Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Johnie Fredman's avatar

I appreciate you and the work you do. I have many friends who, like you, believe Revelation is about Jerusalem. I respect your opinion but still believe Rome fits the overall book far better than Jerusalem. Have you read "Unlocking Revelation" by Stafford North? It is a short, easy-to-read book that I believe provides a clear explanation of Revelation. Revelation is one of my favorite books and I look forward to continuing to explore it, and maybe some time my opinion will change (won't be the first time). So far though, while there are things that do fit Jerusalem well, there are other things that do not fit that view at all. Rome is still the best understanding to me. Thanks for sharing your viewpoint though.

Expand full comment
David Nestor's avatar

Your take on Revelation is spot-on. I would add that Jim McGuiggan's commentary on Revelation is still the best I have ever read on this book (I have had up to 20-21 different commentaries and studies on Revelation). Also, Richard Rogers' study on the Destruction of Jerusalem is the best on that subject I have ever used. It handles Matthew 23-25 admirably, along with Mark 13 and Luke 21 (with part of Luke 17). The church of Christ has a traditional take on Matthew 24 that is just ridiculous; saying half of it is the D of J and the second half is the end of time. It just won't work. Stafford North has some good material as well, as pointed out by Johnie Fredman. Revelation is just not as complicated as it's been made to be. Oh, and a good study of OT judgment passages (addressed by Rogers) will help considerably.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts