On the Brink of the Tribulation.

Oberamagau said:

And I saw, and behold a white horse...and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

Click to expand...

The message of Revelation is "Jesus won" .. His truth defeated the enemy... Conquering is WINNING.

Oberamagau said:

I have no idea what you're getting at. What does that have to do with the white horse rider?

Click to expand...

In Revelation 19:16 still says He is called the “King of Kings and Lord of Lords.”

Jesus is portrayed on the White horse. He rode a donkey into Jerusalem... but he rides again in Revelation as a victorious conqueror.

summerville said:

That is absolute idiocy. There isn't even the smallest hint that its Islam or Arabs. .. and locusts are considered a blessing.

There are no suicide bombers in the Bible and no mention of Islam in Rev 9-10.

LOLOL.. You may as well, join the nutters who claim its the EU or the UN.

Click to expand...

Preterism is full blown idiocy. Locust are considered a blessing? Wow huh! Tell that to the people in East Africa dealing with another locust infestation.

Photos: Worst Locust Swarms in Decades Hit East Africa

And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, - having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone: - and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone.

breastplates of fire... (suicide vest) The word for breastplates is the word 'thorax,' and were held by straps that went over the shoulders or around the neck.

"...and of jacinth," (dark red)... From Vines.... Jacinth: signifies "hyacinthine," perhaps primarily having the color of the hyacinth. Some regard its color as that of the martagon lily, a dusky red.

According to Swete, the word 'jacinth' in Rev 9:17 is, "doubtless meant to describe the blue smoke of a sulphurous flame."

"...and brimstone:...." sparks and explosion This is the only place the word 'brimstone' or Strong's #2306 is used in the NT. Strong's #2306 comes from 2303 and says, "in its original sense of "flashing."

Suicide bombers are also mentioned in the fourth seal as “TO KILL WITH DEATH”…

Revelation 6:7-8 And when he had opened the fourth... And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, - and with death, - and with the beasts of the earth. (killing people with wild/starving animals)

Locust are figurative of the Arabs in the Old Testament. Both the scorpions and locust have the Mid-East as their natural habitat, especially in Arabia. In Arabic the word "Arab" and "locust" sound similar.

In Judges 6:5 and 7:12 the Midianites and the Amalekites, who are likely related to the Ishmaelites, are Arab tribes that are associated with grasshoppers or ‘LOCUST.’ Gesenius says that the Midianites are of an Arab nation, and the Amalekites are the descendants of Esau. In Genesis 37:25 the Midianites seem identified with the Ishmaelites. Strong's says Midian or Midianite' = "strife." Nahum says about the Arabs... "Make thyself many as the locusts." Nah.3:5

The East wind is mentioned in the Islamic terrorism chapter of Habakkuk 1. Locust and the East Wind perfectly describes the Arabs and Muslims goal of world domination through terrorism and demographics, as well as their form of worship. The East wind brought the locust in Exodus 10:13 and is associated with 'falsehood, deceit, and evil'. Exodus 10:13 And Moses stretched forth his rod over the land of Egypt, and the LORD brought an east wind upon the land all that day, and all that night; and when it was morning, the east wind brought the locusts. Speaking of the Arabs, Judges 6:5 say’s... "For they came up with their cattle and their tents, and they came as grasshoppers for multitude; for both they and their camels were without number: and they entered into the land to destroy it."

"Revelation 9:8 And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions."

Faces of men? The most distinguishing features of a man's face as opposed to a woman's face is a beard. The most distinguishing feature of a woman's face is her hair. What do ISIS fighters look like? Nearly all of them have long hair and a beard. Dead or alive they look the same.

summerville said:

The message of Revelation is "Jesus won" .. His truth defeated the enemy... Conquering is WINNING.

Click to expand...

It's that simple huh?

Marilyn C said:

Islam features quite a lot in God`s word.

1. Isa. 31: 8, is in the time of the Lord`s return and `the Assyrian shall fall by a sword not of man.` An Assyrian is from the area of Iraq, Syria & Jordan, (ancient Assyria). Interesting that that area has come back into focus as God said it would.

2. Dan. 2: 31, 41 - 45, reveals the Great Image standing in the Middle East. The final World Ruler will be from that area.it is a divided kingdom - Sunni & Shi-ite.

3. Dan. 7: 7. The fourth federation that treads down all the others. Three powers, (horns) become the power base for the A/C.

4. Dan. 11: 36 45. The King of the North, (from the Ptolomaic Dynasty) arising at God`s appointed time. That is the area of Iraq, Syria & Jordan.

5. When the Russian federation is defeated on the Golan heights soon, then there will be a power vacuum in the Middle east. Then we will see the 4th beast of Daniel, the 4th horseman of Rev. arise. it will be a most `terrifying` Federation that no one can stop.

Click to expand...

People have believed that the anti-Christ would be an Assyrian way before people associated the anti-Christ with Rome. This Assyrian anti-Christ will unite the Middle-East and most of all - he will NOT be a global dictator who unites the world's governments.

Oberamagau said:

It's that simple huh?

Click to expand...

Yeah it is..

The locusts in Rev 9 represent the soldiers under the command of Titus to include the foreign troops from other countries.

This will give you the historical backstory to what happened in Palestine in the war of 66-70 AD.

Jewish War (66-70) - Livius

Marilyn C said:

Islam features quite a lot in God`s word.

1. Isa. 31: 8, is in the time of the Lord`s return and `the Assyrian shall fall by a sword not of man.` An Assyrian is from the area of Iraq, Syria & Jordan, (ancient Assyria). Interesting that that area has come back into focus as God said it would.

2. Dan. 2: 31, 41 - 45, reveals the Great Image standing in the Middle East. The final World Ruler will be from that area.it is a divided kingdom - Sunni & Shi-ite.

3. Dan. 7: 7. The fourth federation that treads down all the others. Three powers, (horns) become the power base for the A/C.

4. Dan. 11: 36 45. The King of the North, (from the Ptolomaic Dynasty) arising at God`s appointed time. That is the area of Iraq, Syria & Jordan.

5. When the Russian federation is defeated on the Golan heights soon, then there will be a power vacuum in the Middle east. Then we will see the 4th beast of Daniel, the 4th horseman of Rev. arise. it will be a most `terrifying` Federation that no one can stop.

Click to expand...

That sure is an abuse of scripture. The king of the North was the son of Antiochus IV.


Who is 'the king of the north' mentioned in Daniel 11?
https://www.religioustolerance.org/ryszard01.htm
Daniel 11:10-12 His ["the king of the north"] sons = Seleucus III Ceraunus and Antiochus III the Great. "The king of the north" = Antiochus III, the Great. "The king of the south" = Ptolemy IV Philopator.



In secular history, the king of the South is often referred to as Ptolemy. The Ptolemaic dynasty ruled from Alexandria in Egypt, which is south of Israel. The king of the North ruled from Antioch in Syria, which is north of Israel, under the name Seleucus, or Antiochus.

Marilyn C said:

Thank you, I wrote the wrong name. Yes it should have been the Seleucid dynasty. So when reading Dan. 11 we read of history and then the `appointed time, ` the `time of the `end.` So we see that area has come into focus in these times.

Click to expand...

In Daniel 11 he's talking about Darius the Mede.

Darius the Mede - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_the_Mede

Darius the Mede is mentioned in the Book of Daniel as king of Babylon between Belshazzar and Cyrus the Great, but he is not known to history, and no additional king can be placed between the known figures of Belshazzar and Cyrus.

Most scholars view him as a literary fiction, but some have tried to harmonise the Book of Daniel with history by identifying him with various known figures, notably Cyrus or Gobryas, the general who was first to enter Babylon when it fell to the Persians in 539 BCE.

summerville said:

In Daniel 11 he's talking about Darius the Mede.

Darius the Mede - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_the_Mede

Darius the Mede is mentioned in the Book of Daniel as king of Babylon between Belshazzar and Cyrus the Great, but he is not known to history, and no additional king can be placed between the known figures of Belshazzar and Cyrus.

Most scholars view him as a literary fiction, but some have tried to harmonize the Book of Daniel with history by identifying him with various known figures, notably Cyrus or Gobryas, the general who was first to enter Babylon when it fell to the Persians in 539 BCE.

Click to expand...

I keep telling people that Babylon didn't fall to the Persians it fell to Darius and the Medes. Any scholar who believes Darius is fictitious isn't worthy of being called a 'scholar'. Darius is mentioned 25 times in the OT. There's little secular history on Darius and the bible is the historical authority on him. He took out Babylon.

The conquest and destruction of Babylon is attributed to Darius and the Medes.

Daniel 5:31

"And Darius the Median took the kingdom, (Babylon) being about threescore and two years old."

Isaiah 13:17

"Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them." (Babylon)

Jeremiah 51:11 Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.

Darius reigned for 6 years after which his brother in law Cyrus came in. Darius then took control over the northern province of the kingdom and Cyrus the southern part.

Ezra 6:1

Then Darius the king made a decree, and search was made in the house of the rolls,where the treasures were laid up in Babylon.

Daniel 6:1

It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over THE WHOLE KINGDOM the whole kingdom;

Daniel 9:1

In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;

Daniel 11:1

Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him.

Ezra 6:15

And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.

Daniel 6:28

So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, AND (afterwards) in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

Oberamagau said:

I keep telling people that Babylon didn't fall to the Persians it fell to Darius and the Medes. Any scholar who believes Darius is fictitious isn't worthy of being called a 'scholar'. Darius is mentioned 25 times in the OT. There's little secular history on Darius and the bible is the historical authority on him. He took out Babylon.

The conquest and destruction of Babylon is attributed to Darius and the Medes.

Daniel 5:31

"And Darius the Median took the kingdom, (Babylon) being about threescore and two years old."

Isaiah 13:17

"Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them." (Babylon)

Jeremiah 51:11 Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.

Darius reigned for 6 years after which his brother in law Cyrus came in. Darius then took control over the northern province of the kingdom and Cyrus the southern part.

Ezra 6:1

Then Darius the king made a decree, and search was made in the house of the rolls,where the treasures were laid up in Babylon.

Daniel 6:1

It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over THE WHOLE KINGDOM the whole kingdom;

Daniel 9:1

In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;

Daniel 11:1

Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him.

Ezra 6:15

And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.

Daniel 6:28

So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, AND (afterwards) in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

Click to expand...

The Book of Daniel was written in 167 BC... during the reign of Antiochus IV and there is NO Darius the Mede in history and no gap in history that could be another character misnamed. Daniel, or the author of Daniel, was never in Babylon.

The purpose of the Book of Daniel was to give the Jews who were suffering under Antiochus IV hope and encouragement.

In 539 B.C., less than a century after its founding, the legendary Persian king Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon. The fall of Babylon was complete when the empire came under Persian control. Aug 20 2019
Babylonia - HISTORY
www.history.com/topics/ancient-middle-east/babylonia

summerville said:

Yeah it is..

The locusts in Rev 9 represent the soldiers under the command of Titus to include the foreign troops from other countries.

This will give you the historical backstory to what happened in Palestine in the war of 66-70 AD.

Jewish War (66-70) - Livius

Click to expand...

Lets see...Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD and John wrote the Revelation in 90-95 AD....yep - Preterism makes a lot of sense.

And as far as the church fathers and preterism are concerned, there is zero indication from known writings of the church fathers that anyone understood the New Testament prophecies from a preterist perspective.

Christians living during 70 AD, as well as the church fathers, believed the Second Coming was a future event.

The oldest extra-Biblical Christian document known to exist is a document called The Didache. It was written around 80 AD and was cited by many of the church fathers like the Christian historian Eusebius (see Eusebius, Church History 3:25), so its early existence is well documented.

In addition to the Didache, early church fathers like…
• Papias
• Clement of Rome
• Ignatius
• Polycarp
• and Justin Martyr
…wrote of a future Second Coming.

The Book of Revelation was written in approximately 95 AD, long after the events of A.D. 70.

For the Preterist view to work, the Book of Revelation has to have been written sometime prior to A.D. 70, so they changed the date of the book.

But there is compelling evidence in the writings of the church fathers that the Book of Revelation was written approximately 25 years after the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Consider Irenaeus. He lived from A.D. 120–202. He was the bishop in the city of Lyons in modern day France and grew up in Smyrna, one of the cities where the Book of Revelation was first circulated (Rev. 2:8). He was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John - the author of Revelation!
Let that sink in...Polycarp was a disciple of the apostle John - the author of the Book of Revelation - and Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp. If anyone knew when the Book of Revelation was penned, it would have been Polycarp or Irenaeus!

In Irenaeus’s work titled, Against Heresies (13:18), he tells us when John had his apocalyptic vision. He says…

“We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him [the apostle John] who beheld the apocalyptic vision.

Irenaeus (AD 120-202) believed that the “Antichrist” had still not been revealed. Well, that throws a wrench in the preteristic viewpoint. Why? Preterists, including Hank Hanegraaff, believe that the first century Nero was the Antichrist but that’s not what Irenaeus thought! Notice when Irenaeus says John had his apocalyptic vision…

"...For that was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign."
Irenaeus says John had his “apocalyptic vision (the things he writes about in the Book of Revelation) towards the end of Domitian’s reign."

Domitian was a Roman Emperor near the end of the first century and his reign didn't begin until A.D. 81 and ended with his assassination on September 18th, A.D. 96!

Irenaeus places the date of the authorship of the Book of Revelation sometime around 95 AD towards the END of Domitian’s reign, long after the events of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem. This statement by Irenaeus is devastating to the preterist position.

And if the Book of Revelation was written anytime after the destruction of Jerusalem, it can not be a collection of prophecies about events that found their fulfillment before and in A.D. 70 as preterists claim.

Here are others who affirmed the very same thing…

Clement of Alexandria, (who lived from about A.D. 150 to 215) also testified to a post A.D. 70 date for the writing of the Book of Revelation. He mentions that John was exiled to the isle of Patmos until after the death of the tyrant - another reference to Domitian who died in 96 AD.

Another source for a post A.D. 70 completion date for the Book of Revelation is Victorinus.

Victorinus was an early church bishop who suffered martyrdom around A.D. 304. He said in his commentary on the Book of Revelation, that John had his vision of the apocalypse while "he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian."

Another early church source is Eusebius…

Eusebius lived from A.D. 260 – 340. He is known as "the father of church history," due to his classic work Ecclesiastical History. Several times in his writings he also dates the Book of Revelation to the reign of Domitian.

In addition to these men, there was Jerome.

Jerome, the one who translated the Scriptures into Latin (The Vulgate), lived from 340 to 419. He states clearly in two places, that John was banished under Domitian, and that that is when he wrote the Book of Revelation.

These statements from some of the greatest, most reliable names in early church history. They build a compelling case that the Book of Revelation was written many years after A.D. 70 and the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem.

Marilyn C said:

Can you see who is smiling?

Click to expand...

Front row. Sixth guy from the right has engaging smile. Does that mean he is antichrist ?

summerville said:

The Book of Daniel was written in 167 BC... during the reign of Antiochus IV and there is NO Darius the Mede in history and no gap in history that could be another character misnamed. Daniel, or the author of Daniel, was never in Babylon.

The purpose of the Book of Daniel was to give the Jews who were suffering under Antiochus IV hope and encouragement.

In 539 B.C., less than a century after its founding, the legendary Persian king Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon. The fall of Babylon was complete when the empire came under Persian control. Aug 20 2019
Babylonia - HISTORY
www.history.com/topics/ancient-middle-east/babylonia

Click to expand...

You've accepted the very same MAJOR blunder that so many others have accepted. MOST people who deny that Darius took out Babylon - do so because it debunks the Roman/Catholicism connection of Daniel 2. It's amazing - truly amazing - that a Christian would say Darius never existed when his name is mentioned 25 times in the Old Testament. You have zero credibility big guy.

Just like all the other Preterist on earth, you've accepted one of the greatest abominations ever to enter Christianity.

Jonathan Walkerin said:

Front row. Sixth guy from the right has engaging smile. Does that mean he is antichrist ?

Click to expand...

All Muslim's are anti-Christ.

Oberamagau said:

Lets see...Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD and John wrote the Revelation in 90-95 AD....yep - Preterism makes a lot of sense.

And as far as the church fathers and preterism are concerned, there is zero indication from known writings of the church fathers that anyone understood the New Testament prophecies from a preterist perspective.

Christians living during 70 AD, as well as the church fathers, believed the Second Coming was a future event.

The oldest extra-Biblical Christian document known to exist is a document called The Didache. It was written around 80 AD and was cited by many of the church fathers like the Christian historian Eusebius (see Eusebius, Church History 3:25), so its early existence is well documented.

In addition to the Didache, early church fathers like…
• Papias
• Clement of Rome
• Ignatius
• Polycarp
• and Justin Martyr
…wrote of a future Second Coming.

The Book of Revelation was written in approximately 95 AD, long after the events of A.D. 70.

For the Preterist view to work, the Book of Revelation has to have been written sometime prior to A.D. 70, so they changed the date of the book.

But there is compelling evidence in the writings of the church fathers that the Book of Revelation was written approximately 25 years after the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Consider Irenaeus. He lived from A.D. 120–202. He was the bishop in the city of Lyons in modern day France and grew up in Smyrna, one of the cities where the Book of Revelation was first circulated (Rev. 2:8). He was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John - the author of Revelation!
Let that sink in...Polycarp was a disciple of the apostle John - the author of the Book of Revelation - and Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp. If anyone knew when the Book of Revelation was penned, it would have been Polycarp or Irenaeus!

In Irenaeus’s work titled, Against Heresies (13:18), he tells us when John had his apocalyptic vision. He says…

“We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him [the apostle John] who beheld the apocalyptic vision.

Irenaeus (AD 120-202) believed that the “Antichrist” had still not been revealed. Well, that throws a wrench in the preteristic viewpoint. Why? Preterists, including Hank Hanegraaff, believe that the first century Nero was the Antichrist but that’s not what Irenaeus thought! Notice when Irenaeus says John had his apocalyptic vision…

"...For that was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign."
Irenaeus says John had his “apocalyptic vision (the things he writes about in the Book of Revelation) towards the end of Domitian’s reign."

Domitian was a Roman Emperor near the end of the first century and his reign didn't begin until A.D. 81 and ended with his assassination on September 18th, A.D. 96!

Irenaeus places the date of the authorship of the Book of Revelation sometime around 95 AD towards the END of Domitian’s reign, long after the events of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem. This statement by Irenaeus is devastating to the preterist position.

And if the Book of Revelation was written anytime after the destruction of Jerusalem, it can not be a collection of prophecies about events that found their fulfillment before and in A.D. 70 as preterists claim.

Here are others who affirmed the very same thing…

Clement of Alexandria, (who lived from about A.D. 150 to 215) also testified to a post A.D. 70 date for the writing of the Book of Revelation. He mentions that John was exiled to the isle of Patmos until after the death of the tyrant - another reference to Domitian who died in 96 AD.

Another source for a post A.D. 70 completion date for the Book of Revelation is Victorinus.

Victorinus was an early church bishop who suffered martyrdom around A.D. 304. He said in his commentary on the Book of Revelation, that John had his vision of the apocalypse while "he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian."

Another early church source is Eusebius…

Eusebius lived from A.D. 260 – 340. He is known as "the father of church history," due to his classic work Ecclesiastical History. Several times in his writings he also dates the Book of Revelation to the reign of Domitian.

In addition to these men, there was Jerome.

Jerome, the one who translated the Scriptures into Latin (The Vulgate), lived from 340 to 419. He states clearly in two places, that John was banished under Domitian, and that that is when he wrote the Book of Revelation.

These statements from some of the greatest, most reliable names in early church history. They build a compelling case that the Book of Revelation was written many years after A.D. 70 and the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem.

Click to expand...

Oberamagau said:

People have believed that the anti-Christ would be an Assyrian way before people associated the anti-Christ with Rome. This Assyrian anti-Christ will unite the Middle-East and most of all - he will NOT be a global dictator who unites the world's governments.

Click to expand...

Oberamagau said:

Lets see...Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD and John wrote the Revelation in 90-95 AD....yep - Preterism makes a lot of sense.

And as far as the church fathers and preterism are concerned, there is zero indication from known writings of the church fathers that anyone understood the New Testament prophecies from a preterist perspective.

Christians living during 70 AD, as well as the church fathers, believed the Second Coming was a future event.

The oldest extra-Biblical Christian document known to exist is a document called The Didache. It was written around 80 AD and was cited by many of the church fathers like the Christian historian Eusebius (see Eusebius, Church History 3:25), so its early existence is well documented.

In addition to the Didache, early church fathers like…
• Papias
• Clement of Rome
• Ignatius
• Polycarp
• and Justin Martyr
…wrote of a future Second Coming.

The Book of Revelation was written in approximately 95 AD, long after the events of A.D. 70.

For the Preterist view to work, the Book of Revelation has to have been written sometime prior to A.D. 70, so they changed the date of the book.

But there is compelling evidence in the writings of the church fathers that the Book of Revelation was written approximately 25 years after the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Consider Irenaeus. He lived from A.D. 120–202. He was the bishop in the city of Lyons in modern day France and grew up in Smyrna, one of the cities where the Book of Revelation was first circulated (Rev. 2:8). He was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John - the author of Revelation!
Let that sink in...Polycarp was a disciple of the apostle John - the author of the Book of Revelation - and Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp. If anyone knew when the Book of Revelation was penned, it would have been Polycarp or Irenaeus!

In Irenaeus’s work titled, Against Heresies (13:18), he tells us when John had his apocalyptic vision. He says…

“We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him [the apostle John] who beheld the apocalyptic vision.

Irenaeus (AD 120-202) believed that the “Antichrist” had still not been revealed. Well, that throws a wrench in the preteristic viewpoint. Why? Preterists, including Hank Hanegraaff, believe that the first century Nero was the Antichrist but that’s not what Irenaeus thought! Notice when Irenaeus says John had his apocalyptic vision…

"...For that was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign."
Irenaeus says John had his “apocalyptic vision (the things he writes about in the Book of Revelation) towards the end of Domitian’s reign."

Domitian was a Roman Emperor near the end of the first century and his reign didn't begin until A.D. 81 and ended with his assassination on September 18th, A.D. 96!

Irenaeus places the date of the authorship of the Book of Revelation sometime around 95 AD towards the END of Domitian’s reign, long after the events of A.D. 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem. This statement by Irenaeus is devastating to the preterist position.

And if the Book of Revelation was written anytime after the destruction of Jerusalem, it can not be a collection of prophecies about events that found their fulfillment before and in A.D. 70 as preterists claim.

Here are others who affirmed the very same thing…

Clement of Alexandria, (who lived from about A.D. 150 to 215) also testified to a post A.D. 70 date for the writing of the Book of Revelation. He mentions that John was exiled to the isle of Patmos until after the death of the tyrant - another reference to Domitian who died in 96 AD.

Another source for a post A.D. 70 completion date for the Book of Revelation is Victorinus.

Victorinus was an early church bishop who suffered martyrdom around A.D. 304. He said in his commentary on the Book of Revelation, that John had his vision of the apocalypse while "he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian."

Another early church source is Eusebius…

Eusebius lived from A.D. 260 – 340. He is known as "the father of church history," due to his classic work Ecclesiastical History. Several times in his writings he also dates the Book of Revelation to the reign of Domitian.

In addition to these men, there was Jerome.

Jerome, the one who translated the Scriptures into Latin (The Vulgate), lived from 340 to 419. He states clearly in two places, that John was banished under Domitian, and that that is when he wrote the Book of Revelation.

These statements from some of the greatest, most reliable names in early church history. They build a compelling case that the Book of Revelation was written many years after A.D. 70 and the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem.

Click to expand...

No one knows if John of Patmos was John the Apostle or not.. and scholars disagree on the early or late writing of the Revelation letter to the seven churches.. and it doesn't matter because history in the Bible is not linear.

There is a good bit of evidence that Revelation was adapted nearly verbatim from an earlier apocalyptic Jewish writing. We do know it is written in symbolic language .. some say "code".

Whether Nero or Domitan doesn't matter either since both emperors persecuted the Jews.

Shifting the identity of the locusts to Arabs and suicide bombers is ridiculous.

In Revelation 9 Satan is called Abaddon and Apollyon. In Revelation 12 Satan is called the dragon. In Revelation 9 the Roman Empire is described as locusts. In Revelation 13 the Roman Empire is described as the beast.

Specifically, the locusts are lead by Titus.. He commanded the Roman garrisons stationed in Syria as well as troops provided by Egypt, Syria and Arabs which were part of the Roman empire.

The earthly reflection of the locusts of Revelation 9 are Roman soldiers and the General Titus is the human reflection of Apollyon.

Firey breastplates aren't suicide bombers.. This must be the stuff of false prophets that Jesus warned about. I'm curious. What church taught you that the locusts of Revelation were Arabs?

Oberamagau said:

All Muslim's are anti-Christ.

Click to expand...

That isn't true. Muslims revere Jesus as the purest of the prophets, born of a virgin from the mind of God like Adam. They don't believe that blood sacrifice expiates sin. They don't believe that God eats or is fed. They don't believe Jesus was crucified.. That really offends their sense of justice that such a holy man could die such a cruel and humiliating death.

Ignorance is a terrible thing.. The Arabs aren't the "locusts" anymore than Russia is Gog and Magog.


“Titus began the siege of Jerusalem in April, 70. The defenders held out desperately for five months, but by the end of August the Temple area was occupied and the holy house burned down, and by the end of September all resistance in the city had come to an end.”

Oberamagau said:

The average interpreter views the seals the same way they view the beast. They look at a progressive of 'past tense' interpretation. I've said it over and over again that not ONE part of the Revelation13 and 17 beast is 'past tense.' The heads and horns are not ancient Popes, Ancient Roman Emperors, or past kingdoms. Everything on these beast represents something or someone that exist in the last days - at the consummation of the age - just before the Lord's return and the big battle.

SDA'S have real problems with prophecy. In my opinion, they get very little right. Everything is about ROME with Seventh Day Adventist. Some Protestants do the same thing and attribute all the evils of the last days to Rome. That's amazing to me because there's no scriptural evidence that specifically labels Rome being involved in the last days. NONE!

The SDA "National Sunday Law" is a real ridiculous abomination. Your church actually believes governments will legislate that everyone goes to church on Sunday and Protestants would fall into accepting this "Mark of the Beast" because they already go to church on Sundays. I can deal with Mormon's and JW'S better than SDA'S.

SEALS
To say a seal opens slowly or centuries ago, or that they are in a constant mode of revelation - defeats the purpose of them even being called a seal.

The SDA view is that the four horsemen have passed between the 1st and 5th centuries and represent different stages of the church. The purpose of the 7 seals - especially the four horsemen, is they are events that pass swiftly and give us the 'opening signs' of the end-times. They indicate that there's very little time left before the world really goes bad and the Lord returns. They show us that the fulfillment of the rest of the book of Revelation is upon us with bigger things to come.

The four horsemen are NOT PAST TENSE - they are four END-TIME events and people. The four riders are ISLAMIC. Bin Laden, (1st Seal) Saddam Hussien, (2nd Seal) Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, (3rd Seal) - and the fourth seal is likely Assad or some Iranian nutcase. I have a page on my site about each one.

Revelation 6 on to the end of the book covers a very short period of time. From the last trump in Revelation 11 there's very likely only a 45 day duration before the Lord returns.

Click to expand...

Interesting guess we will have to disagree on proper interpretation of prophecy as it appears you are a futurist and I am a Historicist