Originally posted by kern
Every scholarly opinion I have read of Revelation's date says that parts of it were possibly composed before 70 AD but that the final form of the book is 90+.
Originally posted by parousia70
Kern,
ALL proponents of the "Late Date" base their premise on one questionable statement by Ireneaus. He is the ONLY source for the Late date. Since He was wrong about so much else,(Jesus lived to be 50 and was never crucified) You will understand if I don't take his word about the dating of Revelation.
Originally posted by Mike Beidler
Parousia70 is right.
However, it's also important to point out that the statement by Irenaeus is a "second generation" quote. Irenaeus' statement that John's vision was seen during the reign of Domitian only exists in Latin and not the original Greek. Most scholars, totally apart from any eschatological argumentation, state that the Latin text is either poor in quality or corrupt. The liklihood is great that Irenaeus was speaking of John (not his vision) being seen during the reign of Domitian. Not only does this work better in context, but it is also supported by Irenaeus' statement that John lived to the time of Traijan, who was emperor after Domitian. A "reconstruction" of the Greek text from the Latin can allow for the change of subject from "it" to "him."
Thus, scholars of futurist bent are relying on a corrupt quote. That, or Irenaeus was just stupid. There are many things in his writings that contradict themselves.
Anyhoo, Irenaeus also stated that the canon of Scripture was completed during the reign of Nero. That would support the early date of Revelation's composition.
Originally posted by Auntie_Belle_Um
Must be that Jedi Knight thing.
Originally posted by Auntie_Belle_Um
rofl
Auntie has invisible sheild, which protects her from all preterist persuasion....hee hee.
Originally posted by parousia70
Kern,
ALL proponents of the "Late Date" base their premise on one questionable statement by Ireneaus.
He is the ONLY source for the Late date.
Originally posted by kern
Not according to what I've read. But I will admit that discussion on this point is futile. You're not about to accept a late date for Revelation unless you also somehow accept that John was writing about already fulfilled events.
-Chris
Originally posted by prodigal
Bump? Bump what? There is nothing else to talk about, preter is wrong, period.
:::Another subtle wave::: "Josephus is Scripture ..."
Originally posted by gwyyn
tell me you don't really believe this guys interpretation over what the bible sais!!!
Josephus was not even a christian. Yea he was for the Jews until they lost, and then he goes and lives the with roman royality! He even adopted a Roman name.
http://religion.rutgers.edu/iho/josephus.html
this is where i got my reading to assume my opinion
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?