Posted on 02/03/2020 7:09:40 PM PST by grumpa
There are two views of when Revelation was written. One view is that it was written around AD 95-96. The second view is that it was written in the mid 60’s AD—prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. I will show that the early date has the strongest support.
1. Revelation 17:10 says that the book was written during the sixth king, who was Nero, who reigned from AD 54-68. (The previous five Roman rulers were Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius.) Interestingly, the text also says that the seventh king to come would reign only “a little while.” The seventh king was Galba, who was ruler for only six months (AD 68-69).
2. An ancient, second century New Testament—The Syriac version (called the Peshitto)—says the following on the title page of the Book of Revelation: “Again the Revelation, which was upon the holy John the Evangelist from God when he was on the island of Patmos where he was thrown by the emperor Nero.”
3. Revelation 1:9 says it was being written during the Tribulation, which Jesus said would occur during his own generation, as Jerusalem became surrounded by armies (Matthew 24:15-34; Luke 21:20-24).
4. Scholars agree that the major theme of Revelation is a GREAT JUDGMENT upon “Babylon.” Babylon was an historic enemy of God’s people, and it is used symbolically in Revelation to represent Old Covenant Israel/Jerusalem who had become unfaithful. This is the theme of chapters 16-19. The Lord’s wrath, promised in Revelation, would come against “the GREAT CITY Babylon” (Revelation 18:21-24), which is clearly identified as the “CITY WHERE THE LORD WAS SLAIN” (Revelation 11:8-9). This unambiguously confirms that the Great Judgment was against JERUSALEM, and thus the identity of Babylon. Also confirming the identity of Babylon, is her description as a harlot (Revelation 17:1, 15; 19:2). Throughout the Bible, when Israel was unfaithful, she is characterized as a harlot or adulterer (Deuteronomy 31:16-18; Isaiah 1:21; Jeremiah 2:20; 3:6-9; Ezekiel 6:8-9; 16:15, 26, 28; Hosea 1:2; 9:1). The harlot is adorned in purple and scarlet (Revelation 17:4), which are the colors of the ritual dress of the high priest and the colors that adorn the temple (Exodus 28:5-6; 39:1-2).
5. Revelation contains over 30 passages that demand its imminent, i.e. soon, fulfillment. We see such statements as “must shortly take place,” “soon,” “near,” and “about to happen” (Revelation 1:1-3; 22:6-20; etc.). The wrath of God and the Lamb (Revelation 6:16-17; 14:19; 15:1, 7; 16:1; 16:19; 19:15), then, is consistent with Jesus’ astounding condemnation of his fellow Jews in Matthew 23, which He insisted would be judged for all the righteous blood ever shed on earth—IN THEIR GENERATION. This judgment was because of their sins and failure to accept Him as Messiah. There is nothing post AD 95 that could qualify as such an imminent (“must shortly take place”) judgment. Only a pre-AD 70 (prior to the fall and judgment of Old Covenant Israel) makes any sense. Case closed about Babylon and the Great Judgment.
6. Revelation 11:2 says, “They will trample the holy city for forty-two months.” This is consistent with Jesus’ statement to his contemporaries: “When YOU see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then you know that its desolation is near.” (Luke 21:20). It cannot be coincidence that forty-two months is exactly the period of the Roman army’s final assault on Jerusalem—from February AD 66 to August AD 70.
7. Revelation 1:7 tells us whom God’s judgment was against. It reads: “Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of Him.” This clearly identifies Jesus’ crucifiers as the target. “All the tribes of the earth” is a reference to the twelve tribes of Israel, which means Old Covenant Israel. Interestingly, Josephus and other ancient historians reported seeing chariots in the sky above Jerusalem during the Jewish-Roman War of AD 66-70. This fulfilled the visibility requirement. “Coming on clouds” is Hebraic idiomatic apocalyptic language from the Old Testament, where God “came” in judgment against his enemies (example, Isaiah 19). Thus, this poetic judgment language affirms that the Lord would come in a non-literal sense against apostate Israel, as predicted in numerous New Testament passages, such as Matthew 16:27-28; 21:33-45; 22:1-14; 23:29-39; Luke 21:5-33; etc. Like judgments against Israel in Old Testament times (722 BC and 586 BC), God used an opposing army as his instrument.
8. In Revelation 11:1, John was told to measure the temple. This implies that the temple was still standing when the book was written, thus prior to AD 70.
9. Another reason to believe the Book of Revelation was written at the earlier date is there is a question about John’s health after AD 70. Papias (c. AD 100) purportedly said that John was killed by the Jews. This would have been when the Jews could have accomplished the execution—before AD 70. However, another view is that Jerome noted in his writings that John was seen in AD 96, and that he was so old and infirm that “he was with difficulty carried to the church, and could speak only a few words to the people.” We must put this fact together with Revelation 10:11, which says John must “prophesy again concerning many peoples and nations and tongues and kings.” It is difficult to imagine John could write Revelation in AD 96 or be able to speak to many nations and many kings at any date after AD 96 since he was already elderly and feeble.
10. In Daniel, the author was told to “seal up the vision, for it is a long way off” (Daniel 12:4)—which referred to a 483-year wait until Jesus came to fulfill the prophecy. By contrast, in Revelation, John was told “not to seal up the vision because it concerns things which must shortly come to pass” (Rev 22:10). If 483 years was considered a long way off, it makes no sense that 2,000 plus years could be considered “shortly to come to pass.” Clearly, the obvious answer is Revelation shouldn’t be sealed because it was about to happen at the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem.
11. The existence of only seven churches in Asia Minor (see Revelation 1) also indicates a writing date before the greater expansion of Christianity into that region, which occurred after the fall of Jerusalem.
12. The apostle Peter wrote about the coming New Heaven and New Earth (2 Peter 3), reminding his readers that other apostles also wrote about it (2 Peter 3:2). The other apostle to have written most prominently about this was John in Revelation 21. Thus, it is probable that Peter used Revelation as source material. Since Peter was martyred under Nero no later than AD 68, that places the writing of Revelation earlier than Peter’s death. See my article about the New Heaven and New Earth here:
https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AG32bst6fh%2DYjhw&cid=D3BD424B0B25B83F&id=D3BD424B0B25B83F%2116781&parId=D3BD424B0B25B83F%21113&o=OneUp
There are no convincing internal evidences for the late date of Revelation. The late date is based largely on a third-hand ambiguous statement by Irenaeus in about AD 160. Scholars have questioned just what Irenaeus meant, and have also pointed out Irenaeus’ other historical errors such as saying that Jesus lived to near fifty years old. Kenneth Gentry lists 136 authors that hold to a pre-AD 70 dating. See Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (Powder Springs, Georgia: American Vision, 1998, pgs. 30-38). His book is highly recommended.
www.ProphecyQuestions.com
The date is important.
If the date is early, then Revelations regards the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, in turn implying the partial preterists are correct.
bkmk
Thanks for sharing this.
Mark Hitchcock - A.D. 95 - Defending the Traditional Date of Revelation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgYvh0dtCO0&t=333s
Free Download
Dr. Mark Hitchcock’s PhD dissertation on the date of the Book of Revelation.
(It’s AD 95 !!!)
https://www.pre-trib.org/media/k2/assets/Documents/hitchcock-dissertation.pdf
And your evidences also rely on varying degrees of ambiguity and or interpretation. Regardless, are you saying that all of what Revelation predicts has been fulfilled, and if not, what is left to be so?
I don’t worry too much about interpreting prophecy.
As far as I am concerned, the later date leaves current events open to manipulation by the PTB (including using technology to fake the Second Coming with a false savior).
Best we can do is offer the Gospel to everyone, strive to obey God in everything in our daily lives, pray, seek His will in everything.
I have no interest in “helping” God to fix the Middle East, either.
I recently had a discussion about this with a very knowledgeable friend who is Eastern Orthodox. He’s not familiar with the Left Behind series and the Scofield modern interpretation of Revelation.
He was flabbergasted that anyone would think the Temple was to be rebuilt and destroyed again, that people were still waiting for the events of the destruction of Jerusalem to happen again, etc.
In short, he’s a partial Preterist.
He didn't say it would occur during his own generation.
Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place
means that the events will occur quickly, i.e. in a single generation. Much of that discourse doesn't make sense if interpreted as describing the events of 70 AD.
“The Lord’s wrath, promised in Revelation, would come against “the GREAT CITY Babylon” (Revelation 18:21-24), which is clearly identified as the “CITY WHERE THE LORD WAS SLAIN” (Revelation 11:8-9).”
_-_-_-———
Sorry, no, it is not.
Rome is Babylon, not Jerusalem. Look up both verse bundles.
The date of Revelation only serves to focus our attention on which historical events fulfilled Revelation. If it was early then the Roman War takes care of the details. If it was late then Eusebius was probably correct that a combination of the Roman War, the Bar Kokhba revolt, and the conversion of Rome to Christianity under Constantine takes care of the details. I think the Roman War works better, but there are no grounds for modern futurism.
I could not agree more - - Thanks!!
Cough! cough! Jesus warning in Luke 21 seems to have been a better predictor than Jesus’s prediction in Revelation of Jesus Christ by John. cough! cough!
All of the "fulfilled prophecies," for example, could simply have been tacked on after they came to pass.
Regards,
” “The date of Revelation only serves to focus our attention on which historical events fulfilled Revelation””
And according to Evangelists it dates the end of the Bible by making it so God will not give any new written Word.
You must have a large inventory of books still to sell.
Sigh, Grumpa is at it again, pushing preterism.
Strangely the post-apostolic writings, including people like Hermas of Rome, Clement of Rome, Barnabus, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, etc., who lived almost two thousand years closer to the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD than we do, said nothing at all about the Olivet discourse of Jesus, and all that is prophesied in Revelation, had been fulfilled in their recent memory...they living not that long after that event.
In fact, they said just the opposite, for whenever they commented on what Jesus foretold in his Olivet disourse, or on Revelation, they interpreted it in the future...and they lived AFTER the fall of Jerusalem.
Enter Grumpa and the preterists, some two thousand years later claiming they know more these who lived two thousand years closer to the actual event.
If what the preterists claim were true, it would be a very great prophetic thing indeed to the post-apostolic writers mentioned above. The fact that they DID NOT interpret 70AD as modern preterists do, means only one thing, their doctrine is utterly bogus.
No. Not when you analyze the writing styles, if that was tacked on later you’d see clear changes between authors’ grammatical styles.
What non-Catholics you're familiar with have chosen to ignore isn't proof that every word Christ said would happen in the life time of some of those who were present when he spoke didn't happen happened exactly when He said it would.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.