Objection #1:

Arie, I did not have to dig too hard to read of earthly Jerusalem equated with Egypt (Rev 11:8), to read of a wilderness experience of the church (Rev 12:6)  [lasting 1260 "days" and beginning in 70 AD when Jerusalem was trodden under foot (Rev 11:2)] , to read of the "Promised Lands" (yes, plural) experience at the completion of the wilderness years (Rev 11:15), to read of a "Babylonian" oppression on God's people (Rev 17:5), to read of a restoration period (Rev 20:3), to read of a Magog-like attack on God's people (Rev 20:8), and to read of an Advent of Christ when Christ comes down to earth to be with man (Rev 21:3).

Now, Arie, those details in that chronological order sounds vaguely similar to some nation's history I have read before.  And I only used a hand shovel for digging.

- Parnell McCarter
 

Arie W Blok wrote:
>
> Dear Parnell,
>         Your views of the Book of Revelation are of some interest.  When
> I look at seven commentaries on Revelation, I inevitably will find seven
> ways of trying to explain it.  The one problem with your proposed
> exposition of the Book of Revelation is that the Book itself does not
> encourage us to think that the future of the church will be a parallel of
> O. T. history.  The references in Revelation to O. T. persons and events
> are to the character of persons, Jezebel, etc.  If Christ had wanted to
> give us a complete outline of history in the prophetical Books and the
> Book of Revelation, we would have that outline in plain sight and would
> not have to "dig" for it.
>
> Arie W. Blok
> Retired minister in the Reformed Church in America
> http://www.macatawa.org/~arieblok