11.2. The Nature of Internal Evidence
Share
This resource is exclusive for PLUS Members
Upgrade now and receive:
- Ad-Free Experience: Enjoy uninterrupted access.
- Exclusive Commentaries: Dive deeper with in-depth insights.
- Advanced Study Tools: Powerful search and comparison features.
- Premium Guides & Articles: Unlock for a more comprehensive study.
1 This is not to deny the influence of bias upon the interpretation of all evidence. For example, evolutionists and creationists are faced with the same objective evidence, but arrive at a totally different interpretation of the evidence.
2 Kenneth L. Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1998), 113.
3 Colin J. Hemer, The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in Their Local Setting (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989), 4.
4 David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance (Tyler, TX: Dominion Press, 1987), 4.
5 Jerusalem is mentioned separately from Babylon and Jerusalem is not known to have been referred to as “Babylon” any time prior to A.D. 70. Yet it is Babylon which is the object of God’s total destruction (Rev. Rev. 18:1+), not Jerusalem.
6 Robert L. Thomas, “Theonomy and the Dating of Revelation,” in Richard L. Mayhue, ed., The Master’s Seminary Journal, vol. 5 (Sun Valley, CA: The Master’s Seminary, 1994), 186.
7 Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977), 35.
8 Robert L. Thomas, “The ‘Jesus Crisis’: What Is It?,” in Robert L. Thomas and F. David Farnell, eds., The Jesus Crisis: The Inroads of Historical Criticism into Evangelical Scholarship (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1998).