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

46 minutes ago, Origen said:

Does not address the question but rather avoids it.

The evidence he presents in his post directly addresses it.

Edited by justasking

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
5 minutes ago, justasking said:

The evidence he presents in his post directly addresses it.

He edited his post.  Only the first two lines of the post were present when I posted my comment.  He added that information later.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Becky said:

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

Becky, my statement in no way diminished the Words of Christ. All I said was that the Words of Christ do not have bearing on the date Revelation was written which is what this topic is about. Please do not accuse me of doing things I did not in fact do.

13 minutes ago, Becky said:

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

Becky, my statement in no way diminished the Words of Christ. All I said was that the Words of Christ do not have bearing on the date Revelation was written which is what this topic is about. Please do not accuse me of doing things I did not in fact do.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
53 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

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).

@Truth7t7 might I ask what this means?

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

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

 

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.

Dave we agree, the abomination of desolation, great tribulation, and second advent all seen in Matthew 24:15-30 are future events unfillfilled.

 

As has been clearly shown, you can't have a literal fulfillment of the Abomination of Desolation, and Great Tribulation in 66-70AD and put the second advent seen taking place "Immediately After The Tribulation Of Those Day's" off in a distance of 2,000 years and waiting?

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, davidtaylorjr said:

Becky, my statement in no way diminished the Words of Christ. All I said was that the Words of Christ do not have bearing on the date Revelation was written which is what this topic is about. Please do not accuse me of doing things I did not in fact do.

Becky, my statement in no way diminished the Words of Christ. All I said was that the Words of Christ do not have bearing on the date Revelation was written which is what this topic is about. Please do not accuse me of doing things I did not in fact do.

I was careful in my post to not accuse you of anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, William said:

@Truth7t7 might I ask what this means?

Might I ask what this means?

 

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.

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

God's Word says shortly and at hand . Jesus says "this generation'  Why do we need evidence of men. 

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
4 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

Might I ask what this means?

 

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.

What does that have to with the quote of Warfield? I asked what Warfield means, I'm having a little trouble understanding the quote of Warfield. 

 

Here it is again: 

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 andHerzog 1891, 2036).

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Becky said:

God's Word says shortly and at hand . Jesus says "this generation'  Why do we need evidence of men. 

Peter also said roughly 2,000 years ago the end of all things was "At Hand"?

 

1 Peter 4:7KJV

7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, William said:

What does that have to with the quote of Warfield? I asked what Warfield means, I'm having a little trouble understanding the quote of Warfield. 

 

Here it is again: 

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 andHerzog 1891, 2036).

I'm trying to better understand the early church fathers can you help?

 

20th century B.B. Warfield hold's little to no weight in the dating of the Revelation.

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, Truth7t7 said:

I'm trying to better understand the early church fathers can you help?

 

20th century B.B. Warfield hold's little to no weight in the dating of the Revelation.

 

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.

Did you not provide that quote or are you unaware that you quoted him? His quote in your post makes zero sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, William said:

Did you not provide that quote or are you unaware that you quoted him? His quote in your post makes zero sense to me.

It clearly is the argument to support a early dating as Schaff and Herzog who support the early date were quoting Warfield?

 

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

 

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).

Edited by Truth7t7

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

Might I ask what this means?

 

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.

Does this persuade you absolutely? 

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

What ended 2000 years ago? IMO The end of the age of temple worship . The end of the whole Jewish world where religion/worship are considered. 

How long was Christ's earthly ministry ?  Was it God or the Romans that leveled the temple? How about God used the Romans?  

Who here thinks all of The Revelation of Jesus Christ  happens or comes at same time? I don't

 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Truth7t7 said:

I'm trying to better understand the early church fathers can you help?

 

20th century B.B. Warfield hold's little to no weight in the dating of the Revelation.

 

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.

If we break this down a bit:

Irenaeus wasn't a student of Polycarp.

It is questionable whether he claimed that Revelation was seen in John's day.

 

Clement of Alexandria doesn't mention Domitian.

 

Victorinus doesn't agree with Eusebius that John was banished late in Domitian's reign.

 

Jerome was following Eusebius. 

So where is the strong evidence?

 

  • Wow 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, Truth7t7 said:

It clearly is the argument to support a early dating as Schaff and Herzog were quoting Warfield?

 

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

 

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).

You quoted Warfield, his quote makes zero sense. Can you please provide the reference to the work which was quoted for some context to make sense of what any of these people allegedly stated?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Becky said:

What ended 2000 years ago? IMO The end of the age of temple worship . The end of the whole Jewish world where religion/worship are considered. 

How long was Christ's earthly ministry ?  Was it God or the Romans that leveled the temple? How about God used the Romans?  

Who here thinks all of The Revelation of Jesus Christ  happens or comes at same time? I don't

 

You are an admin and you are making this about preterism instead of about the dating of Revelation? Isn't your job to insure people don't wreck and destroy threads with their own pet obsessions? 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, justasking said:

Does this persuade you absolutely? 

Preterist are the proponets of the early dating, and almost all "Weak Arguments" are in their camp to support it.

 

The citations of the early church fathers far outweigh modern scholarship, and the evidence is extremely strong to support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, justasking said:

You are an admin and you are making this about preterism instead of about the dating of Revelation? Isn't your job to insure people don't wreck and destroy threads with their own pet obsessions? 

No, that's actually the moderator job description which can be read in the about us menu option. 

 

Seems lots of people are bothered about Becky's volunteer title on this board. Wonder why that is? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, William said:

You quoted Warfield, his quote makes zero sense. Can you please provide the reference to the work which was quoted for some context to make sense of what any of these people allegedly stated?

You still haven't acknowledged the external evidence in the four early church fathers, does it make any sense?

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, William said:

No, that's actually the moderator job description which can be read in the about us menu option. 

 

Seems lots of people are bothered about Becky's volunteer title on this board. Wonder why that is? 

I'm new to posting here (for some reason I started receiving emails--seems I've been signed up a year) and seeing how far this thread has been allowed to stray from the original post just makes me wonder what the point is. The interpretation of Rev and Matt 24 and the arguments to and against preterism are very important, but they can have their own threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
Just now, justasking said:

I'm new to posting here (for some reason I started receiving emails--seems I've been signed up a year) and seeing how far this thread has been allowed to stray from the original post just makes me wonder what the point is. The interpretation of Rev and Matt 24 and the arguments to and against preterism are very important, but they can have their own threads.

I actually agree with you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
1 hour ago, Truth7t7 said:

You still haven't acknowledged the external evidence in the four early church fathers, does it make any sense?

 

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.

Forget it, I think you did a bad copy and paste job and can't support your references. 

 

Others are probably verifying your quoted sources but you've done nothing more than provide a red herring for the time being.

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...