Replies

JH,
I already presented more proof than you.
Your proof is that a man was told that another man saw John on Patmos.

My proof is that John never mentioned AD 70 (the second biggest modern day event in his lifetime).
John mentioned the priesthood as if it was still in existence but after AD 70, it was not existent.
John measured the temple.
Etc.

It is not logical to believe Revelation was written post AD 70 with all the internal evidence.

Other proof I have posted time and time again.
Christ said it! Using the same type of speech as prophets of old who prophesied doom on others. The apostles taught it! Confirming THEY were in the last days.

The signs of Matt 24 are declared by Jude, John and Josephus.
YOU have no proof Christ did not return when he said. I have Biblical proclimation and world history proving it's fulfillment.

God Bless
Nate

My proof is that John never mentioned AD 70 (the second biggest modern day event in his lifetime).

If John wrote Revelations around 100AD, this would have been 30 years after your supposed return of Christ.

If he didn't mention the return of Christ, it was because it hadn't happened. If he didn't mention the destruction of Jerusalem, it was 30 years earlier and with all the Jews gone, he was now preaching to the Gentile church, and the history of Jerusalem was pretty well forgotten.

In the text of John's letters to these Gentiles, how would the destruction of Jerusalem have been segued into his letters? Where in them would it have been appropriate to have talked about it?

It would have been strangely out of place anywhere in the three letters and Revelations also.

And how do you get around 1-2-and 3 John, that from all accounts I've read, they were written between 90 and 100AD? Do you argue with these dates also, or the author of the letters?