Introduction
Gary D. Long, a committed five-point Calvinist, authored the excellent book Definite Atonement. His niche was guiding readers away from the exegetical and logical inconsistencies of four-point or “four-and-a-half-point” Calvinist (Amyraldian) perspectives toward the biblical, five-point view of definite atonement. That’s precisely how his writings influenced me as a young theological student at The Master’s College in 1991. Over the years, God has shaped my own calling, which seems to be helping partial preterists recognize the exegetical and logical flaws in their eschatology and leading them to the biblical position of full preterism. Ultimately, both Amyraldian and partial preterist views devolve into man-pleasing or man-fearing systems riddled with inconsistencies. Worse still, they portray a Christ who failed to accomplish (1) what He promised—both in His high priestly work on the cross and at His parousia—and (2) when He said He would accomplish it. Christ came to take away “the [spiritual] death” that came through Adam so that believing in him we will “never die” which of course has nothing to do with ending biological death for believers. These are not minor theological missteps; they strike at the heart of Christ’s mission and victory!
At this juncture, the Lord has positioned me—“the Pit Bull of Preterism”—to challenge partial preterist Doug Wilson and one of his protégés, Reformed Pastor Andrew Isker, who refers to Doug as his “mentor.” We are pressing them to identify which text(s) support the creedal assertion that the Bible teaches a future physical de-creation and re-creation of planet Earth. Doug Wilson has already conceded that passages like Isaiah 65, 2 Peter 3, and Revelation 21 refer to the passing of the old covenant age and the arrival of the new covenant in AD 70. Desperate to find a text aligning with his hyper-creedal eschatology, Doug has leaned heavily on Hebrews 1:10–12 as his supposed proof. However, Don Preston and I have thoroughly addressed this, dedicating multiple shows to demonstrating that Hebrews 1:10–12 and Psalm 102 describe the same old covenant de-creation and the formation of a new covenant people as seen in the other passages Doug acknowledges were fulfilled in AD 70.
In my last article, I highlighted a podcast where partial preterist Andrew Isker, alongside Joel Webbon, interpreted the “heavens” and “earth” of Hebrews 1:10–12—described as being “rolled up and changed”—as the old covenant creation ending in AD 70, giving way to the new covenant creation. This concession leaves partial preterism clinging to just onetext—Revelation 20:11—as their sole support for a future physical, planetary de-creation and re-creation. I pointed out this dilemma to Mr. Isker on X, asking how the de-creation event of the “heaven and earth” fleeing in Revelation 20:11 (which he claims is physical and future) differs from the old covenant “heaven and earth” passing away in Revelation 21:1 and Hebrews 1:10–12, both fulfilled in AD 70. His response? A cowardly, “I’m not going to debate this with you.”
I’ve also pressed Andrew on X and in my previous article to reveal the source of his preterist interpretation of Hebrews 1:10–12. Did he glean it from our critique of his mentor, Doug Wilson? Did he uncover it in some partial preterist work I’ve missed in my 30 years of study? Or did he devise it independently? This, too, remains unanswered. It’s a familiar pattern among partial preterists like Kenneth Gentry, who label us “heretics” while quietly adopting our exegesis of key eschatological texts—without citation or acknowledgment. For instance, James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry now argue that the resurrection in Daniel 12:2 was fulfilled spiritually in AD 70, yet they don’t credit full preterists. Similarly, which partial preterist before us claimed that “all Israel” in Romans 11 was “saved” in AD 70? If such sources exist, I’d love to see them documented. It seems Andrew Isker may be following the same unethical and evasive playbook as Gentry, who acts as though he’s above answering questions or debating the implications of his preterist readings of texts like Daniel 12:2.
Partial Preterism is on Life Support Clinging Desperately to ONE Text (Rev. 20:11)
If your eschatological system hinges on a single text—Revelation 20:11—to align with the creeds, you’re not teaching biblical doctrine; you’re peddling an unbiblical philosophy. This is the precarious state of partial preterism today. When a theological framework rests on such a fragile foundation, it’s time to reconsider its fidelity to Scripture and its service to God’s people.
Neither Jesus nor any Old Testament or New Testament writer predicted the end of the physical planet or world history, as is often assumed by creedal statements. When we examine the works of influential theologians within the Reformed and evangelical communities, we find a full preterist interpretation of nearly every eschatological de-creation prophecy in the Bible.
Scholars including John Owen, John Locke, John Lightfoot, John Brown, R.C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, Kenneth Gentry, James Jordan, Peter Leithart, Keith Mathison, Crispin H.T. Fletcher-Louis, Hank Hanegraaff, and N.T. Wright (to name just a few) interpret the passing away of “heaven and earth” (cf. Matt. 5:17–18; 24:3, 29, 35; 1 Cor. 7:31; II Peter 3; I Jn. 2:17–18; Rev. 21:1) as referring to the destruction of the temple or the civil and religious worlds of men—Jewish or Gentile. They argue that the rulers of the old covenant system or world, along with the temple, were symbolized by the “sun, moon, and stars” of the “heaven and earth” that perished in AD 70. See the following works:
- John Owen, The Works of John Owen, 16 vols. (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965–68), 9:134–135.
- John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica: Matthew – 1 Corinthians, 4 vols. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, [1859], 1989), 3:452, 454.
- John Brown, Discourses and Sayings of our Lord, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, [1852] 1990), 1:170.
- John Locke, The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke: A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St Paul Volume 2, (NY: Oxford University Press, 1987), 617–618.
- R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998).
- Kenneth Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion (Tyler TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), 363–365.
- Kenneth Gentry (contributing author), Four Views on the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998), 89.
- Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (Powder Springs: GA, 1999), 68–74, 141–154, 191–192.
- James B. Jordan, Through New Eyes Developing a Biblical View of the World (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, 1998), 269–279.
- Crispin H.T. Fletcher-Louis (contributing author) Eschatology in Bible & Theology (Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1997), 145–169.
- Peter J. Leithart, The Promise of His Appearing: An Exposition of Second Peter (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2004).
- Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1999), 114, 157–158.
- N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), 345–346.
- N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), 645, n.42.
- Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2007), 84–86.
As I cover in my books and online articles, John Lightfoot even correctly understood the “creation” “groaning” in Romans 8 as the “creation of men” (as in the “creation” that was preached to Cols. 1:5-6, 23) and not referring to any planetary change.
| Partial Preterism concedes every de-creation or “heavens and earth” passage to AD 70 except for ONE – Revelation 20:11 | |
| 1). Matthew 5:17-18 | Old Covenant World or H&E passed away in AD 70 |
| 2). Matthew 24:3, 29, 35 | Old Covenant World or H&E passed away in AD 70 |
| 3). Acts 2:20-21 | Old Covenant World passed away in AD 70 |
| 4). Romans 8:18-23YLT (John Lightfoot – creation of men groaning not the planet & liberation “about to be” fulfilled – G. DeMar) | Not the planet but liberation of the “creation of men” “about to be” fulfilled in AD 70 |
| 5). 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 | Old Covenant World passed away in AD 70 |
| 6). 2 Peter 3 | Old Covenant World or H&E passed away in AD 70 |
| 7). Hebrews 1:10-12 (Andrew Isker) | Old Covenant World or H&E passed away in AD 70 |
| 8). 1 John 2:17-18 | Old Covenant World passed away in AD 70 |
| 9). Revelation 6:14-17 | Old Covenant World passed away in AD 70 |
| 10). Revelation 16:20 | Old Covenant World passed away in AD 70 |
| 11). Revelation 21:1 | Old Covenant World or H&E passed away in AD 70 |
While these interpretations are individually considered “orthodox,” full preterists synthesize them into a cohesive biblical theology: the Bible is not about the end of world history, but rather the end of a covenant world—and the beginning of another. The de-creation of old covenant Israel was a transition to the new covenant “heavens and earth” established in Christ.
The following seven exegetical, orthodox, and historical points demonstrate that the millennium was roughly a forty years second exodus period from AD 27 – AD 67 and therefore the “heavens and earth” of Revelation 20:11 are referring to the old covenant creation and not the planet earth:
(1) Imminence in Revelation
Orthodox partial preterism informs us that the book of Revelation is about things which were past, present, and “about to be” fulfilled in John’s day (Rev. 1:19, YLT). If Revelation 20 is to be understood within these inspired parameters, then its millennial period must also conclude within that time frame. Since the millennium was still future at the time John wrote, its end must fall within the scope of things that were “about to be” fulfilled.
As amillennialists such as Vern Poythress and Simon Kistemaker (also contributors to The Reformation Study Bible) have pointed out in their works, if the imminent time texts in Revelation 1:1 and 22:20 are to be taken literally as referring to AD 70, and if they function as literary bookends, then the millennium of Revelation 20 must also have been fulfilled by AD 70. They of course agree with us on that point.
Therefore, both views combined teach that the end of the millennium resurrection and judgment of the dead were fulfilled “shortly” in AD 70. Given that this aligns with both amillennial and partial preterist views, how could such a conclusion be considered heterodox?
(2) The Symbolic Nature of the Thousand Years
The thousand years in Revelation does not have to denote an extended chronological period, as G.K. Beale, the New Testament editor of The Reformation Study Bible and a leading amillennialist, notes in his commentary on Revelation. Some Rabbinic interpretations even understood it as referring to a forty-year period:
“The primary point of the thousand years is probably not a figurative reference to a long time…”[1]
Similarly, Collin Brown observes that a strong case can be made that, in certain Old Testament contexts, the Hebrew word elep (translated as “thousand”) does not necessarily indicate a literal 1,000 but rather a smaller unit:
“elep [the Hebrew for thousand] does not literally mean a thousand but is a term for a considerably smaller unit…”[2]
In biblical numerology, the number 1,000 symbolizes fullness or completion, not necessarily an exact measurement of time. For example, a “thousand” in Scripture is often analogous to one day, a watch in the night, or an indefinite period (Ps. 90:4; 2 Pet. 3:8). Context determines whether it represents a brief era or eternity.
Therefore, the thousand-year millennium can be a symbolic depiction of a relatively short period of time – eg. the second exodus forty-year generation period.
(3) Rabbinic Typology of a Forty-Year Transitional Period (Historical Context Argument)
It has also been acknowledged by Reformed theologians such as Beale that many Rabbis believed that the period of Messiah would serve as a transitional phase between “this age” (old covenant) and “the age to come” (new covenant). Certain Rabbis, such as R. Adiba, interpreted this transition as a forty-year period, based upon how long the Israelites were in the wilderness before inheriting the land. This type/anti-type understanding is developed for us in the book of Hebrews:
- “So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief. Therefore while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it” (Heb. 3:19–4:1).
- “Not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day [of sabbath rest / inheritance / salvation discussed in chapters 3-4] drawing near” (Heb. 10:25).
- “But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem” (Heb. 12:22).
- “For we have no permanent city here, but we are longing for the city [Mount Zion / the heavenly Jerusalem] which is soon to be ours” (Heb. 13:14 Weymouth New Testament).
As Dr. A. Cohen observed:
“Many Rabbis believed that the period of the Messiah was to be a transitionary stage between this world [age] and the word [age] to come, and opinions differed on the time of its duration. ‘How long will the days of the Messiah last? R. Akib said, Forty years, as long as the Israelites were in the wilderness.”[3]
As I have noted in my books and articles, Reformed partial preterists such as Joel McDurmon and Gary DeMar affirm that Jesus and Paul referred to “this age” as the old covenant era, with “the last days” marking the transition from the old to the new (AD 30–70). Doug Wilson believes the “end of the age” “gathering” in Matthew 24:3, 31 is referring to Christ coming at the end of the old covenant age and spiritually gathering His saints into His kingdom and continues to do so. However, Jesus has already told us what the “gathering” at the “end of the age” was in Matthew 13 and it was the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 event. Doug is not available for comment or debate – no surprise there.
Similarly, amillennialists teach that the millennium of Revelation 20 corresponds to the period between the two ages of the New Testament of “this age” and the “age to come.” Given these mutually accepted premises, it logically follows that the millennium represents a forty-year period from the Cross to AD 70, marking the full transition from the old covenant age—which was passing away and ready to vanish—to the new covenant age.
(4) Recapitulation in Revelation
Reformed postmillennial partial preterists such as Kenneth Gentry, Doug Wilson, Andrew Isker and James Jordan argue that Revelation 1–19 and 21–22 were fulfilled by AD 70, including a spiritual resurrection, judgment, and the arrival of the new heavens and new earth.
At the same time, amillennialists like Simon Kistemaker and Robert Strimple affirm that Revelation 20:5–15 recapitulates the same judgment and consummation scenes depicted throughout the book of Revelation.
If both positions are true and orthodox (and they are), this means that the millennium must fall within the timeframe leading up to AD 70, concluding with the destruction of Jerusalem—an event that signaled the full arrival of the new covenant age. The following table illustrates how the themes of persecution, judgment, and new creation in Revelation 20 align with those found throughout Revelation 1–19 and 21–22:
|
Revelation 1–19 & 21–22 (Partial Preterists: AD 70) |
Revelation 20
(Amillennialists: Chapters 1-19; 21-22 Describe Same Judgment as chapter 20) |
| Past persecution with more to come; martyrs awaiting vindication (Rev. 6, 12) | Ongoing persecution: Satan will be loosed for “a little while” |
| Future persecution lasting for “a little while”; Satan has “a little while” longer (Rev. 6, 12). | Satan is released for a final “little while” before judgment |
| Cosmic upheaval: “Every mountain and island were removed,” “every island fled (Greek pheugo),” and “the first heaven and earth passed away” (Rev. 6, 16, 21–22) | Heaven and earth “fled” (pheugo), implying the arrival of the new creation (Rev. 21–22) |
| Judgment of the dead (Rev. 11) | Judgment of the dead |
| The last-days war of Ezekiel 38–39 fulfilled (Rev. 16, 19) | The last-days war of Ezekiel 38–39 fulfilled |
| Enemies of the Church (beast, harlot, false prophet) cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 17, 19) | Satan cast into the lake of fire; final crushing of the serpent (Rom. 16:20; Gen. 3:15) |
Therefore, since full preterists embrace both Reformed and historically orthodox interpretations of Revelation—affirming that the end-of-the-millennium resurrection and judgment occurred in AD 70—why should agreeing with both orthodox and reasonable positions be considered heretical?
(5) Is Revelation 20 an Isolated Event?
The “Already-and-Not-Yet,” the “This Age and the Age to Come,” and the “Last Days” Millennial Period
In critiquing premillennialism, which often isolates Revelation 20 from the rest of the New Testament, amillennialists and many postmillennialists argue that Revelation 20 falls within the “already and not yet” framework of the last days. This transition period is seen in the Parable of the Wheat and Tares (Matt. 13:24–30) and the eschatological discourse in Matthew 24–25.
However, as established earlier, it is orthodox to believe that the last days ended with the old covenant age in AD 70 and that the harvest, gathering, and coming of Christ described in Matthew 13 and 24–25 were fulfilled at that time.
Therefore, since the millennial period represents the transition between “this age” (old covenant) and “the age to come” (new covenant)—spanning AD 30–70—then the end of the millennium, including the resurrection and judgment of the dead, coincided with the passing of the old covenant age in AD 70.
Why, then, would agreeing with both “orthodox” and scripturally consistent views label full preterists as heretical?
(6) The Second Coming in Matthew 24–25 Ends the Millennium of Revelation 20
If the following points hold true:
- The coming of Christ in Matthew 24–25 refers to the AD 70 judgment (as partial preterists assert),
- John’s version of Matthew 24–25 is the book of Revelation,
- Matthew 24:27–25:31 describes the singular end-of-the-age event involving Christ’s second coming, judgment, and resurrection (as upheld in creeds and confessions),
Then the Reformed community has some explaining to do, as these views collectively support the “this generation” forty-year millennial framework of full preterism.
| Matthew 24–25 | Revelation 20:5–15 |
| (1) Resurrection & Judgment (Matt. 24:30–31; 25:31–46; cf. Matt. 13:39–43; Dan. 12:2–3) | (1) Resurrection & Judgment (Rev. 20:5–15) |
| (2) De-creation of heaven & earth (Matt. 24:29, 35; cf. Matt. 5:17–18) | (2) Heaven & earth flee (Rev. 20:11; cf. Rev. 6:14; 21:1) |
| (3) Christ enthroned as Judge (Matt. 25:31) | (3) God enthroned as Judge (Rev. 20:11) |
| (4) Eternal punishment for wicked & devil (Matt. 25:41–46) | (4) Same judgment (Rev. 20:10, 14–15) |
This parallelism suggests that the second coming in Matthew 24–25 coincides with the end of the millennium in Revelation 20—both fulfilled in AD 70.
(7) The Analogy of Faith: Daniel 12 and Revelation 20
If the following are true:
- The judgment and resurrection in Daniel 12:1–4, 13 were fulfilled by AD 70 (as Kenneth Gentry and James Jordan propose),
- Daniel 12:1–4, 13 is the fulfillment of and parallels with Revelation 20:5–15 (as classic amillennialists teach),
Then the Reformed tradition again supports a “this generation” forty-year millennial view central to full preterism. This is especially true since partial preterism through James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry are teaching that the judgment, tribulation and resurrection of Daniel 12 was fulfilled at the “appointed time of the end” of AD 70 (which ends the millennium of Rev. 20):
| Daniel 12:1–2, 4LXX | Revelation 20:5–15 |
| (1) Names in the book delivered from condemnation
(Dan. 12:1–2) |
(1) Names in the book spared from the lake of fire
(Rev. 20:12–15) |
| (2) Resurrection & judgment of the dead (Dan. 12:1–2). This was the ONE “appointed time of the end” judgment and resurrection of v. 4LXX | (2) Resurrection & judgment of the dead (Rev. 20:5–15). This was the ONE “appointed time of the end” judgment and resurrection of Dan. 12:4LXX |
Why the Full Preterist View Holds
Therefore, given the evidence presented above, the full preterist millennial view (AD 27–67) is consistent with:
- Revelation’s themes of imminence and recapitulation.
- “Orthodox” teachings within Reformed circles.
- The analogy of Scripture—interpreting Scripture with Scripture.
- Historical Jewish thought, where Rabbis envisioned a 40-year Messianic transition between two ages.
This exegetically sound and historically supported view challenges claims that full preterism is unorthodox. Selah.
Revelation 20 doesn’t depict a biological corpse resurrection (the futurist belief), but rather focuses on souls being released from Hades—either entering God’s presence or facing eternal punishment (Rev. 20:12–15). This spiritual resurrection aligns with Jewish ideas concerning the resurrection prior to the New Testament during Jesus’ time, and with the kind of spiritual resurrection taught by some orthodox partial preterists such as James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry.
De-creation Within Revelation itself
At this point let us examine the de-creation texts within Revelation itself to explore how scholars have interpreted them in order to support the exegetical position of full preterism on Revelation 20:11.
De-creation in Revelation 6:13–17
A passage found in Revelation 6 provides the first evidence of the de-creation of old covenant Israel:
And the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand? (Rev. 6:13–17)
Let’s once again make some brief but powerful observations from this text:
Isaiah 2 and the Day of the Lord:
John quotes Isaiah 2:19, 21, describing men fleeing to the mountains during the Day of the Lord. Both Jesus (Luke 23:28–31) and Paul (2 Thess. 1:5–9) referenced this passage in connection with the AD 70 judgment.
Kenneth Gentry notes the historical fulfillment during the Jewish-Roman War:
“In 6:15–16 many “hid in caves” and “called to the mountains and the rocks, ‘Fall on us.’” Josephus frequently mentions that the Jews actually sought refuge underground during the AD 67–70 war: “And on this day the Romans slew all the multitude that appeared openly; but on the following days they searched the hiding places, and fell upon those that were underneath the ground, and in the caverns” (Wars 3.7.36; see also 3.2.3; 3.7.35; 5.3.1; 6,7.3; 6.9.4; 7.2.1).[4]
Therefore, it is Christ’s coming in AD 70 that results in Israel’s de-creation in this passage. Interestingly, Gentry interprets the coming of the Lord in Isaiah 2—which causes first-century men to flee to the caves—as fulfilled in Luke 23 and Revelation 6, yet he views Paul’s citation of Isaiah 2 in 2 Thessalonians 1 as a future event still awaiting fulfillment. In contrast, Keith Mathison maintains consistency by applying the coming of the Lord in Isaiah 2 to all three passages (Luke 23, Revelation 6, and 2 Thessalonians 1) as referring to the AD 70 judgment, reflecting the interpretation presented here.
Orthodox Interpretations:
Keith Mathison connects the de-creation language to prophetic judgments on nations like Babylon and Edom:
“As the sixth seal is broken (6:12–17), a vision of judgment upon the nation of Israel is given in the familiar prophetic language of cosmic upheaval (cf. Isa. 13:10–14; 34:4–5; Ezek. 32:7; Amos 8:9).”[5]
Kenneth Gentry, in a written debate defending the Preterist view of Revelation, emphasizes that the de-creation imagery reflects the collapse of Israel’s old covenant order:
“The de-creation language in the sixth seal (Rev. 6:12–17) portrays Israel’s world coming apart under the “wrath of the Lamb” on the “great day of wrath” (vv. 16–17). Such language is common prophetic parlance regarding the collapse of God-cursed governments, such as Babylon (Ezek. 32:2, 7–8, 16, 18), Idumea (Isa. 34:3–5), and Judah (Jer. 4:14, 23–24).[6]
De-creation in Revelation 16:20
Revelation 16:20 presents Israel’s second de-creation scene:
“And every island fled away, and no mountains were to be found” (Rev. 16:20).
Preterist commentaries typically view this as a recapitulation of Revelation 6:12–17, emphasizing the cyclical structure of the book where the same event—de-creation—is rendered through different prisms. Gentry interprets this imagery as symbolic of the destruction and abandonment of Israel’s cities during the Jewish-Roman War, linking the judgment poured out by the priestly angels in Revelation 16 to the broader theme of Israel’s collapse, writing:
“Since the priestly angels (15:6) pour the libation judgment on “the Land” (16:1, 2; cf. 16:12, 16) the removal of islands and mountains indicates the overthrow, abandonment or surrender of all of Israel’s cities, small and large, near and far (J.W. 3:7:1 134; 4:9:9 545–555).”[7]
However, a notable omission in Gentry’s analysis is the Greek word pheugo (“flee”), used here to describe the vanishing islands and mountains. This term also appears in Revelation 20:11, where earth and sky flee from God’s presence, suggesting thematic unity across these passages. While preterists recognize the recapitulation between Revelation 6 and 16, they often shift their interpretation in Revelation 20:11, treating it as the literal end of world history. This inconsistency invites closer examination as we turn to the de-creation event in Revelation 20.
De-creation in Revelation 20:11
“From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them” (Rev. 20:11).
At this point we must side with the classic amillennialist such as G.K. Beale who highlights the recapitulated parallelism of de-creation across Revelation 6:14, 16:20, and 20:11:
“Note the striking parallel language in 6:14; 20:11; and 16:20:
6:14 “every mountain and island were moved from their places”
16:20 – “every island fled, and the mountains were not found”
20:11 – “the earth and the heaven fled, and a place was not found for them”
“Destruction of mountains was a sign of the end of the cosmos in Jewish apocalyptic” And “a place was not found for them” is from Dan. 2:35 Theod., where it is used of the destruction of the wicked kingdoms at the end time”[8]
I agree with Beale that all three of these de-creation texts in Revelation—6:14, 16:20, and 20:11—depict the same event. In Jewish thought, the destruction of mountains symbolized the passing of the “heavens and earth.” Beale himself, along with one of his co-authors, acknowledges that Jerusalem and the temple were considered by the Jews to be a representation of the “heavens and earth” until they passed away in AD 70. This raises the question: why shouldn’t the “earth” and “heaven” in Revelation 20:11 also symbolize the passing of Israel’s old covenant order in AD 70?
It should be noted that the phrase “a place was not found for them” in Daniel 2:35 (Theodotion) speaks of God’s judgment during the Roman Empire—the fourth world empire—which fits very well with the historical context of AD 70.
However, we appreciate Gentry and Beale’s scholarship in Revelation, as once again full preterism is demonstrated:
Major Premise: If all three de-creation texts in Revelation describe the same event—as the analogy of faith principle of interpretation and the recapitulation structure of Revelation demonstrate—then they must share the same historical fulfillment, as classic amillennialist G.K. Beale teaches.
Minor Premise: Amillennialists (Beale) affirm that all three Revelation texts describe the same event, and Partial Preterists (Gentry) affirm that two Revelation texts (Revelation 6 and 16) were fulfilled in AD 70.
Conclusion: Therefore, Revelation 20:11, referring to the same event, must also have been fulfilled in AD 70. Since all of these de-creation texts are the same and two of them were fulfilled in AD 70, then all of them were fulfilled in AD 70. The analogy of faith, recapitulation structure, and high symbolism and apocalyptic language in the book of Revelation all point to full preterism.
De-creation in Revelation 21:1
Let’s now examine our last de-creation passage in Revelation 21 and see how John linguistically connects it to Revelation 20.
“…for the first heaven and the first earth had passed the sea was no more” (Rev. 21:1).
Doug Wilson offers a clear interpretation of this transition, connecting Isaiah 65–66, 2 Peter 3, and Revelation 21–22:
“We are seeing here the transition between the first heaven (the Judaic aeon) and new earth (the Christian aeon). … I do not take the new heaven and new earth as referring to the post-Second Coming eternal state.” … “So, I take the first heavens and earth as the Judaic aeon and the new heavens and earth as the Christian aeon, and these two aeonsoverlapped—the latter beginning at Pentecost, and the former ending with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.”[9]
Kenneth Gentry offers further insight on “the sea was no more”:
“The absence of the sea (21:1) speaks of the harmony and peace within. In Scripture the sea often symbolizes discord and sin…[10]
For Gentry “no more sea” signifies that at Christ’s “soon” coming in AD 70, He established the new creation, and God positionally removed our sin in His eyes. If “no more sea” equates to “no more sin,” positionally, this interpretation sounds like full preterism!
Connecting the De-creation Passages
John’s linguistic connections among the de-creation events build upon one another, emphasizing thematic continuity:
- Mountains and Islands: Revelation 6:14 and 16:20 both reference “every mountain and island” being displaced or fleeing.
- Pheugo (“flee”) and “Not Found”: Revelation 16:20 and 20:11 share the Greek verb pheugo and the phrase “was not found,” reinforcing their thematic unity.
- Earth and Heaven: Revelation 20:11 and 21:1 both depict the passing away of “earth” and “heaven,” signaling the end of the old covenant world.
Here’s how the de-creation sequence progresses:
- 6:14 — “every mountain and island were moved from their places.”
- 16:20 — “every island fled, and the mountains were not found.”
- 16:20 — “every island fled [pheugo], and the mountains were not found.”
- 20:11 — “the earth and the heaven fled [pheugo], and a place was not found for them.”
- 20:11 — “the earth and the heaven fled, and a place was not found for them.”
- 21:1 — “…for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.”
Despite these clear connections, some interpreters argue that Revelation 20:11 uniquely refers to the end of world history, disconnected from the recapitulation structure and imminent time texts that bind the other de-creation passages. Yet this view overlooks the textual and thematic unity evident in the repeated imagery and language. It often stems from hyper-creedalism—forcing an “end of world history” interpretation into Revelation where it doesn’t naturally belong.
Conclusion
Therefore, as a system, hyper-creedal Partial Preterism is left with only one de-creation passage to rally around in an attempt to align with the creeds: Revelation 20:11. However, this passage is also part of the “prophecy of this book,” which was “about to be” fulfilled in John’s future (Rev. 1:1, 19 YLT; 22:10). Moreover, it describes a de-creation event that is recapitulated in chapters 6, 16, and 21 and likewise falls in line with what Mr. Andrew Isker and Joel Webbon taught concerning the “rolling up” and passing away of the old covenant “heavens and earth” of Hebrews 1:10-12 in AD 70! If not why not?
It is time for real men of courage—true men indwelt by the Reformation spirit (“reformed and always reforming”)—to revise the creeds rather than bow to them. They should not cling to Pastoral or scholarly “careers” that ought to be ministries dedicated to the Lord and His people! Everyone knows Partial Preterism is “inconsistent” and “leads to Full Preterism.” No one cares how long your beard is, what cigars you smoke, what craft beer you drink, or how many Puritan books you have read or are in your library! Partial Preterism as a system will be irrelevant in 10-30 years and will only be known as a compromised and man-pleasing and man-fearing system that functioned as a steppingstone to the truth of Full Preterism.
[1] G. K. Beale, The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999), 1018. Emphasis added.
[2] Collin Brown, The International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1967), 698.
[3] Dr. A. Cohen, Everyman’s Talmud (New York, NY: E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1949), 356. Emphasis added.
[4] Gentry, Four Views on the Book of Revelation, 55.
[5] Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1999), 149.
[6] Gentry, Four Views on the Book of Revelation, 54.
[7] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of Revelation, vol. II: Revelation 10:1–22:21 (Acworth, GA: Tolle Lege Press, 2024), 1250.
[8] Beale, The New International Greek New Testament Commentary, 844, 1032. Emphasis added.
[9] Douglas Wilson, When the Man Comes Around: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation, (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019), 245–246.
[10] Gentry, Four Views on the Book of Revelation, 89. Emphasis added.