Prophecy Explorer · sources

Sources and flags

Download:the whole walk (PDF)the chart (PNG)the data (CSV)all downloads

The research notes behind the chart: every source the chart, the data and the walk rest on, how each was read, and every place where the evidence is thin or a label is disputed. The data table names each row’s sources; the data page has the rows.

Date: 2026-10-28. Research package v1. This page lists every source the chart, the data and the walk rest on, how each was read, and every place where the evidence is thin, a label is disputed, or a source was read second-hand. The machine-readable list is data/prophecy_sources_v1.csv; each data row names its sources in source_keys and writers_sources.

How to read the status words

• read: fetched and read on 2026-10-28. Pages fetched through the web tool come back as a summary; any wording quoted from them must be rechecked against the page or a printed copy before it is published.
• second-hand (Timeline): taken from The Whole Story research package v2 (timeline_v2_data.csv, 27 Oct). Each of those rows lists its own sources and marks them read or not confirmed. This package did not reread them.
• second-hand (project dossier): taken from a dossier in the eschatology project library, which summarizes the writer's own pages. Not read directly.
• not confirmed: named, but nothing was read.

1. Scripture

• Every quotation in the walk is from the NET Bible Second Edition, checked word for word against a local copy of the NET text (net_local.db, built from NETBIBLE21.epub, NET Bible 2.1). The check is in verification_2026-10-28/.
• The permission notice is the Timeline walk's own wording, with the year range "1996–2019" as delivered there. The site's Timeline renderer changes it to 1996–2024 at build time; the Prophecy section's books already print 1996–2024 and add "For information visit netbible.com/copyright." The same open question as the Timeline: which NET copyright year to print.
• No NET text appears on the chart. The chart carries references only.
• No translator notes were used or quoted.

2. Where each view places the contested passages

Dispensationalism

• Daniel 9, Olivet, Revelation, the thousand years: Scofield, Walvoord, Anderson, Ice, Ryrie. Second-hand (Timeline), rows ev-dan9-start, ev-dan9-69-end, ev-dan9-70th, ev-olivet, ev-jerusalem-70, ev-revelation-date, ev-millennium (view dispensational).
• Ezekiel 38–39: Thomas Ice, "Ezekiel 38 & 39 (Part 27)", Pre-Trib Research Center, 12 June 2018. Read. Ice defends "the pretribulational, post-rapture view of the timing" (rechecked on the page, 28 Oct). Ice, "Ezekiel 38 & 39 (Part 24)", the same day: "A second view sees it taking place in the first half, towards the middle of the tribulation" (rechecked; no names given on the page). An earlier draft named Walvoord, Benware, Pentecost, Hitchcock and Lindsey as mid-tribulation holders by Ice's report; that was not found on either page and is removed. The Part 27 endnotes PDF was not read.
• Ezekiel 38:2 and Revelation 20:7–9: Scofield Reference Notes, note at Ezekiel 38:2 (1917 text online at studylight.org). Read. "headed up by Russia"; the prophecy "belongs to the yet future 'day of Jehovah'" and "includes also the final revolt of the nations at the close of the kingdom-age."
• Romans 11:25–27: John F. Walvoord, "Eschatological Problems IX: Israel's Restoration", walvoord.com/node/26. Read. The deliverance is "a future event and a single event," "an event following the return of Christ in His second coming."

Partial Preterism

• Daniel 9, Olivet, Revelation's date and content, the thousand years, the return: Gentry, Sproul (through Ligonier pages), Chilton, Mathison, Kline, Mauro, Riddlebarger. Second-hand (Timeline), rows for view partial-preterist.
• Ezekiel 38–39: James B. Jordan, "The Battle of Gog and Magog", Theopolis Institute, 16 January 2018. Read. "I suggest that the book of Esther describes the fulfillment of the battle of Gog and Magog." American Vision, "The Battle of Gog and Magog is Past", 3 November 2025. Read (a page describing Gary DeMar's teaching; DeMar's own argument not confirmed).
• Revelation 20:7–9: Riddlebarger (amillennial). Second-hand (Timeline), rows ev-antichrist and ev-return-christ, subview amil. Postmillennial: Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., "Final Battle = Final Collapse?", Postmillennial Worldview, 5 September 2014. Read (28 Oct). The rebellion comes after the thousand years, near the end of history; the fire from heaven is Christ's second advent.
• Romans 11:25–27: Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., "Postmillennial Paul", Postmillennial Worldview, 21 April 2020, with his comments of 1 September 2020. Read. Charles Hodge on Romans 11, reposted on Postmillennial Worldview, 10 March 2026. Read. Amillennial: Lee Irons, "Paul's Theology of Israel's Future: A Nonmillennial Interpretation of Romans 11", Reformation & Revival 6/2, Spring 1997. Read (28 Oct). "All Israel" is the whole church, Jews and Gentiles; Irons counts himself among the amillennialists. Ben L. Merkle, "Romans 11 and the Future of Ethnic Israel", JETS 43/4 (2000), read: "all Israel" is the elect Jews of every age; he does not label his view amillennial.

Full Preterism

• Daniel 9, Olivet, Revelation, the thousand years: Preston, Green, Sullivan, King, Stevens (IPA). Second-hand (Timeline), rows for view full-preterist.
• Ezekiel 38–39 and Revelation 20:7–9: Brad Baker, "The Timing of the Gog & Magog War" / "The Mystery of Gog & Magog Revealed". Second-hand (project dossier): Brad Baker Dossier v19, section 2G.
• Romans 11:25–27: Michael Sullivan, "How 'All Israel' Was Saved in AD 70: Romans 9–11", fullpreterism.com, 20 June 2026, revised 26 August 2026. Second-hand (project dossier): Full Preterism Dossier v79, section 16F.

3. Record checks

• Daniel's date. Britannica, "The Book of Daniel" (critical date, first half of the 2nd century BC; Antiochus IV, 175–164/163 BC). Read. Ralph F. Wilson, "The Case for a Sixth Century Dating of Daniel" (Aramaic, Belshazzar, Qumran fragments). Read. Matthew 24:15 (NET).
• Isaiah and Cyrus. Wikipedia, "Book of Isaiah" (chapters 40–55, an anonymous 6th-century author, 550–539 BC). Read; secondary. Britannica, "Deutero-Isaiah" (one-sentence definition). Read. Dennis Bratcher, "The Unity and Authorship of Isaiah" (describes the single-author defenders from outside). Read. Josephus, Antiquities 11.1.1–2, Whiston translation ("This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of his prophecies"). Read. John 12:38–41 (NET). Conservative commentators such as Oswalt and Motyer: not confirmed (not read; not cited in the walk).
• Kings and Josiah. Wikipedia, "Books of Kings" (first edition late 7th century BC, final edition mid-6th century). Read; secondary.
• Seventy years, Babylon's fall in 539 BC, the temple dates. Second-hand (Timeline), Chart 2 anchors ev-anchor-539-babylon, ev-exile, ev-return. The 70 to 72 years is calculated here.
• Anderson's day count, Gentry's inclusive count, Preston's 40-year week: calculated in the Timeline package; carried here.
• Date-setting (Lindsey, Whisenant) and Irenaeus on Revelation's date: second-hand (Timeline), Stops 11 and 12.
• Gog identifications reassigned: Scofield 1917 (read); Pulling the Threads: Dispensationalism, section 11 (site source v110).
• Matthew's fulfilment formulas: calculated from the NET text (10, 11, 13 or 15, depending on what is counted).

4. Site sources

Read from michlaude_source_v110.zip: Three Ways People Read the End of the Story (manuscript_rev26), Pulling the Threads: Dispensationalism, Pulling the Threads: Full Preterism, Revelation: A Walk-Through, and the DMI questionnaire (questions 13 and 14). Heading texts in site_book_link are copied from those manuscripts.

5. Flags

Thin evidence

1. Partial Preterism on Ezekiel 38–39 rests on one writer. James B. Jordan proposes Esther; the American Vision page reports that Gary DeMar holds the battle is past. The Timeline data records that DeMar's present position is disputed (Gentry and Mattson report he has moved beyond partial preterism). Not every partial preterist holds the Esther reading. Decided 28 Oct: keep the arc. It stays drawn as one writer's proposal.
2. Partial Preterism on Revelation 20:7–9 rests on the amillennial wing (Riddlebarger, through the Timeline) and one postmillennial writer, Gentry (2014, read 28 Oct). Both put the revolt at the end of the age. Improved 28 Oct; still two writers.
3. The amillennial reading of Romans 11 is now read from one amillennial writer (Irons, 1997) besides Gentry's summary. Amillennialists differ (Merkle's reading is different), so the chart's single amillennial arc stands for one of at least two readings. Improved 28 Oct.
4. Full Preterism on Gog and Magog and on Romans 11 rests on Baker and Sullivan, both through project dossiers. Rechecked 28 Oct against Brad Baker Dossier v19 section 2G (Gog and Magog in the AD 66–70 window; the thousand years running to AD 70) and Full Preterism Dossier v79 section 16F (Sullivan: the remnant plus grafted-in Gentiles, matured and closed at AD 70). Both match what the chart says. The project's searches found nothing on Gog and Magog from King, Preston or Stevens. Baker's and Sullivan's own pages were not read. 4a. Full preterists do not agree on Revelation 20. The chart draws the mainline reading (Baker; Preston and King end the millennium at AD 70). Duncan McKenzie's "Premillennial Preterism" begins the thousand years at AD 70, and one source files it with partial preterism (Full Preterism Dossier v79, section 31; second-hand). The walk says so in one sentence.
5. The proportion (48 links above, 6 passages below) is a curated count, not a census. The selection rule and the cap produce it. It is honest about what it is, and the walk says the proportion teaches; Decided 28 Oct: keep the proportion at Stops 0 and 12 as a trial. The wording stays honest about what it is.

Still open

20. Held: a link from the chart to the site's church questionnaire (the DMI) waits for the questionnaire's rebuild.
21. Some record checks were changed on 28 Oct and have not yet had a second reading. Sourcing weaknesses behind them: the Daniel conservative case rests on one source (Wilson); the Kings and Isaiah dating claim rests on Wikipedia; the second seventy-years reckoning and the Matthew 27:9 "many readers" line are unsourced; the Gog record checks are this package's judgment, including the new Esther check.

Disputed labels

6. Every "kind" label is this package's judgment, marked judgment in kind_basis. Links carrying two labels: Isaiah 7:14 (prediction or pattern); Psalm 22:18 and Psalm 2:1–2 (pattern or prediction); Genesis 15 to Joshua 21, 2 Samuel 7 to 1 Kings 8, Malachi 4, Isaiah 61, Zechariah 12:10, Amos 9, Jeremiah 31 (prediction, or partial now and full later).
7. Isaiah 44:28 to Ezra 1:1–4. Ezra names Jeremiah's word as fulfilled, not Isaiah's. The arc rests on the content match. The walk says so.
8. Matthew 27:9 names Jeremiah; the closest words are Zechariah 11:12–13. Drawn from Zechariah; the walk says so.
9. Daniel 9:27, partial preterist target. The writers name the cross, not a verse. Matthew 27:50–51 is this package's choice of landing.
10. Amos 9 and Acts 15 is drawn in band 2 but is contested in fact (Dispensationalism reads the rebuilt tent as future for Israel). A candidate for band 3.
11. Zones beyond the canon. "The present age" holds two different things: the amillennial church age and the postmillennial expectation of a later conversion of Israel within history. The zone label says "From Pentecost to Christ's return"; both fit, but they are not the same claim.

Read second-hand or through a summary

12. All Daniel 9, Olivet, Revelation and millennium placements come from The Whole Story's data (second-hand). That research's own cautions still apply: its quotations came through a web summarizer, and its unconfirmed sources are listed in its rows_with_unconfirmed_sources.csv.
13. Outside quotations, rechecked 28 Oct against each page through the web tool (which returns a summary that quotes the page): Jordan, Scofield ("headed up by Russia" and the other two phrases), Walvoord, Gentry ("future, massive conversions among the Jews" and the amillennial summary), Josephus (Antiquities 11.1.2) and Ice's "post-rapture" phrase all match. Two Ice items did not: "a literal prophecy of the A.D. 70 judgment" is on neither Ice page read, so the walk now paraphrases (Ice, "An Interpretation of Matthew 24–25 (Part 3)", 14 May 2018, calls the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem "a judgment upon the Jewish people"); and the mid-tribulation names, removed (see section 2). Still open: no printed copies were seen, and the tool is a summarizer, so a final eye on the live pages is cheap insurance.
14. The local NET database's own provenance check: the epub's source is not confirmed as the official store. The quotations match it word for word. Spot-check 28 Oct against the NET on BibleGateway (netbible.org itself returned the wrong page to the tool): Micah 5:2 (first half), Isaiah 7:14 and 7:16, Zechariah 9:9, Matthew 24:34, Daniel 9:24 and 9:27, Romans 11:26, John 17:3. All matched. The other quotations were checked only against the local database. Full pass done the same day in Chrome against the live NET text (labs.bible.org API, the NET site's own backend): every Scripture quotation in the walk and data notes, 65 verses, matched except two numerals, which were corrected to the live wording: Jeremiah 25:11 ("70 years") and Zechariah 11:13 ("30 pieces of silver"). Spot-read on netbible.org itself for both. The local epub (NET 2.1) spells those two numbers out, so it is slightly older than the live text. The Timeline package may carry the same two quotations; check it.
15. The local database stores some dashes with a space beside them (for example "life —that" in John 17:3). BibleGateway shows John 17:3 as "life—that", with no space, so the database spacing is an artefact. The walk now quotes Micah 5:2 in two pieces, on either side of the dash, so no quotation crosses one. Resolved 28 Oct.

Chart

16. The chart names its font (Inter, then Helvetica Neue, then Arial) without embedding it, like the Timeline charts. The PNG and the PDF are drawn with Inter.
17. The chart's title line reads "Version 1".
18. The view names on the chart are the site's "At a Glance" names (Dispensationalism, Partial Preterism, Full Preterism), so the naming question raised for the Timeline does not arise here.

The checks that were run

The chart and the data

• viewBoxes identical: True (7 files)
• ids: 189, duplicates: 0
• link ids missing from chart: []
• regions: 45, bad: 0
• stops in map: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]
• bands: {'1': 14, '2': 34, '3': 26}
• tests: {'B': 14, 'A': 34, 'C': 26}
• kinds (bands 1-2): {'prediction': 28, 'prediction | partial-now-full-later': 7, 'prediction | pattern': 1, 'pattern': 9, 'pattern | prediction': 2, 'partial-now-full-later': 1}
• band 3 views: {'dispensational': 8, 'partial_preterist': 11, 'full_preterist': 7}
• record checks: 15
• passage groups: ['Daniel 9:24-27', 'Ezekiel 38-39', 'Matthew 24 (the Olivet Discourse)', 'Revelation', 'Revelation 20:7-9', 'Romans 11:25-27']
• font sizes used: [17.0, 20.0, 21.0, 23.0, 24.0, 25.0, 26.0, 27.0, 28.0, 34.0, 36.0, 38.0, 84.0]
• text elements: 210, overlapping pairs: 0