Approaches to Eschatology

[Biblewriter]

Correct me if I am mistaken but I am not aware that E. Earle Ellis was preterist, nor Stolt. Ian Boxall in his landmark work on Patmos in the Reception History of the Church acknowledges the ambiguity too. To my knowledge, he isn't even a Christian let alone a preterist. This is just a non-issue and a red herring.

So you conclude that Peter Schaff was wrong in classifying "The Acts of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John" as ante Nicene?

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[timtams]

Although I spent considerable time researching this subject, I never found any statement by Jerome quoting Tertullian as saying anything that would even imply John being banished by Nero. Please quote the passage you are speaking of, with explicit citation.

I can't comment on how you research.

Tertullian stated that John was plunged in oil and then immediately sent into exile.

But Jerome records that Tertullian placed this in Nero's reign:

moreover, Tertullian relates that, having been thrown into a terracotta jar of burning oil by Nero (a Nerone missus in ferventis olei dolium), he came out cleaner and more vigorous than when he entered (Jov. 1.26)

The translation and Latin text is from Ramelli, “John the Evangelist's Work,” 43.

An editor decided that Tertullian couldn't have said this, since John was banished in Domitian's reign. What did he do? The editor of the 1564 printed edition decided to change "by Nero" to "at Rome," which is the translation you'll find in the Ante Nicene Fathers collection. He did this with zero manuscript support.

 

[timtams]

So you conclude that Peter Schaff was wrong in classifying "The Acts of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John" as ante Nicene?

If he mistakenly did that, then yes he was wrong.

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[timtams]

edit

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The fact that you don't accept it doesn't make it questionable. It is accepted by all scholars. Furthermore, I will repeat, the statement concerning the early dating of Revelation is also found in the later manuscriptys that don't exhibit the corruption that Westcott refers to. It's early evidence, period.

Hello timtams. I am enjoying your posts.
Have you checked out this site?

https://www.preteristarchive.com/BibleStudies/ApocalypseCommentaries/Dating/Early/index.html

• 
  STUDY TOPICS
  
  • Authorship: John the Apostle, Presbyter, Other
    
    
  • Babylon: Rome, Jerusalem, Other
    
    
  • Date of Composition: Before AD70, After AD70, Composite
    
    
  • Language of Origin: Greek, Syriac, Other
    
    
  • Antichrist: Nero, Nero Redivivus, Nero Rediturus, Etc.
    
    
  • Origin: Christian, Christian Redaction of Jewish Apocalyptic
    

Apocalypse: Early Date Advocates

Henry Cowles : The Book of Revelation | F.W. Farrar : Dating The Book of Revelation | Thomas B. Slater - Dating the Apocalypse to John | Gonzalo Rojas-Flores The Book of Revelation and the First Years of Nero’s Reign

Arethas
"For there were many, yea, a countless multitude from among the Jews, who believed in Christ : as even they testify, who said to St Paul on his arrival at Jerusalem : Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe. (Acts xxi. 20.) And He who gave this revelation to the Evangelist, declares, that these men shall not share the destruction inflicted by the Romans. For the ruin brought by the Romans had not yet fallen upon the Jews, when this Evangelist received these prophecies : and he did not receive them at Jerusalem, but in Ionia near Ephesus.


Clement of Alexandria (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.)

Epiphanies (A. D. 315-403)
States Revelation was written under "Claudius [Nero] Caesar." (Epiphanies, Heresies 51:12,)

Irenaeus' Quote (Used as Grounds for Late Date Theory)
"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 who beheld the Revelation. For ‘he’ [John?] or ‘it’ [Revelation?] was seen . . . towards the end of Domitian’s reign." (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3)

Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170)
"the blessed Apostle Paul, following the rule of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name. "

"John too, indeed, in the Apocalypse, although he writes to only seven churches, yet addresses all. " (ANF 5:603).

Tertullian
“Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority (of apostles themselves). How happy is its church, on which the apostles poured forth all their doctrine along with their blood! where Peter endures a passion like his Lord’s; where Paul wins his crown in a death like John’s! where the Apostle John was first plunged, unhurt, into boiling oil, and thence remitted to his island-exile.”
=========================================================

2 Timothy 2:18 "SOME SAYING RESURRECTION ALREADY BECAME"
Destruction of Jerusalem 70ad


.

 

[Biblewriter]

There's no time for all of Clement's story to have happened between 96 when Domitian died and 100, when John died, since he was so infirm in his old age that he had to be carried into church and couldn't even walk.

Domitian was occasionally called "tyranical." I am not aware of "numerous ancient writers" that called him a tyrant. Hitchcock cites Dio Cassius and Suetonius, but neither of them actually refer to him as "a tyrant" or "the tyrant," though they mention his tyranny.

Read my very long paper. I gave you the link.

 

[Biblewriter]

It's in Junod and Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, vol. 2, 705. You'd need to be able to read French.

For the Acts of John, it isn't stated but it's implied. The Acts of John doesn't leave any room for a Domitianic dating.

Can you personally read French?

 

[Biblewriter]

I read it. However, you're prone to misunderstand the data, and because you lack scholarly training, you aren't even aware of it.

I point out logical errors made by many that hold themselves forth as "scholars." And you have no idea what kind of training I have.

 

[timtams]

Hello timtams. I am enjoying your posts.
Have you checked out this site?

https://www.preteristarchive.com/BibleStudies/ApocalypseCommentaries/Dating/Early/index.html
.

Yes, I've seen that site but I'll check it out again.

 

[timtams]

I point out logical errors made by many that hold themselves forth as "scholars." And you have no idea what kind of training I have.

As I said, these things are very obvious to those who do have such training.

 

[timtams]

Can you personally read French?

Yes.

 

[Biblewriter]

I'm responding to your discussion of Epiphanius, who believed in an early date.

I'm responding to your discussion of Epiphanius, who believed in an early date.

And what I said was that he was the only one that unquestionably wrote before the sixth century, and clearly made this claim. For all the rest of those so alleged, either heir dating claims are questionable or they did not clearly state it.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yes, I've seen that site but I'll check it out again.

Wanna join in on this "parousia" thread?
I may write my own book on it once I harmonize it with Revelation and Daniel..........

"PAROUSIA" IN THE "MT OF OLIVES" TEMPLE/JERUSALEM DISCOURSE

LittleLambofJesus said: ↑
The "days of Noah" is shown in both Matt and Luke [Mark never mentions Noah]

Revealing Times said: ↑
Was there supposed to be a reply in that ? I did not see one brother.

I was responding to this remark here brother................

Revealing Times said: ↑
When Jesus Raptures us in Matthew 24:37 he will be NEAR/Present, in the Clouds (Rev. 14:14) calling us to Heaven,

I noticed a lot of Christians tend to leave out Luke when mentioning Matthew 24, so I am just providing the verse in Luke 17 in case others are not aware that it is in a different chapter than Luke 21

Matthew 24:37
As the days of Noah were, so the coming of the Son of Man will be.
Luke 17:26
Just as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days of the Son of Man:

It is the same with "where the eagles are gathered", different chapter of Luke

Matthew 24:28
for wherever the corpse<4430> may be,
there shall the eagles/vultures<105> be gathered together.
Luke 17:37
And they answering say to him, 'Where, sir?'
and He saith to them,
'Where the body<4983> is, there will the eagles/vultures<105> be gathered together.'

"Where the body/carcass is, there the eagles be gathered" Matt 24 Luke 17 70ad and Revelation
Matthew 24:28 Luke 17:37

 

[Biblewriter]

As I said, these things are very obvious to those who do have such training.

These things are very obvious to some, and not so obvious to others. I have deeply examined the claims on numerous "scholars," only to find HARD PROOF that their claims were groundless, and often apparently intentionally designed to be technically accurate, but wholly misleading.

I asked you for quotations, with citations, and in every case, all you have produced is a citation to someone else who made the same claim you are making. When I have pointedly asked you if you had personally examined the texts in question, you have repeatedly simply avoided the issue.