[P-Marlowe]

BTW, how is the use of Josephus as a historical witness to the events of AD70 different than futurists using the historical accounts of the emperor Domitian and the writings of Irenaeus to support the notion that Revelation was written in or about AD96?

For one thing Irenaues, as I recall, Irenaus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a Disciple of John who was the author of the book. So the earliest record we have dating the book is 96AD. The earlier dating is simply based upon the assumption that it had to be written earlier than 70AD since John was supposedly referring to Nero as the beast.

My eshcatology is not contingent upon Revelation being written in 96AD. Your's is contingent upon it being written before 70AD. But you have no historical proof.

I gotta go.

[topcat54]

For one thing Irenaues, as I recall, Irenaus was a disciple of Polycarp, ...

Tell us, was Irenaeus fallible or infallible? Did God in His providence perfectly preserve Irenaeus' words for us as He preserved the Bible? Did God promise to His church the ability to understand Irenaeus as He did with His own Holy Word?

My eshcatology is not contingent upon Revelation being written in 96AD.

Sure it is. You would have no reason to be a futurist otherwise. That's why folks like your friend xzins insist that Revelation must have been written in AD96. The alternative is devastating to the futurist view.

But you have no historical proof.

You mean we have no "gospel according to Irenaeus" to back our assertion?