"I ask then why do people say Israel must go through the Tribulation?" Jeremiah 30.6. paraphrased.
- Thread starter Evmur
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The internal evidence for the book of Revelation being written before 70 AD is compelling, along with the external evidence. To study this to its fullest would take a great deal of time.
The late date setting is actually the one which was required to make the creation of the state of secular Israel prophetic along with selling books and making movies which has been very profitable.
Remember when a generation was 40 years and the start of the last generation was 1948?
That didn't work so then the new date was 1967
That didn't work either.
So here we are waiting for this temple to built so there is no stone is left on top of another.
The late date setting is actually the one which was required to make the creation of the state of secular Israel prophetic along with selling books and making movies which has been very profitable.
Remember when a generation was 40 years and the start of the last generation was 1948?
That didn't work so then the new date was 1967
That didn't work either.
So here we are waiting for this temple to built so there is no stone is left on top of another.
-
1
- Show all
I am not sure where you got this information but it is incorrect.
JOHN GILL'S COMMENTARY
Some think it was written in the times of Claudius Caesar (h), before the destruction of Jerusalem. In the title of the Syriac version, this revelation is said to be made to John in the isle of Patmos, into which he was cast by Nero Caesar. But the more commonly received opinion is, that he had this vision there, at the latter end of Domitian's reign (i) by whom he was there banished, about the year 95, or 96.
Just about any commentator whom I have read agrees with this.
JOHN GILL'S COMMENTARY
Some think it was written in the times of Claudius Caesar (h), before the destruction of Jerusalem. In the title of the Syriac version, this revelation is said to be made to John in the isle of Patmos, into which he was cast by Nero Caesar. But the more commonly received opinion is, that he had this vision there, at the latter end of Domitian's reign (i) by whom he was there banished, about the year 95, or 96.
Just about any commentator whom I have read agrees with this.
What happens if anyone person of the scattered church of the house of Isreal don't make it back to Isreal
The Message
Mark 13:14-23
Run for the Hills
14-18 “But be ready to run for it when you see the monster of desecration set up where it should never be. You who can read, make sure you understand what I’m talking about. If you’re living in Judea at the time, run for the hills; if you’re working in the yard, don’t go back to the house to get anything; if you’re out in the field, don’t go back to get your coat. Pregnant and nursing mothers will have it especially hard. Hope and pray this won’t happen in the middle of winter.
The Message
Mark 13:14-23
Run for the Hills
14-18 “But be ready to run for it when you see the monster of desecration set up where it should never be. You who can read, make sure you understand what I’m talking about. If you’re living in Judea at the time, run for the hills; if you’re working in the yard, don’t go back to the house to get anything; if you’re out in the field, don’t go back to get your coat. Pregnant and nursing mothers will have it especially hard. Hope and pray this won’t happen in the middle of winter.
i think you have that backwards.
The evidence for an early date of Revelation is not compelling at all: it consists of basically 3 things - the argument that Nero is the Antichrist, the argument that John's Greek is 'less fluid' here than in his gospel (as though he hadn't quite learned to speak Greek yet??), and the mention of a temple in chapter 11.
all these are spurious and unconvincing. no antinicene fathers wrote about Nero being Antichrist, in fact they all still looked for a future one. John is recording a prophetic vision in highly symbolic terms here: of course the language is different than narrative history. and the temple in ch. 11 is said to be that in heaven, not on earth, in the same section of the book - moreover Ezekiel also measures a temple that did not exist in a vision.
also, the futurist view does not in any way at all depend on the dating of the book of Revelation, but it is the preterist view which is utterly destroyed by the actual late date - supported explicitly by a half dozen or more writings from the early church fathers.
The preterist view does not appear until the 1600s, historically, when a Jesuit priest came up with it in order to oppose the then-common view that the beast and Babylon system spoken of in the book were indicative of the papacy. it is at that time and only that time that mid 60AD dates for Revelation began to be proposed, AFAIK - because it was necessary in order for an anti-Protestant interpretation to be plausible, which did not implicate the RCC
The evidence for an early date of Revelation is not compelling at all: it consists of basically 3 things - the argument that Nero is the Antichrist, the argument that John's Greek is 'less fluid' here than in his gospel (as though he hadn't quite learned to speak Greek yet??), and the mention of a temple in chapter 11.
all these are spurious and unconvincing. no antinicene fathers wrote about Nero being Antichrist, in fact they all still looked for a future one. John is recording a prophetic vision in highly symbolic terms here: of course the language is different than narrative history. and the temple in ch. 11 is said to be that in heaven, not on earth, in the same section of the book - moreover Ezekiel also measures a temple that did not exist in a vision.
also, the futurist view does not in any way at all depend on the dating of the book of Revelation, but it is the preterist view which is utterly destroyed by the actual late date - supported explicitly by a half dozen or more writings from the early church fathers.
The preterist view does not appear until the 1600s, historically, when a Jesuit priest came up with it in order to oppose the then-common view that the beast and Babylon system spoken of in the book were indicative of the papacy. it is at that time and only that time that mid 60AD dates for Revelation began to be proposed, AFAIK - because it was necessary in order for an anti-Protestant interpretation to be plausible, which did not implicate the RCC
I believe the majority of what was prophesied in Revelation occurred in the first century. I recognize that this isn't the prevailing view of our time. I think we forget sometimes that the Bible , though timeless, had an original intended audience and the simple and plain reading of scripture is generally the most accurate.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Internal evidence states otherwise.
The fact that their Temple is still up and functioning (see Rev. 11) suggests that revelation was written before the destruction of this temple in 70 AD. It is the temple here on earth. Heaven is not a material place.
According to Revelation 1:4, John was writing this letter to seven Churches in Asia.
“…to show to His bond-servants the things which must shortly take place.” (Rev. 22:6)
The statements by Ireneaus have been misinterpreted to promote a futurist view of eschatology.
Nero sent John to Patmos, John was about 62.
In the late 90's John was frail and barely able to talk, this is verified by the Jerome who met John before he died, he died a natural death in Ephesus in 100 AD
The Syriac History of John, the Son of Zebedee makes reference to John’s banishment under Nero, who reigned from 54 to 68 AD. It states:
“After these things, when the Gospel was increasing by the hands of the Apostles, Nero, the unclean and impure and wicked king, heard all that had happened at Ephesus. And he sent and took all that the procurator had and imprisoned him; and laid hold of St. John and drove him into exile; and passed sentence on the city that it should be laid waste.”
https://www.nasscal.com/e-clavis-christian-apocrypha/history-of-john-syriac/
The fact that their Temple is still up and functioning (see Rev. 11) suggests that revelation was written before the destruction of this temple in 70 AD. It is the temple here on earth. Heaven is not a material place.
According to Revelation 1:4, John was writing this letter to seven Churches in Asia.
“…to show to His bond-servants the things which must shortly take place.” (Rev. 22:6)
The statements by Ireneaus have been misinterpreted to promote a futurist view of eschatology.
Nero sent John to Patmos, John was about 62.
In the late 90's John was frail and barely able to talk, this is verified by the Jerome who met John before he died, he died a natural death in Ephesus in 100 AD
The Syriac History of John, the Son of Zebedee makes reference to John’s banishment under Nero, who reigned from 54 to 68 AD. It states:
“After these things, when the Gospel was increasing by the hands of the Apostles, Nero, the unclean and impure and wicked king, heard all that had happened at Ephesus. And he sent and took all that the procurator had and imprisoned him; and laid hold of St. John and drove him into exile; and passed sentence on the city that it should be laid waste.”
https://www.nasscal.com/e-clavis-christian-apocrypha/history-of-john-syriac/
Internal evidence states otherwise.
The fact that their Temple is still up and functioning (see Rev. 11) suggests that revelation was written before the destruction of this temple in 70 AD.
According to Revelation 1:4, John was writing this letter to seven Churches in Asia.
“…to show to His bond-servants the things which must shortly take place.” (Rev. 22:6)
The statements by Ireneaus have been misinterpreted to promote a futurist view of eschatology.
Nero sent John to Patmos, John was about 62.
In the late 90's John was frail and barely able to talk, this is verified by the Jerome who met John before in died, he died a natural death in Ephesus in 100 AD
The Syriac History of John, the Son of Zebedee makes reference to John’s banishment under Nero, who reigned from 54 to 68 AD. It states:
“After these things, when the Gospel was increasing by the hands of the Apostles, Nero, the unclean and impure and wicked king, heard all that had happened at Ephesus. And he sent and took all that the procurator had and imprisoned him; and laid hold of St. John and drove him into exile; and passed sentence on the city that it should be laid waste.”
https://www.nasscal.com/e-clavis-christian-apocrypha/history-of-john-syriac/
The fact that their Temple is still up and functioning (see Rev. 11) suggests that revelation was written before the destruction of this temple in 70 AD.
According to Revelation 1:4, John was writing this letter to seven Churches in Asia.
“…to show to His bond-servants the things which must shortly take place.” (Rev. 22:6)
The statements by Ireneaus have been misinterpreted to promote a futurist view of eschatology.
Nero sent John to Patmos, John was about 62.
In the late 90's John was frail and barely able to talk, this is verified by the Jerome who met John before in died, he died a natural death in Ephesus in 100 AD
The Syriac History of John, the Son of Zebedee makes reference to John’s banishment under Nero, who reigned from 54 to 68 AD. It states:
“After these things, when the Gospel was increasing by the hands of the Apostles, Nero, the unclean and impure and wicked king, heard all that had happened at Ephesus. And he sent and took all that the procurator had and imprisoned him; and laid hold of St. John and drove him into exile; and passed sentence on the city that it should be laid waste.”
https://www.nasscal.com/e-clavis-christian-apocrypha/history-of-john-syriac/
THAT is the Second Coming? Preposterous. As is historicism and preterism.
Furthermore, Jesus by no means "killed them all". On the contrary, they have OBVIOUSLY been preserved. For the purposes that God has set forth before the world began.
Oh....and check your history. Israel the nation persisted for something like 80-odd more years.
Furthermore, Jesus by no means "killed them all". On the contrary, they have OBVIOUSLY been preserved. For the purposes that God has set forth before the world began.
Oh....and check your history. Israel the nation persisted for something like 80-odd more years.
No. The Temple of Rev 11 is obviously future.
The prophetic Temple succession is:
-586BC destruction
-Reconstruction under Ezra and Nehimiah
-70AD destruction
-future end time reconstruction (a prophetic fact that is being planned in the present day in real time and is quite inevitable)
-the likely destruction of the "tribulation temple" though this is not explicitly stated
-millennial temple of the earthly reign of Christ the King per Ezekiel
The prophetic Temple succession is:
-586BC destruction
-Reconstruction under Ezra and Nehimiah
-70AD destruction
-future end time reconstruction (a prophetic fact that is being planned in the present day in real time and is quite inevitable)
-the likely destruction of the "tribulation temple" though this is not explicitly stated
-millennial temple of the earthly reign of Christ the King per Ezekiel
Really. So you believe that Israel and gentiles shall drift in the flotsam and jetsam of this insane sin-soaked world that is most certainly headed for disaster without a Biblical anchor and hope for the future?
You had better understand the ages-old repeating Biblical types and patterns of the Christ/anti-Christ duality. And eventual victory of One over the other. So stated in Gen 3 to begin with.
The difference between your pathetic and erroneous view of the cataclysmic event known as the DOTL and mine is the difference
between a firecracker and the Tsar Bomba.
Wake.....up. The flood of Noah itself does not even equal the fury of the DOTL.
Mat 24:21
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Mat 24:22
And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
You had better understand the ages-old repeating Biblical types and patterns of the Christ/anti-Christ duality. And eventual victory of One over the other. So stated in Gen 3 to begin with.
The difference between your pathetic and erroneous view of the cataclysmic event known as the DOTL and mine is the difference
between a firecracker and the Tsar Bomba.
Wake.....up. The flood of Noah itself does not even equal the fury of the DOTL.
Mat 24:21
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Mat 24:22
And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
Sorry my bad. But my point still stands unassailable.
IMO your view of eschatology is one of the reasons why the state of the Church today is what it is.
Pathetic, vacillating weak and worldly. And prone to being seduced by the most trivial of Satan's lies.
I did entertain the supposed eschatology teachings if a very well educated Presbyterian pastor for a while. Dude had a mind like a bank vault. Lots of information. And yet he had not even the slightest idea of what he was talking about in terms of prophecy. Literally 100% wrong 100% of the time (reminds me of @GaryA in that regard!) And the lowest of the low view of Scripture.
Fighting the forces of Satan with a baby bottle and a rattle is the status of the Church today. Good luck with that.
IMO your view of eschatology is one of the reasons why the state of the Church today is what it is.
Pathetic, vacillating weak and worldly. And prone to being seduced by the most trivial of Satan's lies.
I did entertain the supposed eschatology teachings if a very well educated Presbyterian pastor for a while. Dude had a mind like a bank vault. Lots of information. And yet he had not even the slightest idea of what he was talking about in terms of prophecy. Literally 100% wrong 100% of the time (reminds me of @GaryA in that regard!) And the lowest of the low view of Scripture.
Fighting the forces of Satan with a baby bottle and a rattle is the status of the Church today. Good luck with that.
it is not as though he is the only source giving the 90's date of Revelation, but...
i invite you to read the full chapter of Iraneus and see that the context bears out the plain reading.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm
Iraneus without any doubt holds a 'futurist' view of Revelation - as did literally the entire church until, after the reformation, a Jesuit invented preterism in order to defend the papacy from interpretations that cast it as the harlot riding the beast.
so apparently even Iraneus 'misinterpreted himself'?
i invite you to read the full chapter of Iraneus and see that the context bears out the plain reading.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm
Iraneus without any doubt holds a 'futurist' view of Revelation - as did literally the entire church until, after the reformation, a Jesuit invented preterism in order to defend the papacy from interpretations that cast it as the harlot riding the beast.
so apparently even Iraneus 'misinterpreted himself'?
-
1
- Show all
