Preterism vs. Futurism

[FreeinChrist]

Can you prove that Revelations was written in 96 AD beyond a shadow of doult. That would have made John at least 85 years ago. I would doult he even lived a much pasted 70 AD, not to think he lived another 26 years.

The BIG QUESTION that I have for you is, if Revelations was written in 96 AD as you say, then why would not John have written about what happened in 70 AD seeing that it was such an important event fullfilling scripture in Luke 21 and Matt 24. The silence is blowing my ear drums out.

It wasn't about 70 AD, Hidden. And yes, John lived to be very old. After he was released from his banishment to Patmos by Dominitan, he lived in Ephesus.

 

[stauron]

You may be upset with roadie, parousia70, but the above comment that roadie says all that is untrue is a clear distortion of what he had written. It is obvious that he was referring to endtime view - or lack of it.

It is what preterists teach apart from orthodox Christianity that he is railing against.

There are only a very few things that preterists teach that are new or different. Consistency and the logical consequences of other theological dogmas are the hallmark of preterism.

It is very arogant to make the claim that it is garbage, but it is silly and pointless to say that it is ALL garbage. Nearly every individual premise of the preterist argument has been supported by Christians throughout the centuries. Not all at once and not by the same folks, but the overall witness is great.

Please note that I am not arguing that there is a consistent preterist witness from the apostles till now, nor that even the men that preterists quote and study would agree with preterist conclusions.

BUT, consistent hermeneutics, consistent scripture use and logically ordering the vast array of able expositors and commentators can easily assemble a corpus of preterist literature that baldly refutes the the comments from roadie.

Many respected men argue that the new heavens and new earth had to do with the change in the ages in the first century. Many argue for the early date (pre-70ad) for Revelation and most if not all of the New Testament Scriptures. You can find a multitude of references to 70ad as a coming in judgement.

My point is that you can disagree and argue against the salient points, but it is inflammatory and unchristian to simply popoff and decry in this way.

My contention is that preterism is the only justifiable way to support that Christians go into God's presence at death, or that we actually have justification now, or that the New Covenant is really new and eternal.

 

[FreeinChrist]

There are only a very few things that preterists teach that are new or different. Consistency and the logical consequences of other theological dogmas are the hallmark of preterism.

Welll... I disagree very much with the 'consistency' comment. And I see some very real dangers with preterism.

 

[stauron]

Welll... I disagree very much with the 'consistency' comment. And I see some very real dangers with preterism.

Of course, I don't expect you to agree with me. I appreciate your caveat about rodie's comment.

The trouble is that most Christians disagree very sharply about baptism, spiritual gifts, the rapture, and calvinism/arminianism; to the point that some even deny that the dissenting view is 'Christian'. Preterism doesn't affect the core things about salvation. I suggest that the gulf between baptists and paedo-baptists is the same or greater than the gap between preterists and some others (partial preterism at least) and the differences between catholics and protestants is much greater.

As far as consistency goes, the same hermeneutic that covers the change in the covenants leads to preterism. I'll write more later, gotta go for the day.

 

[roadie432002]

parousia70.the garbage i was referring to is your belief that revelation was fullfilled in ad 70.that is absurd and any serious study exposes that error.its common knowledge that John was exiled to Patomas by the roman emperor Domitian 81-96 ad.Domitian believed he was devine and demanded he be worshiped.of course true Christians would not do so so he began the first roman empire wide persucation of Christians.He was murdered by his servants in 96 ad.then John was allowed to return to his home in Ephesis were he was the pastor of the local church,and began teaching the future events of Revelation.John was the last apostle to die, 68 years after Christ was cruficied,around 100 ad.yes,John was very old,in his 90,s.Now,since the book of Revelation was written between 81-96 ad it was NOT about the 70 ad destruction of Jerusalem.that was a localized event.the events described in Revelations are global.i have asked you many times to answer a few questions and you always ignore them.lets try again.when did the Trumpets in Rev occur?1.hail,fire and blood that destroys 1/3 of EARTHS vegetation.2.when did the burning mountian occur that turns 1/3 of the EARTHS seas to blood.3.when did the fallen star from heaven contaminate 1/3 of the EARTHS rivers.4.when did the heavenly bodies lose 1/3 of their light.now the first "woe".when did the plague of terrible locusts occur.the 2nd "woe".when were 1/3 of ALL mankind killed.now the Bowls.when did the foul sores occur on those with the mark of the beast.when did ALL the seas become blood,and ALL the sea creatures die.when did ALL the rivers become blood.when did the sun become hot enough to scorch people on EARTH.when did the Euphrates dry up.when did the 200 million man army cross the Euphrates.(there werent that many people on earth when that was predicted).China has boasted that it now has a 200 million man army).you cant spiritualize all of revelations.dont you think that these world wide events would have been noticed if they had happened in A.D. 70?when was the New Heaven and the New Earth created?where is the New Jerusalem?its 1500 miles square!that would really be noticable had it already occurred.we all know Jesus ascended into Heaven from the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:9-12)two men in white apparel(angels)said,Men of Galilee why do you stand gazing up into heaven?This same Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.now,in Zechariah 14:4;and in that day His feet will stand on the mount of Olives,which faces Jerusalem on the east.and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, from east to west,making a large valley.when did that happen?we all know the Mount of Olives has not split yet.ok,its your turn.

 

[roadie432002]

i just spent an hour on a new post and when i hit post quick reply it disappeared.i will try again later.in short, the Apostle John was exiled to Patomas by the roman emperor Domitian 81-96 ad.He thought he was devine and demanded all worship him.of course the real Christians would not.that is when the persucation of Christians began in earnst across all the roman empire.Domitian was found of exileing people to Patomas. John was released from exile in ad 96 after Domitian was murdered by his servents.John returned to Ephesus where he was the pastor of the local church and died around 100 ad.John was the last Apostle to die.

 

[Justme]

Hi Roadie,

When did this happen?

32"I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

That verse is from Luke 21. Some of the "all these things" are:

20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near.
24They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

And oh yes,
27At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

What does this all mean...literally?

Justme

 

[Hidden Manna]

parousia70.the garbage i was referring to is your belief that revelation was fullfilled in ad 70.that is absurd and any serious study exposes that error.its common knowledge that John was exiled to Patomas by the roman emperor Domitian 81-96 ad.Domitian believed he was devine and demanded he be worshiped.of course true Christians would not do so so he began the first roman empire wide persucation of Christians.He was murdered by his servants in 96 ad.then John was allowed to return to his home in Ephesis were he was the pastor of the local church,and began teaching the future events of Revelation.John was the last apostle to die, 68 years after Christ was cruficied,around 100 ad.yes,John was very old,in his 90,s.Now,since the book of Revelation was written between 81-96 ad it was NOT about the 70 ad destruction of Jerusalem.that was a localized event.the events described in Revelations are global.

If this was true then the full preterist could still be right as far as all old testament scripture at the time Jesus said it in Luke 21:22 would be fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed.
Then if what you say is true about revelations being written after 70 AD, then what John said in Rev.13 would point directly at the Papacy in the dark ages. Are you a Seventh Day Adventist or do you have a Historical view?
Keep in mind that in Rev.22:10 John was told not to seal the book because the things were at hand. daniel was told to seal his book because the things spoken of were a long time in coming. About 500 years.
If what you say is true then the book of Revelations would have to take place sooner then 500 years don't you think so? Then Papacy would be the only place to look for consideration, unless if you think 2,000 years to infinitity is correct.

 

[stauron]

parousia70.the garbage i was referring to is your belief that revelation was fullfilled in ad 70.that is absurd and any serious study exposes that error.its common knowledge that John was exiled to Patomas by the roman emperor Domitian 81-96 ad.Domitian believed he was devine and demanded he be worshiped.of course true Christians would not do so so he began the first roman empire wide persucation of Christians.

roadie432002, thanks so much for taking the time to backup your assertions. Your view about the date of the writing of Revelation is fraught with error. The only serious study I have seen is Ken Gentry's work "Before Jerusalem Fell". He hates preterists and has actively disavowed the preterist position. Yet he argues against your "common knowledge" and demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that the early date is better.

Have you actually read any history of the first century? Every scholar of repute starts the Roman persecution with Nero. Domitian was called "little Nero". Nero was much more outspoken and ardent about his divinity. Read Eusebius, Josephus, Schaff, Clarke, Edersheim... they seem unaware of your "common knowledge".

And finally, even if we grant your assumptions about the date, you still have insurmountable difficulty with the start and end of Revelation where 7 times John says the events were going to happen soon. He starts and ends the letter with the admonition/promise that the events were coming quickly, so responsible exegesis requires that we apply that to 2000 years later?

Hidden Manna has a great point as well. Daniel is told to seal up his prophecy because the time is far off, yet John is told to not seal up his prophecy because the time is near. It is common knowledge that they are talking about the same thing. To try and stretch "soon", "at hand" and "quickly" into 1900+ years is absurd and serious study exposes that error.

 

[stauron]

lets try again.when did the Trumpets in Rev occur?1.hail,fire and blood that destroys 1/3 of EARTHS vegetation.2.when did the burning mountian occur that turns 1/3 of the EARTHS seas to blood.3.when did the fallen star from heaven contaminate 1/3 of the EARTHS rivers.4.when did the heavenly bodies lose 1/3 of their light.now the first "woe".when did the plague of terrible locusts occur.the 2nd "woe".when were 1/3 of ALL mankind killed.now the Bowls.when did the foul sores occur on those with the mark of the beast.when did ALL the seas become blood,and ALL the sea creatures die.when did ALL the rivers become blood.when did the sun become hot enough to scorch people on EARTH.when did the Euphrates dry up.when did the 200 million man army cross the Euphrates.(there werent that many people on earth when that was predicted).China has boasted that it now has a 200 million man army).you cant spiritualize all of revelations.dont you think that these world wide events would have been noticed if they had happened in A.D. 70?when was the New Heaven and the New Earth created?where is the New Jerusalem?its 1500 miles square!that would really be noticable had it already occurred.we all know Jesus ascended into Heaven from the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:9-12)two men in white apparel(angels)said,Men of Galilee why do you stand gazing up into heaven?This same Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.now,in Zechariah 14:4;and in that day His feet will stand on the mount of Olives,which faces Jerusalem on the east.and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, from east to west,making a large valley.when did that happen?we all know the Mount of Olives has not split yet.ok,its your turn.

Your literal at all costs hermeneutic is going to have trouble here. Let's just look at Zechariah first. You seemed to have missed the context. 14:3 Then the Lord will go to battle and fight against those nations, just as he fought battles in ancient days. So, let's just think about this for a second. How did God battle in ancient days? Did He ride a horse? What kind of armor did He wear? When He bares His mighty arm and send forth His sword, what kind of sword is it? So if He is fighting in the same way as He did in ancient days, do His feet stand on the mount in the same way?

So how about Hebrews?

12:18 For you have not come to something that can be touched, to a burning fire and darkness and gloom and a whirlwind 12:19 and the blast of a trumpet and a voice uttering words such that those who heard begged to hear no more. 12:20 For they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” 12:21 In fact, the scene was so terrifying that Moses said, “I shudder with fear.” 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the assembly 12:23 and congregation of the firstborn, who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous, who have been made perfect,

Sounds like the new Jerusalem.


These two nobodies seem to think the New Heavens and Earth came already.

"The Scriptures further teach us to call the gospel-restoration and redemption, a creation of a new heaven and a new earth.... ("The Perpetuity and Change of the Sabbath" (The Works of Jonathan Edwards, vol 2).

"Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, of any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under a new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it." (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. xxxvii, p. 354).

 

[roadie432002]

staurton,you are still unable to answer my questions!!thats because you are wrong.Zach speaks for itself.what does kinds of armour have to do with anything.you appear to be incapable of logical thought processes.

 

[FreeinChrist]

roadie432002, thanks so much for taking the time to backup your assertions. Your view about the date of the writing of Revelation is fraught with error. The only serious study I have seen is Ken Gentry's work "Before Jerusalem Fell". He hates preterists and has actively disavowed the preterist position. Yet he argues against your "common knowledge" and demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that the early date is better.

ahhh.... Kenneth Gentry IS a preterist, though a partial preterist. The only arguements he makes that I buy are the ones against hyperpreterism ( aka full preterism, consistent preterism).

Have you actually read any history of the first century? Every scholar of repute starts the Roman persecution with Nero. Domitian was called "little Nero". Nero was much more outspoken and ardent about his divinity. Read Eusebius, Josephus, Schaff, Clarke, Edersheim... they seem unaware of your "common knowledge".

But there is no documentation that Nero banished anyone to Patmos. He torured and killed for entertainment. His persecution, though severe, was pretty well limited to Rome.
In contrast, we do have documentation that Dominitan banished people to Patmos. Dio Cassius was a Roman historian who made mention of those who were released from banisment when Dominitan was asassinated.

And not only do we have writings in the early chuch father's to back (including Eusebius) that John was banished under Domintan - but we also have writings showing the early church fathers (like Justin Martyr) still anticipated the physical return of Christ to the earth to defeat a future Antichrist.

And finally, even if we grant your assumptions about the date, you still have insurmountable difficulty with the start and end of Revelation where 7 times John says the events were going to happen soon. He starts and ends the letter with the admonition/promise that the events were coming quickly, so responsible exegesis requires that we apply that to 2000 years later?

And a number of those times, the word translated as soon means that when they start to occur, it will be quick.
And 'soon' in God's eyes is longer than what we think of 'soon'. After all, a thousand years is ike a day to the Lord.

I don't plan on getting into a discussion here...because I have already examined preterism and rejected it. I found that it is inconsistent and not well supported. But that is my umble opinion.

 

[stauron]

staurton,you are still unable to answer my questions!!thats because you are wrong.Zach speaks for itself.what does kinds of armour have to do with anything.you appear to be incapable of logical thought processes.

God stood on the mountain in the exact same way He fought the battles of ancient days.

Did God ride on a horse into battle?

The mountain split in the same way God bared His arm in battle.

Did God have an iron sword? Bronze?

Being accused by you of being illogical is a compliment.

Can you please address the scripture that refute your fanciful speculation?

Hebrews says that we have come to the Jerusalem above, in contrast to the physical Jerusalem that was in bondage.

Can you address why men much more respected then you or I will ever be boldly state that the new heavens and earth came with the passing of the old covenant?

 

[Hidden Manna]

parousia70.the garbage i was referring to is your belief that revelation was fullfilled in ad 70.that is absurd and any serious study exposes that error.its common knowledge that John was exiled to Patomas by the roman emperor Domitian 81-96 ad.Domitian believed he was devine and demanded he be worshiped.of course true Christians would not do so so he began the first roman empire wide persucation of Christians.He was murdered by his servants in 96 ad.then John was allowed to return to his home in Ephesis were he was the pastor of the local church,and began teaching the future events of Revelation.John was the last apostle to die, 68 years after Christ was cruficied,around 100 ad.yes,John was very old,in his 90,s.Now,since the book of Revelation was written between 81-96 ad it was NOT about the 70 ad destruction of Jerusalem.that was a localized event.the events described in Revelations are global.

If this was true then the full preterist could still be right as far as all old testament scripture at the time Jesus said it in Luke 21:22 would be fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed.
Then if what you say is true about revelations being written after 70 AD, then what John said in Rev.13 would point directly at the Papacy in the dark ages. Are you a Seventh Day Adventist or do you have a Historical view?
Keep in mind that in Rev.22:10 John was told not to seal the book because the things were at hand. daniel was told to seal his book because the things spoken of were a long time in coming. About 500 years.
If what you say is true then the book of Revelations would have to take place sooner then 500 years don't you think so? Then Papacy would be the only place to look for consideration, unless if you think 2,000 years to infinitity is correct.

One other thing Roadie, If John wrote Revelations in 96 AD don't you think that John would have proven Jesus to be a false prophet when Jesus said this in Luke 21:22 ? And then with His coming right after. When John wrote Rev. at the time, the Kingdom was still be come and Babylon "Jerusalem" was still to fall Rev.18

Luke 21


The Destruction of Jerusalem
(1) 20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.


The Coming of the Son of Man
(2) 25 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; 26men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 27Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near."

 

[GW]

FreeinChrist:
Kenneth Gentry IS a preterist, though a partial preterist. The only arguements he makes that I buy are the ones against hyperpreterism ( aka full preterism, consistent preterism).

GW:
Hiya Free. I just thought you should know that Gentry's argument against full preterism is based entirely on Creedal Infallibility, not Sola Scriptura. Gentry believes that the creeds are equal to scripture in their authority, and THEREFORE preterism cannot be true. To read a short article on Gentry's HyperCreedalism, read here:

The Arbitrary Principle of Hyper-Creedalism
by David Green
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/green-david_04_01.html

 

[GW]

FreeinChrist:
Welll... I disagree very much with the 'consistency' comment. And I see some very real dangers with preterism

GW:
Dangers with preterism? Could any such "dangers" even compare to those of futurism, especially dispensationalism? Ever heard of Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, 7th Day Adventists or countless other millennial cults entirely fulled by endtimes madness in general and millennialism in particular? Today's popular protestant eschatology (mostly dispensational millennialism) produces dangerous cults nearly as fast as General Motors produces cars. Rev Jim Jones, David Koresh and Brother Stair are the very poster children of futurist millennialism. So is Hal Lindsey, even though he never drank the kool-aid.

 

[parousia70]

But there is no documentation that Nero banished anyone to Patmos. He torured and killed for entertainment. His persecution, though severe, was pretty well limited to Rome.
In contrast, we do have documentation that Dominitan banished people to Patmos. Dio Cassius was a Roman historian who made mention of those who were released from banisment when Dominitan was asassinated.

Show me your documentation that Dominitan banished John to Patmos. John is the only one that matters to this conversation. Dominitan could have banished a million people to patmos, but if he didn't banish John, your position falls flat.

In contrast to your glaring absense of evidence, we do indeed have documentation that John was banished to Patmos by Nero, before Jerusalem fell:

Epiphanius of Salamis (315-403)
"[John], who prophesied in the time of Claudius [Nero]...the prophetic word according to the Apocalypse being disclosed." (Epiphanius, Panarion/Heresies 51:12,33)

Clement (150-215)
"For the teaching of our Lord at His advent, beginning with Augustus and Tiberius,was completed in the middle of the times of Tiberius. And that of the apostles, embracing the ministry of Paul, end with Nero." (Miscellanies 7:17.)

(On the Timing of John's Banishment)
"And to give you confidence, when you have thus truly repented, that there remains for you a trustworthy hope of salvation, hear a story that is no mere story, but a true account of John the apostle that has been handed down and preserved in memory. When after the death of the tyrant [previously identified as Nero] he removed from the island of Patmos to Ephesus, he used to journey by request to the neighboring districts of the Gentiles, in some places to appoint bishops, in others to regulate whole churches, in others to set among the clergy some one man, it may be, of those indicated by the Spirit." (Who is the Rich Man that shall be Saved?; Section 42)

Syriac Vulgate Bible (sixth century)
"The Apocalypse of St. John, written in Patmos, whither John was sent by Nero Caesar." (Opening Title for the Book of Revelation)

Arethas (sixth century)
"Arethas in the sixth century, applies the sixth seal to the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), adding that the Apocalypse was written before that event" (From Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible, 1871)

(On Revelation 6:12) "Some refer this to the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian."

(On Revelation 7:1) "Here, then, were manifestly shown to the Evangelist what things were to befall the Jews in their war against the Romans, in the way of avenging the sufferings inflicted upon Christ."

(On Revelation 7:4) "When the Evangelist received these oracles, the destruction in which the Jews were involved was not yet inflicted by the Romans."

Papias (first century)
"Because of a statement by Papias, an early church father, that John the Apostle was martyred before a.d. 70, the Johannine authorship has been questioned." (John F. Walvoord on the Date of Revelation - The Bible Knowledge Commentary, p. 925)

"A fragment is, however, attributed to Papias which states that "John the theologian and James his brother were killed by the Jews". (Chapman, John. St. Papias. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI [Online Edition 2002]. Retrieved November 29, 2002 from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11457c.htm)

And not only do we have writings in the early chuch father's to back (including Eusebius) that John was banished under Domintan

All belief in the late date rests upon one cryptic statment of Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyons (130-200AD) who wrote his "Against Heresies" around AD 174. All those that hold to the late date do so because of this one uncertain phrase by Irenaeus, who also stated that Christ Lived to be 50 years old, but I don't see you championing that opinion of his.

- but we also have writings showing the early church fathers (like Justin Martyr) still anticipated the physical return of Christ to the earth to defeat a future Antichrist.

Irrelevant.
The Holy writ of the Inspired apostles trump the later fallible opinions of men.

And a number of those times, the word translated as soon means that when they start to occur, it will be quick.

Please demonstrate this from scripture.
And what about the "number of times" soon dosen't mean what you contend, but acutally means soon?

And 'soon' in God's eyes is longer than what we think of 'soon'. After all, a thousand years is ike a day to the Lord.

Free, God dosen't have soon.
Nothing is "soon" to God, therefore we know that when God says something is going to happen "soon", it is to be understood by how time relates to MAN, not God.

Just to be clear, which of these two possibilities do you personally subscribe to? Are not sure which one is correct so you presented both?

I don't plan on getting into a discussion here...because I have already examined preterism and rejected it. I found that it is inconsistent and not well supported. But that is my umble opinion.

[/color]

Don't you mean you first rejected preterism, THEN examined it?
BTW, For someone who isn't planning on discussing preterism, you sure like to post about it a lot.

 

[Justme]

Hi Parousia70,

I always questioned articles I saw on the early writing of the vision by John. However, these are iron clad references you show here.

Have you got a link to this?

Thanks,
Justme

 

[Hidden Manna]

Hey Parousia70,
Thanks for the info.

I just read a acticle by a Catholic partial preterist and continuing historist last night and it really shook me. He was saying that when constatine declared Rome a Christian country, that was the Kingdoms of this world becoming the Kingdoms of God, and the Spanish Inquosition was Christ ruling the nations with a rod of iron and treading the winepress of the fearace wrath of God smitting the nation with His sword, the that the 1000 years Millennium was the middle ages when the Catholic Church ruled the world supreme without any interferance. The protestant movement was Satan being released from the pit which ended the 1000 years. This was all based on the Book of Revelations being written in 96 AD.

I will copy your posting for future referance.

It amazes me how each different view can be so convincing, but if their foundational starting point is off then we can be more sure that the rest is off.

 

[parousia70]

Hi Parousia70,

I always questioned articles I saw on the early writing of the vision by John. However, these are iron clad references you show here.

Have you got a link to this?

Thanks,
Justme

All these, plus more, compiled in GW's site here: http://www.preteristvision.org/questions/qa_revelationdate.html