Evidence for date of John's exile on Patmos

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,133
3,878
Southern US
✟394,089.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
We are still studying Revelation in depth and debating the Preterist, Futurist, Idealist, and Historicist points of view. The preterist viewpoint seems to hinge on an earlier date of Revelation, written during John's exile on Patmos. What is the evidence for John's exile during Nero's (67-68 AD) vs. Domitian's reign (AD 95 or so)?
 

Freedm

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2020
740
172
42
Austin TX
✟40,387.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Full disclosure, these proofs are not mine but I found them in the book "Raptureless" by Jonathan Welton and I also found them quite compelling.

The following are proofs to show that the book of Revelation was written prior to AD 70

Proof #1: The Syriac

The first proof for an earlier dating of Revelation is the witness of one of the most ancient versions of the New Testament, called The Syriac. The title page of the fourth-century Syriac Version, called the Peshitto, says this: Again the revelation, which was upon the holy John the Evangelist from God when he was on the island of Patmos where he was thrown by the emperor Nero. Nero Caesar ruled over the Roman Empire from AD 54 to AD 68. This means John had to have been on the island of Patmos during this earlier time period. One of the oldest versions of the Bible tells us that Revelation was written before AD 70! This alone is a very compelling argument.

Proof #2: Revelation 17:10

Second, when we look at the internal evidence, we find a very clear indicator of the date of authorship in Revelation 17:10: “They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.” This passage, which speaks of the line of rulers in Rome, tells us exactly how many rulers had already come, which one was currently in power, and that the next one would only last a short while. This accurately identifies the rule of Nero and gives an outline of the Roman Empire of the first century. The succession of the first seven Roman Emperors went like this: “Five have fallen...” Julius Caesar (49–44 BC) Augustus (27 BC–AD 14) Tiberius (AD 14–37) Caligula (AD 37–41) Claudius (AD 41–54) “One is...” Nero (AD 54–68) “the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.” Galba (June AD 68–January AD 69, a six-month rule) Of the first seven kings, five had come (Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, and Claudius), one was currently in power (Nero), and one had not yet come (Galba), but would only remain for a short time (six months). From this we can clearly see that the current Caesar at the time of John’s writing was the sixth Caesar, Nero.

Proof #3: Those Who Pierced Him

Our third proof is found in the Hebrew idiom “coming on clouds,”7 which speaks of God coming to bring judgment on a city or nation. That is what Jesus came to do in AD 70. Revelation 1:7 tells us the target of God’s judgment: Lo, he doth come with the clouds, and see him shall every eye, even those who did pierce him, and wail because of him shall all the tribes of the land. Yes! Amen (Revelation 1:7 YLT). Here, the phrase “those who did pierce him” refers to the people of the first century. At any later time in history, these people would be deceased. Yet, according to this passage, they were expected to be alive at the time of this verse’s fulfillment. This tells us that the prophecy of Revelation 1:7 had to be fulfilled within a short time after Jesus’ death, while His accusers were still alive on earth. In other words, it was fulfilled in the destruction of

Jerusalem that happened in AD 70. For this to be true, the Book of Revelation must have been written before AD 70.

Proof #4: Influence of the Jews and Judaizing Heretics

Our fourth proof is found in the fact that the activity of the Jewish leaders and Judaizers in the Church is mentioned in the letters to the churches in Revelation. Jesus speaks of “those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9). This was a clear reference to the Jewish leaders who persecuted the Christians. Also, among the Christians existed a group called the Judiazers, who tried to turn Christians back to the old covenant Jewish Law. This was a major heresy in the first century church, and Paul wrote quite a bit against it. Prior to AD 70, both the Jewish leaders outside the church and the Judiazers within the church had a strong negative impact upon believers. About them, Jesus says: I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you (Revelation 3:9). Before the AD 70 destruction, it was advantageous to be a Jew. The Jewish people had a favored relationship with Rome. They were allowed to have their own police force and follow their own Temple system, so long as they continued in subservience to the empire. But all that changed in AD 70, when the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem and killed more than a million Jews. Ever since that time, history has not been particularly kind to the Jewish people, and I think it is safe to say that after AD 70 people were not touting their status as Jews. These verses about people who falsely claimed to be Jews only makes sense in the pre–AD 70 context. Since the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, it has not been advantageous to claim to be Jewish. In this way, these verses point to an earlier dating of the letter. The first century Jews and Judaizers lost a great deal of influence after the destruction of AD 70, because the Jewish religious system had been destroyed and the Jewish population significantly diminished. Only if we give the Book of Revelation an early date of authorship does the significant presence and threat of the Jews and Judiazers make sense.

Proof #5: Existence of Jerusalem and the Temple

Along the same lines, the fifth proof of an earlier date is the existence and integrity of Jerusalem and the Temple in Revelation 11. This suggests that the book was written before the destruction of AD 70. On the other hand, if the Book of Revelation was in fact written in AD 96, only twenty-six years after the destruction of the Temple and the Holy City, it is shocking that John didn’t mention the recent massacre of the city and Temple. The sheer unlikeliness that John would omit such a crucial piece of Jewish history tells us that the book must have been written prior to AD 70.

Proof #6: Time-related Passages

Our sixth proof is in the time-related passages at both the beginning and end of Revelation. In Revelation 1:1 and 1:3, as well as 22:10 and 22:20, we find internal time indicators that declare “the time is near,” it is “shortly to come to pass,” “he is coming quickly,” and “behold, he comes speedily.” John

clearly wrote that the time of judgment was close. This only fits if the book was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. 


Proof #7: John’s Appearance in AD 96

A seventh reason to believe the Book of Revelation was written at the earlier date is the appearance of John in AD 96. Jerome noted in his writings that John was seen in AD 96, and he was so old and infirm that “he was with difficulty carried to the church, and could speak only a few words to the people.”8 We must put this fact together with Revelation 10:11, which says John must “prophesy again concerning many peoples and nations and tongues and kings.” It is difficult to imagine John would be able to speak to many nations and many kings at any date after AD 96 since he was already elderly and feeble.

Proof #8: Timetable Comparison with Daniel

Eighth, in Daniel’s prophesy about events that would happen hundreds of years later, he was told to “roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end,” because it was a long way off (Dan. 12:4ff). By contrast, John was told, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near” (Rev. 22:10). While Daniel was told to seal the prophecy up because it was a long way off (about 500 years), John was told not to seal it up because it was about to come to pass. In other words, the prophetic events were closer than 500 years. This only makes sense if the book was written prior to AD 70 and the prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. 


Proof #9: Only Seven Churches

Our ninth proof for an early dating of the writing of Revelation is the existence of only seven churches in Asia Minor (see Rev. 1). This tells us that the book was written before the greater expansion of Christianity into that region, which occurred after the fall of Jerusalem.

These nine points strongly point to a dating of the writing of Revelation prior to AD 70. The debate continues in scholarly circles, yet I believe these points are convincing enough for us to move forward with the idea of a pre–AD 70 writing of Revelation.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,457
26,884
Pacific Northwest
✟732,034.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
We are still studying Revelation in depth and debating the Preterist, Futurist, Idealist, and Historicist points of view. The preterist viewpoint seems to hinge on an earlier date of Revelation, written during John's exile on Patmos. What is the evidence for John's exile during Nero's (67-68 AD) vs. Domitian's reign (AD 95 or so)?

For what it's worth I can be broadly described as a preterist in that I believe the Apocalypse was primarily about events in the time which John was living; but I also accept the traditional date of it being written toward the end of Domitian's reign. So that it's hinged on an earlier date isn't quite that necessary I don't think--I think that is probably more of a Full or Hyper-Preterist thing, though not exclusively obviously.

I once saw someone try and argue for the Revelation to have been written during the year of the four emperors, I think specifically while Otho was emperor (that or Galba, I don't recall clearly). Their argument hinged largely upon the description of the heads of the scarlet beast in Revelation 17.

I don't know that outside of internal interpretation of the text, such as the above, there is much in the way of evidence for placing the time of its writing earlier than Domitian. External evidence left to us by early fathers and church writers points to the time of Domitian. The one struggle with that is outside of what Eusebius says there doesn't seem to be much of any evidence for a persecution under Domitian. Which is one reason some have suggested both earlier and later dates, either earlier closer to Nero, or later under Trajan.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Kenneth Heck

Active Member
Sep 13, 2019
110
9
81
Carlisle
✟17,292.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Another support for the early date of Revelation is the description of the four beasts in the midst of the throne (Rev 4:7-8). This indicates a time before Judaism and Christianity were completely separate religions, since later Christianity reveals no angelic beings with animal faces. These four beasts are similar to the four found in Eze 1:6-11.

Also, the white dove resting on Christ's shoulder represented the Holy Spirit of Judaism, not Christianity.
Christianity's Holy Spirit first manifested at Pentecost after Christ's resurrection.

Regarding the last words of Revelation, forbidding adding or subtracting words from the book, this can imply that the original version written before 70 AD may have contained passages implying the defeat of the Romans by the Jews (these are found in the Old Testament). Any such passages would be grounds for destroying the book and severely persecuting those believing in Christ. The final version of Revelation, possibly completed at the time of Domitian, is free of these passages, plus a description of the second coming of Christ where He slays the Antichrist, thus circumventing any further reason for Roman persecution.
 
Upvote 0

Levi Boyd

New Member
May 29, 2021
1
0
43
Queensland
✟15,201.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I love this kind of discussion. I count the emporers starting from Augustus, as Julius was a Statesman's. This makes Galba #6, exiling John, and Otho the one who comes for a short time (3 month reign). The beast itself is also an 8th, being Vitellius. I think then, the second beast is Vespasian, with its 2 horns being titus and domitian. I then see the 10 kings who give authority to the beast as the 10 Imperial Provinces that surrounded the province of Judea. Just my take anyway.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,484.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Full disclosure, these proofs are not mine but I found them in the book "Raptureless" by Jonathan Welton and I also found them quite compelling.

The following are proofs to show that the book of Revelation was written prior to AD 70

Proof #1: The Syriac

The first proof for an earlier dating of Revelation is the witness of one of the most ancient versions of the New Testament, called The Syriac. The title page of the fourth-century Syriac Version, called the Peshitto, says this: Again the revelation, which was upon the holy John the Evangelist from God when he was on the island of Patmos where he was thrown by the emperor Nero. Nero Caesar ruled over the Roman Empire from AD 54 to AD 68. This means John had to have been on the island of Patmos during this earlier time period. One of the oldest versions of the Bible tells us that Revelation was written before AD 70! This alone is a very compelling argument.

Proof #2: Revelation 17:10

Second, when we look at the internal evidence, we find a very clear indicator of the date of authorship in Revelation 17:10: “They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.” This passage, which speaks of the line of rulers in Rome, tells us exactly how many rulers had already come, which one was currently in power, and that the next one would only last a short while. This accurately identifies the rule of Nero and gives an outline of the Roman Empire of the first century. The succession of the first seven Roman Emperors went like this: “Five have fallen...” Julius Caesar (49–44 BC) Augustus (27 BC–AD 14) Tiberius (AD 14–37) Caligula (AD 37–41) Claudius (AD 41–54) “One is...” Nero (AD 54–68) “the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while.” Galba (June AD 68–January AD 69, a six-month rule) Of the first seven kings, five had come (Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, and Claudius), one was currently in power (Nero), and one had not yet come (Galba), but would only remain for a short time (six months). From this we can clearly see that the current Caesar at the time of John’s writing was the sixth Caesar, Nero.

Proof #3: Those Who Pierced Him

Our third proof is found in the Hebrew idiom “coming on clouds,”7 which speaks of God coming to bring judgment on a city or nation. That is what Jesus came to do in AD 70. Revelation 1:7 tells us the target of God’s judgment: Lo, he doth come with the clouds, and see him shall every eye, even those who did pierce him, and wail because of him shall all the tribes of the land. Yes! Amen (Revelation 1:7 YLT). Here, the phrase “those who did pierce him” refers to the people of the first century. At any later time in history, these people would be deceased. Yet, according to this passage, they were expected to be alive at the time of this verse’s fulfillment. This tells us that the prophecy of Revelation 1:7 had to be fulfilled within a short time after Jesus’ death, while His accusers were still alive on earth. In other words, it was fulfilled in the destruction of

Jerusalem that happened in AD 70. For this to be true, the Book of Revelation must have been written before AD 70.

Proof #4: Influence of the Jews and Judaizing Heretics

Our fourth proof is found in the fact that the activity of the Jewish leaders and Judaizers in the Church is mentioned in the letters to the churches in Revelation. Jesus speaks of “those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9). This was a clear reference to the Jewish leaders who persecuted the Christians. Also, among the Christians existed a group called the Judiazers, who tried to turn Christians back to the old covenant Jewish Law. This was a major heresy in the first century church, and Paul wrote quite a bit against it. Prior to AD 70, both the Jewish leaders outside the church and the Judiazers within the church had a strong negative impact upon believers. About them, Jesus says: I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you (Revelation 3:9). Before the AD 70 destruction, it was advantageous to be a Jew. The Jewish people had a favored relationship with Rome. They were allowed to have their own police force and follow their own Temple system, so long as they continued in subservience to the empire. But all that changed in AD 70, when the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem and killed more than a million Jews. Ever since that time, history has not been particularly kind to the Jewish people, and I think it is safe to say that after AD 70 people were not touting their status as Jews. These verses about people who falsely claimed to be Jews only makes sense in the pre–AD 70 context. Since the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, it has not been advantageous to claim to be Jewish. In this way, these verses point to an earlier dating of the letter. The first century Jews and Judaizers lost a great deal of influence after the destruction of AD 70, because the Jewish religious system had been destroyed and the Jewish population significantly diminished. Only if we give the Book of Revelation an early date of authorship does the significant presence and threat of the Jews and Judiazers make sense.

Proof #5: Existence of Jerusalem and the Temple

Along the same lines, the fifth proof of an earlier date is the existence and integrity of Jerusalem and the Temple in Revelation 11. This suggests that the book was written before the destruction of AD 70. On the other hand, if the Book of Revelation was in fact written in AD 96, only twenty-six years after the destruction of the Temple and the Holy City, it is shocking that John didn’t mention the recent massacre of the city and Temple. The sheer unlikeliness that John would omit such a crucial piece of Jewish history tells us that the book must have been written prior to AD 70.

Proof #6: Time-related Passages

Our sixth proof is in the time-related passages at both the beginning and end of Revelation. In Revelation 1:1 and 1:3, as well as 22:10 and 22:20, we find internal time indicators that declare “the time is near,” it is “shortly to come to pass,” “he is coming quickly,” and “behold, he comes speedily.” John

clearly wrote that the time of judgment was close. This only fits if the book was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. 


Proof #7: John’s Appearance in AD 96

A seventh reason to believe the Book of Revelation was written at the earlier date is the appearance of John in AD 96. Jerome noted in his writings that John was seen in AD 96, and he was so old and infirm that “he was with difficulty carried to the church, and could speak only a few words to the people.”8 We must put this fact together with Revelation 10:11, which says John must “prophesy again concerning many peoples and nations and tongues and kings.” It is difficult to imagine John would be able to speak to many nations and many kings at any date after AD 96 since he was already elderly and feeble.

Proof #8: Timetable Comparison with Daniel

Eighth, in Daniel’s prophesy about events that would happen hundreds of years later, he was told to “roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end,” because it was a long way off (Dan. 12:4ff). By contrast, John was told, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near” (Rev. 22:10). While Daniel was told to seal the prophecy up because it was a long way off (about 500 years), John was told not to seal it up because it was about to come to pass. In other words, the prophetic events were closer than 500 years. This only makes sense if the book was written prior to AD 70 and the prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. 


Proof #9: Only Seven Churches

Our ninth proof for an early dating of the writing of Revelation is the existence of only seven churches in Asia Minor (see Rev. 1). This tells us that the book was written before the greater expansion of Christianity into that region, which occurred after the fall of Jerusalem.

These nine points strongly point to a dating of the writing of Revelation prior to AD 70. The debate continues in scholarly circles, yet I believe these points are convincing enough for us to move forward with the idea of a pre–AD 70 writing of Revelation.

I don't see any evidence here just opinions. No 1 means nothing. That was written hundreds of years after the fact. Their opinion is no better than ours. It is like later generation taking our opinion of the creation of the USA as proof of facts years ago. That would be ludicrous.

A lot of the rest of this comes from a faulty opinion of a highly figurative book and a fixation with the coming of Titus in AD 70 rather than the coming of Christ in the future.
 
Upvote 0

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,133
3,878
Southern US
✟394,089.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
To be fair to all, I'll summarize some of the sources we are considering in our study of Eschatology. Some of these claim AD 70 and others AD 95. I'm rebuilding this list from my Chrome History so when finished I'll post finished at the bottom.

Excellent overview of the different views and serious scholars of our time!
https://www.deanbibleministries.org/dbmfiles/slides/2008-ChaferConf-Hitchcock-Slides.pdf

Dating the Book of Revelation
Revelation: Before or after AD70?
Dating the Book of Revelation | Christian Research Institute
When Was Revelation Conceived? on JSTOR
John Exiled to Patmos – Amazing Bible Timeline with World History
John "The Beloved Disciple" - Exiled to Patmos!
Research insights into the Date of Revelation
https://www.tms.edu/m/tmsj5i.pdf
The Date of the Book of Revelation - Christopher L. Scott
When was the book of Revelation written? | NeverThirsty
Determining The Date Revelation's Authorship - Why it couldn't have been 95AD!
"Most modern, historical, and biblical scholars tend to state that Revelation was written between 95 and 96 A.D."

FINISHED LIST
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,133
3,878
Southern US
✟394,089.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Here is the email I got from Dr. Kenneth Gentry. I asked him to speak to our bible study group and he didn't have time. I didn't really know who he was or I'd been to afraid to even ask such of him! All I knew was he contributed to another 4 views of Revelation in the Preterist chapter. We had NO IDEA he was THE authority on Preterism! Dr. Gentry is a very famous Theologian and proponent of Preterism and has a wealth of online resources for anyone interested in exploring the Preterist view: KennethGentry.com "Serious Studies for Serious Christians"
Jeff:
Thanks for your note. I wish you well in your studies.
If I had to recommend one of my books for introducing preterism, it would be The Olivet Discourse Made Easy. It shows how Matthew's entire Gospel prepares for the Olivet Discourse / AD 70 judgment from its very beginning. Then it deals in depth with the Discourse and its famous "great tribulation."
Unfortunately, I am so far behind on writing obligations and get so many requests for interview that I currently can't afford them. I do appreciate your asking, and I wish I could meet with you by phone.

Keep studying!
Ken Gentry

Post note from Jeff: I think all Christians should study Steve Gregg's book on the 4 views of Revelation. Otherwise, how do you know your view is right without considering other views? to be honest, when we started, I was following Wayne Grudem's book "Systematic Theology" and was only focused on the timing of the rapture (pre, mid or post trib) when we started but once begun we found a lot more views than we ever knew existed, so we finished the first 4 Views for which Dr. Gentry is one of 4 authors, then moved to Steve Gregg's 4 views, which are parallel commentaries to the book of Revelation including the Historicist view, the Idealist view, the Preterist view and the Futurist view.

Book 1 we started with:

https://www.amazon.com/Four-Views-B...ws+of+revelation+gentry&qid=1622406467&sr=8-1

Book 2 with parallel commentaries:

https://www.amazon.com/Revelation-Parallel-Commentary-Revised-Updated/dp/1401676219/ref=sr_1_3?crid=14X2NV8PVG3KM&dchild=1&keywords=steve+gregg+4+views+of+revelation&qid=1622406433&sprefix=steve+gregg+4+views+of+re,aps,149&sr=8-3
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,133
3,878
Southern US
✟394,089.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Done!

If others have references, I would LOVE to consider them! At the rate we are going with our Bible study of Eschatology, I do not see finishing until Christmas at the earlierst. We are averaging 2-3 verses a week (not chapters - Verses). This last week we decided to back up to Daniel so we are a long, long ways from finishing. Right now we are in chapter 5 of Revelation.
 
Upvote 0

Christian Gedge

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,214
1,361
Waikato
Visit site
✟227,210.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Another scholar you may wish to consider is Kim Riddlebarger. His book, 'A Case for Amillennialism' is well worth getting. Here is a comment on his blog. Riddleblog - The Latest Post

Another view–which is gaining acceptance among Reformed Christians–is preterism. This view holds that Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70 and that much of what we find in the Book of Revelation was fulfilled when the Roman army sacked Jerusalem in A. D. 70, destroying the temple and dispersing surviving Jews throughout the Mediterranean world.

Preterists make the opposite error as do the futurists. Instead of treating this book as though it deals with future events, preterists treat Revelation as though it is largely historical and that most everything written here has already taken place, with the possible exception of Christ’s second coming and the resurrection, a view taken by so-called partial preterists like R. C. Sproul and Ken Gentry.

This is very problematic because it reduces Revelation to a mere historical record, robbing the book of its apocalyptic character and eliminating John’s stress upon Christ’s final and eschatological victory when he returns in judgment to raise the dead and make all things new on the “last day.”​
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Preterists make the opposite error as do the futurists. Instead of treating this book as though it deals with future events, preterists treat Revelation as though it is largely historical and that most everything written here has already taken place, with the possible exception of Christ’s second coming and the resurrection, a view taken by so-called partial preterists like R. C. Sproul and Ken Gentry.

This is very problematic because it reduces Revelation to a mere historical record, robbing the book of its apocalyptic character and eliminating John’s stress upon Christ’s final and eschatological victory when he returns in judgment to raise the dead and make all things new on the “last day.”​
Not sure if I understood the post above.

I don't think Partial Preterism claims that Christ's return is not in the future.
 
Upvote 0

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,133
3,878
Southern US
✟394,089.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
See my above post where I mentioned contacting Dr. Gentry and we are actively studying the 4 views.
We started out with a book that was organized as chapters expressing the 4 views of Preterism, Idealism, Classical Futurism and Progressive Futurism. We got about half way through it and switched to Steve Gregg's 4 views of Revelation, which is organized as a parallel commentary. So you read Revelation Chapter 5 verses 1-2 and then you read how the Futurist, Preterist, Historicist and Idealist view those two verses. Its typically 2-4 pages or parallel commentary then it cites another few verses of Revelation, using the NKJV bible. I personally use the NASB-77 Hebrew-Greek word study bible (same as Beth Moore), but I have many bibles in my home, including the KJV, the NIV, the NLT, the Message, the Amplified, the NKJV, and others. I also have a Catholic Bible, a Book of Mormon, the Quran, and plan to get the Jewish bible, and have some books on Hindu thought as well. I found recently in hotel that the Johova Witnesses have their own bible, so I plan to get it too. I only study the protestant Scriptures but I use the others as references when witnessing to other faiths. I can't be a very good witness without understanding their belief system, so I invest in their reference books too. I have a book by Maimonides or something like that, as well as a book on Christian Agnostics. I have a fairly decent home library now cause I'm disabled and wheelchair bound, so most of my life is spent either in a book or on the computer sitting in my zero gravity chair.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,133
3,878
Southern US
✟394,089.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Can someone give me a good Jewish bible to buy? I'd like one that has Daniel in it, which I understand is not in their list of prophets but it is included as a "writing".
 
Upvote 0

Freedm

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2020
740
172
42
Austin TX
✟40,387.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
I don't see any evidence here just opinions. No 1 means nothing. That was written hundreds of years after the fact. Their opinion is no better than ours. It is like later generation taking our opinion of the creation of the USA as proof of facts years ago. That would be ludicrous.

A lot of the rest of this comes from a faulty opinion of a highly figurative book and a fixation with the coming of Titus in AD 70 rather than the coming of Christ in the future.
You're not being very objective, are you? There are actual proofs in there. Look again.
 
Upvote 0

Freedm

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2020
740
172
42
Austin TX
✟40,387.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Preterists make the opposite error as do the futurists. Instead of treating this book as though it deals with future events, preterists treat Revelation as though it is largely historical and that most everything written here has already taken place, with the possible exception of Christ’s second coming and the resurrection, a view taken by so-called partial preterists like R. C. Sproul and Ken Gentry.

This is very problematic because it reduces Revelation to a mere historical record, robbing the book of its apocalyptic character and eliminating John’s stress upon Christ’s final and eschatological victory when he returns in judgment to raise the dead and make all things new on the “last day.”​
I'm guessing these are not your words, but a quote, regardless I'd like to respond to this comment. The author says "This is very problematic because it reduces revelation to a mere historical record", but fails to explain how it can be problematic to consider Revelation a historical record if it is in fact a historical record. And to use the word "reduces" as if a historical record is not valuable in and of itself, does nothing to support his position as it reveals only the author's attempt to minimize preterism. In other words, that's the weakest argument against preterism I've ever heard.
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Site Supporter
May 19, 2018
11,000
11,746
Neath, Wales, UK
✟1,012,115.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Revelation 1

1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what must soon take place; and he made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. 3 Blessed is he who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written therein; for the time is near.

I believe what Jesus said at the beginning of Revelation. He was talking about the generation of the Apostles, not thousands of years in the future.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Freedm
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,484.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You're not being very objective, are you? There are actual proofs in there. Look again.

I did. They are very weak, forced and inaccurate. No evidence. Just opinions. Where is your evidence?

Preterists have a habit of cutting and pasting. This portrays a very weak position.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0