Posted on 09/19/2005 9:13:46 AM PDT by xzins
Hmmm, perhaps only the preterists are comfortable enough with the biblical support for their position to post anti-preterist stuff on their web sites.
The typical dispie approach is to try to get folks who disagree with them banned from presenting their case.
Are you serious?? (I'd say "y'all" but that might get me in trouble.)
Revelation has 22 chapters of symbolism. Most of the prophetic books are chock full of symbolism (except the parts that dispensationalist say must be literal in order for them to sell their books).
Details in description does not in any way mitigate the symbolic/representational nature of the image. You think just because dimensions are given that requires a literal interpretation. Well it doesn't. And there is nothing in the Scripture to require it. It is a byproduct of your otherwise faulty hermeneutical method. It fact you have to ignore the obvious symbolism, e.g., the rounded/perfect numbers like 144, 1000, 21 times 12, etc. in order to fit your system.
Your grasping. And you ignored the point that they weren't John's letters, they were Jesus' letters to the churches. Are you gouing to question His authority?
No, I am not going to question his authority, just pointing out that the churches must have known John intimately so that when his letter circulated, even with "servant" rather than "apostle" or "Elder", they knew who he was. With that reputation among the churches, you would have thought Paul would have referenced him in his letters, like he did just about every one else.
It is being built. 1 Cor. 3:16,17.
I tell you what. Let's do this. Let's each ante up $1000 and place it in a bank account with the stipulation that, if within 100 years a temple with the exact description from Exekiel 40-48 is built in Jerusalem your heirs get the money and if it isn't then my heirs get the money. How does that sound? Are you confident enough in your exegesis? Or is 100 years too soon?
I still must be missing something. Early date or late date, Paul was dead by the time the vision of Revelation was given. We have no evidence one way or another that John was even associated with the seven churches back in the late 50s/early 60s. Besides, Paul was able to cover the same territory in a rather short period of time in his first missionary journey. What makes you think John could not do the same?
So I'm really at a loss to figure out the point you're trying to make. But it's fun to speculate.
Typo. Should be 12 times 12.
And you're probably a closet Roman Catholic to boot.
You wroteJohn was not speaking.
Rather than discuss the semantics of "speaking", how does this make a difference in determining that what was meant was "material" wealth?
Regards
Kinda like "conditional salvation," eh?
I for one have no problem with the idea that Ezekiel's Temple is symbolic--just as I have no problem with the idea that Solomon's Temple is symbolic of the believer's architecture or the Tabernacle is symbolic of Heaven. That doesn't mean that Solomon's Temple and the Tabernacle were not literal, physical structures, however. Neither is Ezekiel's Temple merely an etherial symbol without a physical substance.
The existance of a symbol does not deny the existance of the literal.
You're out of arguments and down to, "Is not!" I see.
Interesting. Which JEWISH reader of the Hebrew Scriptures also sees the OBVIOUS interpretations that Christians see into them? The only reason why Christians read the Scriptures the way we do regarding the OT is that we base them on the paradigm that they are speaking of Christ. But reading the Scriptures without this notion do NOT make the Scriptures "obviously" pointing to Christ.
Thus, a Jew can ask YOU the same question regarding your "decoder ring". NO original reader of the Hebrew Scriptures read that the Messiah would be born of a virgin woman, for example...
We read the Scriptures based on the teachings given to us from the Apostles, not by reading them outside of the Church's passed down teachings. This becomes clear when you read the very first orthodox Christians in their battle against the Gnostics.
Regards
Not that there's anything wrong with that....
Kinda like "conditional salvation," eh?
Do you have a problem with Christ teaching that salvation is conditional - based on faith in Him? Wouldn't you say that is conditional salvation?
Regards
I'll save that for if I ever offer one, rather than commenting on the content of your spacefiller.
Dan
Then there is no problem with Ezekiel 40-48 being true, as Dispensationalists affirm, rather than misleading, as you formerly asserted.
Dan
Irrelevant.
If it's irrelevant, why did you bring it up?
Editors' Note: Given this issue's emphasis on courtship and marriage, we felt it important to include at least one article on dating.
The dating of the book of Revelation plays a central role in how the book may be interpreted. Was Revelation a warning to churches of impending persecution prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70? Or did persecution occur much later, in A.D. 95-96 after Jerusalem was destroyed? The argument for preterism, the belief that the destructive prophecies in Revelation described events leading up to the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, depends on the book of Revelation having been written before that date. Premillennialists, who believe these prophecies of destruction are yet future, are quick to argue for the late date because it "destroys this entire theory"[1] of preterism.
Some significant research on the dating of Revelation has recently been conducted by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., in his doctoral research which is contained in the book Before Jerusalem Fell[2] and in an excellent, but less technical summary entitled The Beast of Revelation.[3] Gentry describes the history of the scholarly opinion as an ebb and flow with respect to the dating of Revelation. As liberalism grew in the 1800s, there was considerable pressure to assign late dates to many of the New Testament books. This bolstered the argument by liberals that redactors had added to, modified, or deleted portions of the Bible. Toward the late 1800s, however, the evidence for an early dating of Revelation was considered so compelling that a "strong majority" of scholars favored an early date. Since then, however, opinion has shifted back towards a late date with little apparent reason for doing so.
Gentry lists 145 scholars who advocate an early dating of Revelation, including the great church historian, Philip Schaff, and others such as Jay Adams, Greg Bahnsen, F.F. Bruce, Alfred Edersheim, John A. T. Robinson, and Milton Terry.
The theme verse of Revelation reads "Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen" (Rev. 1:7). Cloud comings refer to swift judgment upon God's enemies (Ps. 18:7-15; Joel 2:1,2, Zeph. 1:14,15) in this case upon "they who pierced him." The Jews were covenantally responsible for Christ's death: they sought His death, paid for His capture, brought false witness, convicted Him, turned Him over to Roman civil authority, and declared "His blood be on us and on our children" (Matt. 27:25).[4] The Greek word for "earth" can also be translated "land," thus the reference here likely refers to the twelve "tribes of the [promised] land," the Jews.
Thus, the judgment Christ prophesied against the Jews (Matt. 21:40-45; 23:32-24:2, Luke 23:23-30) is echoed throughout the book of Revelation. Whereas Christ warned that these prophecies would come within a generation (Matt. 12:41-45, 23:36, 24:34), similarly John in Revelation warns that these events will occur "shortly" (1:1), "the time is near" (1:3), "the hour . . . is about to come" (3:10 NASB), Christ is coming "quickly" in judgment (22:7), and "must shortly take place" (22:6). These judgments culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem under multiple armies under Roman command. Over a million Jews were slaughtered, hundreds of thousands of others were enslaved, the city left in ruins, and the great temple was utterly destroyed within a generation (40 years) of Christ's prophesy (Matt. 24:2).
The late date advocates who believe that Revelation was written around A.D. 95-96 have a problem on their hands. They suggest that persecution under the emperor Domitian was what is described in Revelation, but there is scant evidence that persecution of Christians by Domitian ever took place--a fact that many late date adherents readily admit.[5] The author of Revelation, John, repeatedly alludes to a "great city" which is very likely a reference to Jerusalem and describes the temple as if it were still standing (Rev. 11:2). How can late date advocates make such claims of a city that history records was left in ruins in A.D. 70? Much has been made by late daters of a statement by Irenaeus in Against Heresies that seems to associate John or the book of Revelation with Domitian, but there are a number of translational, interpretational, and historical problems that caution against an overreliance on this ambiguous passage.
Bahnsen and Gentry cite external evidence for an early date: "Clement of Alexandria . . . asserts that all revelation ceased under Nero's reign. The Muratorian Canon (ca. 170) has John completing Revelation before Paul had written to seven different churches (Paul died in A.D. 67 or 68). Tertullian (A.D. 160-220) places John's banishment in conjunction with Peter's and Paul's martyrdom (A.D. 67/68). Epiphanius (A.D. 315-403) twice states Revelation was written under `Claudius [Nero] Caesar.' The Syriac version of Revelation (sixth century) has as a heading to Revelation: `written in Patmos, whither John was sent by Nero Caesar.'"[6]
Since Nero died in A.D. 68, the writing of Revelation must have preceded that date, most likely having been written sometime between A.D. 64 and 67.
And the beat goes on....
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.