Before Jerusalem Fell

136 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL
that these events which constitute the revelation must take place
shortly. That more than 1900 years of church history have passed
and the end is not yet poses a problem for some. One solution is to
understand ‘shortly’ in the sense of suddenly, or without delay once
the appointed time arrives. Another approach is to interpret it in
terms of the certainty of the events in question. Of little help is the
suggestion that John may be employing the formula of 2 Peter 3:8
(’with the Lord one day is as a thousand years’). . . . The most
satis~ing solution is to take the word in a straight-forward sense,
remembering that in the prophetic outlook the end is always imminent.”5
Morns (who probably would be classed as an amillennialist)
agrees with the premillennialist on this matter, although he takes the
route that seems to Mounce to be “of little help”: “ShOrt~ is not
defined. . . . This could mean that the fulfdlment is expected in the
very near future. . . . But speedily has a reference to His time not
ours. With Him one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years
as one day (2 Pet. iii. 8). It is also possible that the term should be
understood as ‘suddenly,’ i.e., not so much ‘soon’ as ‘without delay
when the time comes.’”6
Vincent’s work differs little from the type suggested by Morris’s
line of thought: “Expressions like this must be understood, not according
to human measurement of time, but rather as in 2 Pet. iii. 8.
The idea is, before long, as time is computed by God.”7 Hoeksema,
an amillennialist, agrees when he writes of Revelation 1:1 that “we
must remember . . . that God’s measure of time differs from ours.”8
Swete, a postmillennialist, writes that “h T@EZ . . . must be inter-
5. Robert H. Mounce, Th Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the
New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 64-65. Later, however, Mounce
makes an admission based on his view that must be pair-did to a conservative biblical
scholar “It is true that history has shown that ‘the things which must shortly come to
pass’ (1: 1) have taken longer than John expected” (p. 243). Were not bis numerous
expectations recorded in infallible Holy Writ? Were they merely the expectations of
“John the enthusiast,” or were they not the expectations of ‘John the divinely inspired
prophet” (see Rev. 1:1; 22:6, 20)? These were not incidental to his work, but repetitively
emphatic in it.
6. Leon Morris, The Revefution of.$’t. John (Grand Rapids Eerdmans, 1969), p. 45.
7. Marvin R. Vincent, Word Stu&s in the New Testarrwst, vol. 2: The Writings of John
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, [1887] 1985), p. 407.
8. Herman Hoeksema, Behold, He Corrwth! An Exposition of the Book of Revelatwn (Grand
Rapids: Reformed Free Publishing, 1969), p. 9.