Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
justasking

Date of Revelation

Date of Revelation  

3 members have voted

  1. 1. When was Revelation written?

    • around 95 AD under Domitian
      2
    • around 65 under Nero
      1
    • during the year of the four emperors (69 AD)
      0
    • Other (please state)
      0


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, William said:

I think in a lot of ways people are only talking louder and digging their heels in to support their personal theology. Wouldn't it be more fruitful to examine the why they believe this or that rather what they believe? I for one don't see how the why can be approached without examining the methods and principles used to approach the literature in question. 

 

Two posts are made in the below thread. Why does nobody want to address the methods and principle in our approach to Revelation? It is just common sense that if we don't agree on this basic foundation that the result of our disaggreance will result in different understanding, interpretation, and teaching.

 

 

 

William there is no need to go to Revelation when discussing Matthew 24 and Daniels Abomination and the Great Tribulation regarding the preterist view, the chapter is self explanatory, and refutes 66-70AD fulfillment clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, Truth7t7 said:

William there is no need to go to Revelation when discussing Matthew 24 and Daniels Abomination and the Great Tribulation regarding the preterist view, the chapter is self explanatory, and refutes 66-70AD fulfillment clearly.

Mat 24:34  Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Becky said:

Mat 24:34  Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. 
 

The future generation that will witness the future Abomination and great tribulation, that will see Jesus Christ come in the clouds, immediately after this future tribulation.

 

"This Generation" those that are future, and will actually see and witness the events.

 

We know we'll Jesus Christ hasn't returned, nor has the end of the world taken place.

 

The only way the preterist teaching can survive is to symbolize or change verse 3 below, and the second advent seen in verses 29-30

 

In Love

 

Matthew 24:3KJV

3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Edited by Truth7t7
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

Mat_24:3  And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? 
Mat_24:14  And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

 

Rom_1:8  First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world. 
Rom_10:18  But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. 
There is another verse that conveys the same idea but i can not remember where it is. :classic_sad:

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, Becky said:

Mat_24:3  And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? 
Mat_24:14  And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

 

Rom_1:8  First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world. 
Rom_10:18  But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. 
There is another verse that conveys the same idea but i can not remember where it is. :classic_sad:

I'm fully aware of the preterist argument on 66-70AD fulfillment.

 

Verse 15 Daniels Abomination cause Verse 21 "Great Tribulation"?

 

Verses 29-30 clearly abolishes the preterist 66-70AD fulfillment of the afore mentioned, abomination and Great tribulation?

 

Verse 29 "immediately after the tribulation of those days"?

 

Verse 30 "They Shall See The Son Of Man coming"?

 

We know we'll this wasn't fulfilled in 66-70AD, because Jesus wasn't seen by all the earth, nor did he return in the clouds in 66-70AD?

 

Now to keep the preterist teaching alive, the second advent that is clearly seen must be symbolized, and not interpreted literally.

 

A literal Abomination of Desolation?

A literal Great Tribulation?

A symbolic Second Advent?

 

In Love

 

Matthew 24:15-30KJV

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

@Truth7t7 Why do you say preterest argument to my post ? I did not quote anything but Scripture.  

 

I simply understand Jesus said 'this generation' I believe what He says . 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
1 hour ago, Truth7t7 said:

William there is no need to go to Revelation when discussing Matthew 24 and Daniels Abomination and the Great Tribulation regarding the preterist view, the chapter is self explanatory, and refutes 66-70AD fulfillment clearly.

For one I wasn't addressing only Revelation but methods and principles used to address any particular book of literature. Now you suggest an entire chapter refutes the what a certain theological camp believes. Curious as to whether you are using the same method and principles which isolated a verse from context in Peter? And note you are mentioning other works of literature while downplaying methods and principles to understand the why or even address the how so others may at least see for themselves rather than just accept what you believe and ultimately adopt your view as their own.

 

I am convinced the repetitive arguments or stating them louder is not only unfruitful but is nothing more than addressing a fool according to the folly they're using.

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Becky said:

@Truth7t7 Why do you say preterest argument to my post ? I did not quote anything but Scripture.  

 

I simply understand Jesus said 'this generation' I believe what He says . 

 

Becky I apoligize, let's establish your belief?

 

Do you believe Matthew 24:15 & 21 in Daniels Abomination and Great Tribulation was fulfilled in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70AD?

 

Matthew 24:15 & 21KJV

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

 

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
7 minutes ago, William said:

I am convinced the repetitive arguments or stating them louder is not only unfruitful but is nothing more than addressing a fool according to the folly they're using.

I completely agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
8 hours ago, Becky said:

@Truth7t7 Why do you say preterest argument to my post ? I did not quote anything but Scripture.  

 

I simply understand Jesus said 'this generation' I believe what He says . 

 

Some people are just obsessed by their pet peeve.  The sad truth is any discussion would be pointless.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, William said:

For one I wasn't addressing only Revelation but methods and principles used to address any particular verse. Now you suggest an entire chapter refutes the what a certain theological camp believes. Curious as to whether you are using the same method and principles which isolated a verse from context? And note you are mentioning other works of literature while downplaying methods and principles to understand the why or even address the how so others may at least see for themselves rather than just accept what you believe and ultimately adopt your view as their own.

William the argument below is basic and simple, no Theological degree is needed to read and understand.

 

Just as you have argued against dispensationalism in its flaws, preterism both partial and full has its flaws.

 

Dispensationalism has a huge theological camp, dose'nt make It correct?

 

My argument is basic, clear, and very easy to understand.

 

Verse 15 Daniels Abomination cause Verse 21 "Great Tribulation"?

 

Verses 29-30 clearly abolishes the preterist 66-70AD fulfillment of the afore mentioned, abomination and Great tribulation?

 

Verse 29 "immediately after the tribulation of those days"?

 

Verse 30 "They Shall See The Son Of Man coming"?

 

We know we'll this wasn't fulfilled in 66-70AD, because Jesus wasn't seen by all the earth, nor did he return in the clouds in 66-70AD?

 

Now to keep the preterist teaching alive, the second advent that is clearly seen must be symbolized, and not interpreted literally.

 

A literal Abomination of Desolation?

A literal Great Tribulation?

A symbolic Second Advent?

 

In Love

 

Matthew 24:15-30KJV

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Edited by Truth7t7
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
12 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

William the argument below is basic and simple, no Theological degree is needed to read and understand.

 

Just as you have argued against dispensationalism in its flaws, preterism both partial and full has its flaws.

 

Dispensationalism has a huge theological camp, dose'nt make I'd correct?

I can at least come to a dispensational or other theological perspective by using their camp's methods and principles. I can then move from one theological perspective to another in attempt to see the truth more clearer. What you think and contend as truthful is blurry at best when compared to a hermeneutical lens of other camps. I find this applies to every form of literature, I can at least for example see from an Arminian perspective if I reject the hermeneutical lens of Calvinism. 

 

You suggest no theological degree is necessary, and as I argued elsewhere I'm completely willing to accept that as a characteristic of your theology. As far as not needing a theological degree I receive that as rejecting any education or training in Scripture. I'd have to accept that as an accepted method and principle but remember that the disciples were trained in the OT by Jesus to "see" or understand for themselves the why and how He was the fulfillment or on every page. 

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
2 minutes ago, William said:

You suggest no theological degree is necessary, and as I argued elsewhere I'm completely willing to accept that as a characteristic of your theology.

🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
9 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

William the argument below is basic and simple, no Theological degree is needed to read and understand.

 

Just as you have argued against dispensationalism in its flaws, preterism both partial and full has its flaws.

 

Dispensationalism has a huge theological camp, dose'nt make It correct?

 

My argument is basic, clear, and very easy to understand.

 

Verse 15 Daniels Abomination cause Verse 21 "Great Tribulation"?

 

Verses 29-30 clearly abolishes the preterist 66-70AD fulfillment of the afore mentioned, abomination and Great tribulation?

 

Verse 29 "immediately after the tribulation of those days"?

 

Verse 30 "They Shall See The Son Of Man coming"?

 

We know we'll this wasn't fulfilled in 66-70AD, because Jesus wasn't seen by all the earth, nor did he return in the clouds in 66-70AD?

 

Now to keep the preterist teaching alive, the second advent that is clearly seen must be symbolized, and not interpreted literally.

 

A literal Abomination of Desolation?

A literal Great Tribulation?

A symbolic Second Advent?

 

In Love

 

Matthew 24:15-30KJV

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

You understand your view i understand mine . Pete and repete goes no where. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, William said:

You suggest no theological degree is necessary, and as I argued elsewhere I'm completely willing to accept that as a characteristic of your theology.  

God's word clearly states man's Theological degree isn't needed.

 

John 14:26KJV

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, Truth7t7 said:

God's word clearly states man's Theological degree isn't needed.

 

You haven't responded to my very clear argument regarding Matthew 24:15-30?

 

Is ridicule the only response that will be received?

 

John 14:26KJV

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, heshall teach you all things, and bring allthings to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

 

If I had a nickle for everytime someone blamed the Holy Spirit for horrible interpretation. 

 

Not every one has received the gifts of the Holy Spirit which pertain to offices that illuminate the word of God. 

 

And I'm expressing the ordinary means by which God uses. 

 

Lastly I see no reason to address any verse in this thread. We do not agree on methods and principles of interpretation so I expect to disagree in our understanding.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, William said:

 

If I had a nickle for everytime someone blamed the Holy Spirit for horrible interpretation. 

 

Not every one has received the gifts of the Holy Spirit which pertain to offices that illuminate the word of God. 

 

And I'm expressing the ordinary means by which God uses. 

 

Lastly I see no reason to address any verse in this thread. We do not agree on methods and principles of interpretation so I expect to disagree in our understanding.

Make one wonder why the Holy Sprit did not inform him concerning the tense of the Greek verb in Rev. 11:2.  He said it was future tense but it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Origen said:

Make one wonder why the Holy Sprit did not inform him concerning the tense of the Greek verb in Rev. 11:2.  He said it was future tense but it is not.

"Origen" the argument below is basic and simple, no Theological degree is needed to read and understand.

 

My argument is basic, clear, and very easy to understand.

 

Verse 15 Daniels Abomination cause Verse 21 "Great Tribulation"?

 

Verses 29-30 clearly abolishes the preterist 66-70AD fulfillment of the afore mentioned, abomination and Great tribulation?

 

Verse 29 "immediately after the tribulation of those days"?

 

Verse 30 "They Shall See The Son Of Man coming"?

 

We know we'll this wasn't fulfilled in 66-70AD, because Jesus wasn't seen by all the earth, nor did he return in the clouds in 66-70AD?

 

Now to keep the preterist teaching alive, the second advent that is clearly seen must be symbolized, and not interpreted literally.

 

A literal Abomination of Desolation?

A literal Great Tribulation?

A symbolic Second Advent?

 

In Love

 

Matthew 24:15-30KJV

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Truth7t7 said:

 

 

– Saint Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 5, 30, 3

"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positivelyas to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision.

For [it or he] was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”

 

 

Was he correct? Is there other better evidence that goes against him?

Edited by justasking

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
49 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

"Origen" the argument below is basic and simple, no Theological degree is needed to read and understand.

That is according to you.  I find no reason to accept your claim.  It is simply your opinion and nothing more.  I find it superficial and myopic.

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, justasking said:

Was he correct? Is there other better evidence that goes against him?

Many supporters of "Preterism" argue for The early date of Revelation, so as to validate their beliefs that the "Fulfilling of the Gentiles" seen in Revelation isn't in conflict with 66-70AD fullfillment.

 

Iranaeus is the backbone in argument in the 95/96AD dating.

 

ChristianCourier

 

When Was the Book of Revelation Written?

 

By Wayne Jackson

 

Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96. Some writers, however, have advanced the preterist (from a Latin word meaning “that which is past”) view, contending that the Apocalypse was penned around A.D. 68 or 69, and thus the thrust of the book is supposed to relate to the impending destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70).

 

A few prominent names have been associated with this position (e.g., Stuart, Schaff, Lightfoot, Foy E. Wallace Jr.), and for a brief time it was popular with certain scholars. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.D. 96 (1939, 2584). In fact, the evidence for the later date is extremely strong.

In view of some of the bizarre theories that have surfaced in recent times (e.g., the notion that all end-time prophecies were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70), which are dependent upon the preterist interpretation, we offer the following.

 

External Evidence

 

The external evidence for the late dating of Revelation is of the highest quality.

 

Irenaeus

Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30). The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

 

Clement of Alexandria

Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

 

Even Moses Stuart, America’s most prominent preterist, admitted that the “tyrant here meant is probably Domitian.” Within this narrative, Clement further speaks of John as an “old man.” If Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, it would scarcely seem appropriate to refer to John as an old man, since he would only have been in his early sixties at this time.

 

Victorinus

Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).

 

Jerome

Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,

In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).

To all of this may be added the comment of Eusebius, who contends that the historical tradition of his time (A.D. 324) placed the writing of the Apocalypse at the close of Domitian’s reign (III.18). McClintock and Strong, in contending for the later date, declare that “there is no mention in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place” (1969, 1064). Upon the basis of external evidence, therefore, there is little contest between the earlier and later dates.

 

Internal Evidence

 

The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.

The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.

 

The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).

 

Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.

Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).

 

Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.

 

The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.

 

Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).

 

Arguments for the Early Date Answered

 

In the absence of external evidence in support of an early date for Revelation, preterists generally rely on what they perceive as internal support for their view.

Writing Style Differences

It is contended that the Gospel of John has a much smoother style of Greek than does the Apocalypse. Thus, the latter must have been written many years prior to the fourth Gospel—when the apostle was not so experienced in the literary employment of Greek.

In answer to this argument, we cite R. H. Gundry:

Archaeological discoveries and literary studies have recently demonstrated that along with Aramaic and Hebrew, Greek was commonly spoken among first century Palestinians. Thus John must have known and used Greek since his youth (1970, 365).

 

B. B. Warfield contends that:

the Apocalypse betrays no lack of knowledge of, or command over, Greek syntax or vocabulary; the difference lies, rather, in the manner in which a language well in hand is used, in style, properly so called; and the solution of it must turn on psychological, not chronological, considerations (Schaff and Herzog 1891, 2036).

 

R. H. Charles, author of the commentary on Revelation in the International Critical Commentary series, and perhaps the greatest expert on apocalyptic literature, regarded the so-called bad grammar as deliberate, for purposes of emphasis, and consistent with the citation of numerous Old Testament passages (Gundry, 365). It might be noted that in the 404 verses of Revelation, Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament gives over five hundred references and allusions to the Old Testament.

 

Finally, as McClintock and Strong point out:

It may be admitted that the Revelation has many surprising grammatical peculiarities. But much of this is accounted for by the fact that it was probably written down, as it was seen, “in the Spirit,” while the ideas, in all their novelty and vastness, filled the apostle’s mind, and rendered him less capable of attending to forms of speech. His Gospel and Epistles, on the other hand, were composed equally under divine influence, but an influence of a gentler, more ordinary kind, with much care, after long deliberation, after frequent recollection and recital of the facts, and deep pondering of the doctrinal truths which they involve (1064).

 

No Mention of Jerusalem’s Destruction

It is claimed that Revelation must have been penned before A.D. 70 since it has no allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem; rather, it is alleged, it represents both the city and the temple as still standing.

In response we note the following points.

 

First, if John wrote this work near A.D. 96, there would be little need to focus upon the destruction of Jerusalem since the lessons of that catastrophe would have been well learned in the preceding quarter of a century.

However, it must be noted that some scholars see a veiled reference to Jerusalem’s destruction in 11:8, where “the great city,” in which the Savior was crucified (Jerusalem), is called Sodom—not merely because of wickedness, but due to the fact that it was a destroyed city of evil (Zahn 1973, 306).

 

Second, the contention that the literal city and temple were still standing, based upon chapter eleven, ignores the express symbolic nature of the narrative. Salmon says that it is:

difficult to understand how anyone could have imagined that the vision represents the temple as still standing. For the whole scene is laid in heaven, and the temple that is measured is the heavenly temple (11:19; 15:5). We have only to compare this vision with the parallel vision of a measuring-reed seen by Ezekiel (ch. 40), in which the prophet is commanded to measure—surely not the city which it is stated had been demolished fourteen years previously, but the city of the future seen by the prophet in vision (1904, 238).

Nero Associated with 666

Some argue for an early date of the Apocalypse by asserting that the enigmatic 666 (13:18) is a reference to Nero. This is possible only by pursuing the most irresponsible form of exegesis.

 

To come up with such an interpretation one must:

add the title “Caesar” to Nero’s name;

compute the letter-number arrangement on the basis of Hebrew, whereas the book was written in Greek; and

alter the spelling of “Caesar” by dropping the yodh in the Hebrew.

All of this reveals a truly desperate attempt to find a reference to Nero in the text.

 

Additionally, Leon Morris has pointed out that Irenaeus discussed a number of possibilities for deciphering the 666, but he did not even include Nero in his list, let alone regard this as a likely conjecture (1980, 38). Noted critic Theodor Zahn observed that Nero was not even suggested as a possibility until the year 1831 (447).

In view of the foregoing evidence, a very strong case can be made for dating Revelation at about A.D. 96. Accordingly, the theory of realized eschatology, which is grounded upon the necessity of the Apocalypse having been written prior to A.D. 70, is shown to be without the necessary foundation for its successful defense, to say nothing of the scores of other scriptural difficulties that plague it.

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, Truth7t7 said:

Many supporters of "Preterism" argue for The early date of Revelation, so as to validate their beliefs that the "Fulfilling of the Grntiles" seen in Revelation isn't in conflict with 66-70AD fullfillment.

 

Iranaeus is the backbone in argument in the 95/96AD dating.

Does not address the question but rather avoids it.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

I believe the words of Christ carry more weight then those of Iranaeus .

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Becky said:

I simply understand Jesus said 'this generation' I believe what He says . 

For the record, I believe that too, I just interpret it differently than you.

 

14 minutes ago, Becky said:

I believe the words of Christ carry more weight then those of Iranaeus .

The Words of Christ have nothing to do with when Revelation was written. (other than inspiration of course)

 

Here's the problem. When was the time that Christ returned for the whole world to see after His ascension? Don't you think that would be a notable event that we would know about? I certainly do. One must reasonably conclude that it has not happened yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
23 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

The Words of Christ have nothing to do with when Revelation was written. (other than inspiration of course)

Wow. The fact that most, not all,  dispensational teaching, i have known of, chooses to minimize the words of Jesus is a big part of why i no longer adhere to the teachings 

Edited by Becky
added i have known of

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • Geneva Bible, Revelation, and the Pope

      In the Geneva Bible Note several verses in Revelation are linked to specific popes and other historical people and events.   (1) And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree: but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads. (Rev. 9:4)   (2) And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men. (Rev.

      in Bible Study

    • Media Hypes Roger Stone ‘Revelation’ That Has Been Public For A Year

      By Chuck Ross - A court filing in the special counsel’s case against Roger Stone was widely interpreted in the mainstream press as explosive new evidence of the Trump confidant’s contacts with WikiLeaks and Russian operatives Prosecutors said Friday that search warrants used in the special counsel’s investigation revealed communications that Stone had with WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0. Various news outlets seized on the filing as new evidence in the collusion probe But Stone’s contacts wit

      in Political Conservative News

    • Is America the endtime Beast country prophesized in Revelation and Daniel?

      As you may already know the books of Revelation and Daniel etc. prophesized the Beast country, to be appeared in End time. Many people says about it: S ome say it is EU (Europe Union) or other says it is UN (United Nations) or other says it is resurrected Roman empire etc. For me, I convince that USA, America is this very nation, end time beast country. You can see this explanation at below: The book of Daniel depicts this country as: 1.The country which has strong arm

      in Christian Eschatology

    • Don’t Put Your Hope in Date Night

      Running a nonprofit ministry geared toward moms of young children means our inbox continually fills with questions about parenting and marriage. One of the most frequent is, “How do you do date night?” As married moms of littles, we understand firsthand where this is coming from. Like our podcast listeners, we look for reasons to hire a babysitter and spend one-on-one time with our spouses. Out-of-the-house date night without children in tow feels like the secret ingredient to a healthy marriag

      in Christian Current Events

    • Absentminded KJV-Only Believer Still Writing The Date As 1611

      WILKES-BARRE, PA—At the beginning of January, people often complain of accidentally writing the wrong date on all their documents as they adjust to the new year. The post Absentminded KJV-Only Believer Still Writing The Date As 1611 appeared first on The Babylon Bee. View the original full article

      in Christian Satire

×
×
  • Create New...