Revelation is purely about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. It is complete.
Ping to you — an interesting article.
This should be interesting.
When was Revelation written?
Much of the content of the Bible is not in linear time as we understand it - the Hebrew writers seemed to have a different concept of "flow of time", and God also, being outside the box of space and time, would not "view" time in a linear fashion (there is no past and future, as Jesus is the Lamb slain BEFORE the foundations of the earth were laid).
The Bible is written so that even the simplest of people can understand its message (redemption), but also deep and complex enough for life-long scholars to wrangle over meaning and content - we never have to worry about getting bored by studying the Word.
Luke 19:41-44
So John by his own words tells us that he was brought forward in Spirit to the Lord's day. Peter tells everybody how God measures time, that a day with the Lord is as a thousand years... and that dispensation of time has not yet begun. a n d
Daniel was told to Daniel 12:9 And he (not Daniel) said, ‘Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Not even Daniel understood fully what he was directed to write. Hmmmm interesting now that there are 7 *seals* listed in Revelation and we have yet to have them all completed. So Antiochus is long gone and the ‘end’ is not yet here.
What John wrote in Revelation is what was given him by the Spirit as to the condition of what had taken place, what would be taking place, and declares Who the VICTOR would at the end of the Lord's day. Regardless of traditions of men that make up their own interpretations.
Note -- many folks mistakenly mix up Revelation with Daniel with the writings of Paul. Daniel's prophecies were fulfilled in Antiochus IV and his desecration of the Temple in Jerusalem and the restoration of the Jewish Kingdom by the Maccabees, while Paul's is about the future.Revelation is purely about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. It is complete.
I'll get this read, sometime soon.
There are many ways to parse the same data, and Daniel and John’s Apocalypse are not the only biblical texts that discuss eschatology. I’d point you to Vos’ Pauline Eschatology for a start at that.
My own position (pretty standard Reformed protestant amillennialism, see my FR page for the standard references and rant) doesn’t require an early date for Revelation, and I don’t tend to participate much when it comes up on FR.
The preterist position (which you are arguing) requires an early date, and you end up needing a lot of exegetical special pleading to make it work.
It also confuses certain parties in the debate, who can’t seem to distinguish any position outside their camp. Which is ironic, given how they pride themselves on “rightly dividing” this or that.
Revelation is purely about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. It is complete.
"It's end will come with a flood"
Considered in the history of redemption, the siege and overthrow of Jerusalem and the destruction of the physical temple were indeed a tribulation "such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be."
Daniel's prophecies were fulfilled in Antiochus IV and his desecration of the Temple in Jerusalem
Oh? Don't count the years like a 19th century lawyer or engineer. Look at the numbers like a Jew soaked in Old Testament history and texts would. Seventy weeks takes you to the tenth jubilee out. It's a sabbatical pattern. You might find this an interesting read.
There are a lot of things discussed in rev that don,t seem to have any thing to do with a.d seventy, for instance the thousand years in which the people who were in the first resurrection would reign with Christ.
For the Jews, the Temple was a mini-version of the world. So the destruction of the temple was the destruction of the World
Any way. If you cannot (which you can't), then Revelation is not yet complete.