Jump to content

justasking

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About justasking

  • Rank
    Newly Registered

Gender

  • Gender
    Male

Denomination

  • Den
    Other
  1. Yes, and possibly misinterpreting him by making revelation the subject of the verb "was seen".
  2. 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.
  3. 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?
  4. 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?
  5. Does this persuade you absolutely?
  6. The evidence he presents in his post directly addresses it.
  7. Was he correct? Is there other better evidence that goes against him?
  8. Please answer the poll and discuss.
×
×
  • Create New...