Replies

This is such a gross misrepresentation of the current debate over Revelation that it's almost laughable. The moderate liberal will always try to relegate the Revelation to that early Church era. They don't want to see a future application aspect to it. This man has just told you that proper interpretation of Revelation REQUIRES YOU to strip it of any notions YOU might have about its being a futuristic book. Despite what you might read in that sounds futuristic, looks futuristic, compares with other passages as futuristic, this man tells you that you are mistaken.

Most of Revelation is written to the persecuted church. I know that view isn't popular, but popularity doesn't really mean much.

However, major portions of Revelation do look forward (from its writing) and major portions of the old testament prophets do look forward. Enough to establish supernatural foreknowledge of a wide range of things.

The prophet Daniel outlines history for the next 500 years after his writing with stunning detail. The materialists who reject the supernatural can only get around Daniel's predictions by making him a near-contemporary of Christ or ignoring him altogether. Of course, then you run into more problems, such as Alexander's identification with one horn, where he would be depicted with the two horns of Amen-Ra after visiting Egypt if Daniel had written at a later date.

Most of Revelation is written to the persecuted church. I know that view isn't popular, but popularity doesn't really mean much.

I don't mind debating the above with someone who at least recognizes there is a debate going on. The man who wrote this basic article assumes the above conclusion without even mentioning the debate...and it is a hot debate. Preterism, in particular, has reemphasized the intensity of the debate.

You are honest. He is dishonest.

You also recognize a futuristic element in Revelation. It's hard to read about the judgements and new Jerusalem without at least conceding these are futuristic, but some won't even allow that.

There is much more that is futuristic. I would, however, be one who would listen to a historic interpretation of the opening letters to the 7 churches segment. I don't find any alignment with historic "periods" of the church to be at all compelling, and instead, it's the penultimate in high speculation.