I absolutely agree.
And Just as I have to evidence to back up my belief, you have to have evidence to back up yours.
And here lies the problem. Can revelation be proved 100% that it was written post 70ad with external evidence? No. Can it be proven 100% that revelation was written pre 70AD with external evidence? No
There is evidence for both sides of the argument.
And well, with internal evidence? That's really hard to debate as well because futurists will just declare dual fulfillment or, no Jesus didn't really mean this generation in front of him, it was about a future generation.
What is your source for this?
the only source I know of and could find is Irenaeus. And it appears that any later church fathers that agree is because of Irenaeus. When dating a book, it is important took at multiple sources. Is Irenaeus a reliable historian? Should we use his quote to 100% proof revelation was written between 81 and 96? Should we take it at 100% proof that Jesus lived till 40-50 years of age, because 1 source: irenaeus, says so?
Irenaeus
-Irenaeus admits that he was a boy when he learned from Polycarp he kept no written record:
"For, while
I was yet a boy, I saw thee in Lower Asia with Polycarp ... For I have a more vivid recollection of what occurred at that time than of recent events ... so that I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse ... also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord; and how he would call their words to remembrance ... I then listened to attentively, and treasured them up
not on paper, but in my heart; and I am continually, by God's grace, revolving these things accurately in my mind" (Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus, II)."
-Iranaeus has some other problems with his memory of learning things, for he also believed Jesus lived to be an old man, as the gospel and the elders testify to.
"but from the
fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which
our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the
Gospel and all the elders testify. (against heresies Book II chapter 22)"
-According to pliny the elder, Nero was also referred to as
Domitius Nero. Nero's actual name was Lucius
Domitius Ahenobarbus. So it is possible, considering his 'memory', that he misunderstood what he had learned as a boy.
Another source that is often used is clement, but does he even mention Domitian in regards to Johns exile? No he doesn't:
Clement of Alexandria (150-215)
-Clement of Alexandria never actually mentions Domitian by name. He only mentions a 'tyrant'
'And that you may be still more confident, that repenting thus truly there remains for you a sure hope of salvation, listen to a tale, which is not a tale but a narrative, handed down and committed to the custody of memory, about the
Apostle John. For when, on
the tyrant's death, he
returned to Ephesus from the
isle of Patmos, he went away, being invited, to the contiguous territories of the nations, here to appoint bishops, there to set in order whole Churches, there to ordain such as were marked out by the Spirit" (Clement of Alexandria - Who is the Rich Man that Shall be Saved, Chapter 42)'
-Clement of Alexandria also believed that the teachings of the apostles ended with Nero:
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,
ends with Nero" (Clement of Alexandria -The Stromata, or Miscellanies, Book 7, Chapter 17).
-Clement of Alexandria also believed Nero's reign occurred during Daniels 70th week
"The half of the week
Nero held sway, and
in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away ..." (Clement of Alexandria -The Stromata, or Miscellanies, Book 1, Chapter 21). Later in this same chapter, Clement wrote, "... and the result is three years and six months, which is "the half of the week," as
Daniel the prophet said. For he said that there were two thousand three hundred days from the time that
the abomination of Nero stood in the holy city, till its destruction."
-so most likely the tyrant that Clement mentions is Nero
How epiphanus (314-430) Who stated john was exiled by Claudius Caesar?
Or the Syriac version of revelation that states John was exiled by nero?
they do? or is this just a generic statement used to belittle?