the millennium (Ezek. 38), but John tells us that they rebel after the millennium (Rev. 20:8). Amillennials argue that this shows that the premillennial perspective is contradictory at worst, or confused at best. Is this the case?
Continue reading →

Problem: John writes,

(Rev. 20:4-5) Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.
Continue reading →

Problem: Because amillennials and postmillennials believe that we are currently in the millennium as Christians, it follows necessarily that Satan is currently bound. Postmillennial Kenneth Gentry writes,

Christ accomplished Satan’s binding judicially in the first century; the binding increasingly constricts Satan throughout the Christian era (i.e., the ‘one thousand years’), except for a brief period just prior to the Second Advent (Rev. 20:2-3, 7-9). This binding does not result in the total inactivity of Satan; rather, it restrains his power by Christ’s.[1]
Likewise, amillennial G.K. Beale writes,

The binding was probably inaugurated during Christ’s ministry, which is more the focus of texts such as Matt. 12:29; Mark 3:27; and Luke 10:17-19. Satan’s binding was climactically put in motion immediately after Christ’s resurrection, and it lasts throughout most of the age between Christ’s first and second comings.[2]
Continue reading →

Problem: Most commentators identify these seven kings with Roman Emperors. However, Osborne writes that this “is incredibly difficult.”[1] Consider the list of Roman Emperors below:[2]

Continue reading →

Problem: Some commentators argue vehemently that John’s mention of the “seven hills” (Rev. 17:9 NIV) are a clear allusion to Rome. Osborne writes, “At the outset, the angel identifies the seven heads with “seven mountains,” a phrase often used for Rome in the ancient world because it was built on seven hills (see Cicero, Att. 6.5; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.66–67; et al.; see Swete 1911: 220 for others). The city began with an amalgamation of groups living on the seven hills (Aventine, Caelian, Capitoline, Equiline, Palatine, Quirinal, Viminal), and during Domitian’s reign a festival (the Septimontium) celebrated it.”[1] Robert Mounce writes, “There is little doubt that a first-century reader would understand this reference in any way other than as a reference to Rome, the city built upon seven hills.”[2] Is this the imagery being used here?
Continue reading →

Problem: Commentators wonder how we should render this section of Revelation. Should we render this section in this way?

NASB: “On her forehead a name was written, a mystery, ‘Babylon the Great.’”

ESV: “On her forehead was written a name of mystery: ‘Babylon the great.’”

NLT: “A mysterious name was written on her forehead: ‘Babylon the Great.’”

Or should it be translated as the NIV renders it?

NIV: “This title was written on her forehead: ‘Mystery Babylon the Great.’”

Is “Mystery Babylon” the title? Or is the title a mystery now revealed as Babylon? Moreover, what does this title mean?
Continue reading →

Problem: Preterist interpreters argue that the “huge hailstones, about one hundred pounds each” (Rev. 16:21) were actually the rocks were catapulted over the walls of Jerusalem in AD 70. Preterist Kenneth Gentry writes,

John is presenting the dramatic covenant lawsuit against Israel for her adultery. The punishment in God’s law for adultery is death (Lev. 20:10), which in biblical law is by stoning. Thus, we witness enormous hailstones raining down on Jerusalem in Revelation 16:21: ‘From the sky huge hailstones of about a hundred pounds [Gk. talantiaia, talent, kjv] each fell upon men. And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.’ Josephus records its historical fulfillment in the Roman catapulting of Jerusalem.[1]
Gentry goes on to cite Josephus Jewish Wars, which states:

Now the stones that were cast were of the weight of a talent, and were carried two furlongs and further. The blow they gave was no way to be sustained, not only by those that stood first in the way, but by those that were beyond them for a great space. As for the Jews, they at first watched the coming of the stone, for it was of a white color. (Jewish Wars 5.6.3)
Does this citation from Josephus support a Preterist reading of Revelation?
Continue reading →