Pre AD70 revelation..list of scholars supporting it

[Paul K]

JlB, I am perplexed, I just read this whole section about the evidence of revelations being done before ad 70. Now you just mentioned that the mark of the beast is here now, and we all will go into hell to suffer. That contradicts with the thought of revelations being done back in AD 70. it would mean that we are currently living in the kingdom of God and living in heaven with all peace and goodness for all eternity, and we will no longer be suffering sin and evil because Satan has been tossed into the lake of Fire for eternity.

I don't think that is true because as of this time, Israel is at war with palestine, Ukraine is at tensions with Russia, and there are constant evil deeds being done somewhere in this World.

P

 

[miamited]

No we believe that. "In the world you will have trouble, but I have over come the world." I trust you believe that too, during this epoch.

Hi interplanner,

Sure, I believe that. I'm not asking about whether we are going to have trouble, although, I'm confident that if the 1,000 year reign is enjoyed by the people that it is claimed to be living through it, since they are all believers in the Lord, that the troubles surely wouldn't be anything like they are today. But, let's set that aside for a moment.

Peter wrote to the believers that Satan is prowling around like a roaring lion, looking for those he may devour. He wrote this after the ascension of our Lord. He wrote this in the days that Mr. Adams claims to be a part of this 1,000 year reign. Was Peter not being truthful? Did he not really know the truth?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[shturt678s]

Hi interplanner,

Sure, I believe that. I'm not asking about whether we are going to have trouble, although, I'm confident that if the 1,000 year reign is enjoyed by the people that it is claimed to be living through it, since they are all believers in the Lord, that the troubles surely wouldn't be anything like they are today. But, let's set that aside for a moment.

Peter wrote to the believers that Satan is prowling around like a roaring lion, looking for those he may devour. He wrote this after the ascension of our Lord. He wrote this in the days that Mr. Adams claims to be a part of this 1,000 year reign. Was Peter not being truthful? Did he not really know the truth?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

"Satan" in Peter is a personification due to Jesus kicking his butt a the Cross Lk.11:21, 22. He's in the abyss having to work through the Antichristian agencies until he's personally loosed at Rev.20:7.

Only an opinion from a lower paygrade at that, old Jack

 

[Rev20]

Only from a lower paygrade as a summary overview. Off the top the apostle John lived and labored out of Ephesus since the days of the Jewish war in 70 A.D. which destroyed the Jewish nation. Domitian died September 18, 96 eyeballing one of my old notes. This date makes it necessary to place the visions in Revelation in the year 96 to me anyway.

John wasn't exiled by the emperor himself, correct? He was condemned to exile by the proconsul or similar authority...been awhile...remember this from the historian Zahn. There's nothing to prevent us from dating Revelation in the year 96, the actual year of Dominitians death, correct? Nerva ruled until 98, then followed Trajan. John was released after Domitian's death, and died during Trajan's death, correct?

Then we have Irenaeus from my old notes (Heresis III, 4, 4) who states that John lived until the time of Trajan (98-117). Eusebius (Church History 5, 8) quotes Irenaeus to the effect that Revelation was seen almost in the memory of men then living, namely "toward the end of the reign of Domintian" (died in 96). Old Amill. Jack's opinion

Old Jack, good to see you weigh-in on this one. I need a second opinion.

You, like most, are basing your understanding entirely on Irenaeus, since he is the only one who actually claimed it. All the others simply quoted Irenaeus (with the occasional embellishment).

But what did Irenaeus actually know? He was not born until approximately 120-140 AD, and admits he only knew Polycarp (d. 155) as a youth. But the most controversial of Irenaeus' statements is virtually ignored; and that is this one:

"Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies [of the Apocalypse], and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]; while reason also leads us to conclude that the number of the name of the beast, [if reckoned] according to the Greek mode of calculation by the [value of] the letters contained in it, will amount to six hundred and sixty and six;" [Roberts & Donaldson, Irenaeus, Against Heresies, "Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol 01: Apostolic Fathers." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913, Book V.30.1, p.558]​

How could there be ancient copies of the Revelation, when according to (interpretations of) a statement two paragraphs after the one above, Irenaeus claimed John saw the vision "almost in our day":

"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 apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign." [Roberts & Donaldson, Irenaeus, Against Heresies, "Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol 01: Apostolic Fathers." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913, Book V.30.3, pp.559-560]​

How could a vision seen "almost in our day" already have ancient copies transcribed from the original book written about that vision?

Something doesn't add up, Old Jack. Personally, I believe Irenaeus meant to say that either John or a copy of the book was seen almost in his day. Either way, Irenaeus is not a reliable source for the dating of the Revelation.

There are other early sources for dating the Revelation, most vehemently opposed by futurists. One would be this one by Caius, where he implies John wrote to the seven churches prior to Paul writing to his seven churches:

"…as the blessed Apostle Paul, following the rule of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name, in this order: the first to the Corinthians, the second to the Ephesians, the third to the Philippians, the fourth to the Colossians, the fifth to the Galatians, the sixth to the Thessalonians, the seventh to the Romans." [Roberts & Donaldson, Caius, Canon Muratorianus, "Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol 05: 3rd Century." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1919, III.3, p.603]​

And there is this by Clement of Alexandria, which on the surface doesn't appear that significant, until all factors are considered, in particular John's very old age. He would have been almost a centenarian:

"XLII. 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." [Roberts & Donaldson, Clement of Alexandria, Who is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved (Quis Salvus Dives)? "Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol 02: Fathers of the 2nd Century." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913, Chap.XLII, p.603]​

Notice first that Clement doesn't name the tyrant. Nero died in 68, Domitian in the mid to late 90's. Let us assume that John was released at nearly 100 years old, after Domitian died. Clement said that after his release, and during the aforementioned travels, John committed a youth to a one of the Bishops:

"Having come to one of the cities not far off (the name of which some give as [fn: Smyrna]), and having put the brethren to rest in other matters, at last, looking to the bishop appointed, and seeing a youth, powerful in body, comely in appearance, and ardent, said, "This (youth) I commit to you in all earnestness, in the presence of the Church, and with Christ as witness." And on his accepting and promising all, he gave the same injunction and testimony. And he [John] set out for Ephesus. And the presbyter [the Bishop] taking home the youth committed to him, reared, kept, cherished, and finally baptized him." [Roberts & Donaldson, Clement of Alexandria, Who is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved (Quis Salvus Dives)? "Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol 02: Fathers of the 2nd Century." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913, Chap.XLII, p.603]​

Later, the youth became corrupted and joined a gang. Then this:

"Time passed, and some necessity having emerged, they send again for John. He, when he had settled the other matters on account of which he came, said, "Come now, O bishop, restore to us the deposit which I and the Saviour committed to thee in the face of the Church over which you preside, as witness." The other was at first confounded, thinking that it was a false charge about money which he did not get; and he could neither believe the allegation regarding what he had not, nor disbelieve John. But when he said "I demand the young man, and the soul of the brother," the old man, groaning deeply, and bursting into tears, said, "He is dead." "How and what kind of death?" "He is dead," he said, "to God. For he turned wicked and abandoned, and at last a robber; and now he has taken possession of the mountain in front of the church, along with a band like him." Rending, therefore, his clothes, and striking his head with great lamentation, the apostle said, "It was a fine guard of a brother's soul I left! But let a horse be brought me, and let some one be my guide on the way." He rode away, just as he was, straight from the church. On coming to the place, he is arrested by the robbers' outpost; neither fleeing nor entreating, but crying, "It was for this I came. Lead me to your captain;" who meanwhile was waiting, all armed as he was. But when he recognised John as he advanced, he turned, ashamed, to flight. The other [John] followed with all his might, forgetting his age, crying, "Why, my son, dost thou flee from me, thy father, unarmed, old? Son, pity me. Fear not; thou hast still hope of life. I will give account to Christ for thee. If need be, I will willingly endure thy death, as the Lord did death for us. For thee I will surrender my life. Stand, believe; Christ hath sent me."" [Roberts & Donaldson, Clement of Alexandria, Who is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved (Quis Salvus Dives)?, "Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol 02: Fathers of the 2nd Century." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913, Chap.XLII, p.603]​

Here is a virtual centenarian riding a horse, and also chasing a much younger man on foot. At my age (66) that would be no easy feat; but for a man approaching 100, it is incredulous.

But, however, if John was released after the death of Nero the tyrant in 68, he would have been still been in his 60's, and all of this would make much more sense.


.

 

[JLB777]

JlB, I am perplexed, I just read this whole section about the evidence of revelations being done before ad 70. Now you just mentioned that the mark of the beast is here now, and we all will go into hell to suffer. That contradicts with the thought of revelations being done back in AD 70. it would mean that we are currently living in the kingdom of God and living in heaven with all peace and goodness for all eternity, and we will no longer be suffering sin and evil because Satan has been tossed into the lake of Fire for eternity.

I don't think that is true because as of this time, Israel is at war with palestine, Ukraine is at tensions with Russia, and there are constant evil deeds being done somewhere in this World.

P

The mark of the beast technology has only been available within the last few years.

This will enable the government to control what you buy and sell.


As far as going to hell, we must simply heed the warning given to us about the mark of the beast that will emerge onto the seen very soon.


Hear the testimony of those who stand strong, even unto death.


10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, "Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death. 12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time." Revelation 12:10-12

Blessing and strength to you brother as you prepare.


JLB

 

[interpreter]

Lord God Almighty, Father of your blessed and beloved
child Jesus Christ, through whom we have received knowledge of
you, God of angels and hosts and all creation, and of the whole
race of the upright who live in your presence: I bless you
that you have thought me worthy of this day and hour, to be
numbered among the martyrs and share in the cup of Christ, for
resurrection to eternal life, for soul and body in the
incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit. Among them may I be
accepted before you today, as a rich and acceptable sacrifice,
just as you, the faithful and true God, have prepared and
foreshown and brought about. For this reason and for all things
I praise you, I bless you, I glorify you, through the eternal
heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved child, through
whom be glory to you, with him and the Holy Spirit, now and for
the ages to come. Amen.



The fire was then lit and shortly thereafter a soldier stabbed Polycarp to death by order of the magistrate when the fire failed to touch him..


This took place on February 23, 156.

Polycarp was born in A.D. 69.

It is recorded by Irenaeus, and by Tertullian, that he had been a disciple of John the Apostle.

Saint Jerome wrote that Polycarp was a disciple of John and that John had ordained him bishop of Smyrna.

Polycarp said that no church in Smyrna existed during the ministry of Paul.

Paul died around 66-67 AD.


To the Church in Smyrna
And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the first and the last, who died and came to life.

“‘I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who conquers will not be hurt by the second death.’


It sounds to me like Polycarp ran a good church, but something doesn't add up.
At what age did John ordain him Bishop of Smyrna?
As an infant in A.D. 69?
When he was 10 years old in A.D. 79?
When he turned 20 years of age in A.D. 89?
How about when he turned 30 years old in A.D. 99?
How young could Polycarp have been before he could be ordained by the apostle John as the Bishop of Smyrna and have God write a review of his church?
If you ask any of "the wise and learned" from the list in the OP, he would have had to been the first Baby Bishop of a church that wasn't built yet.

Polycarp said that no church in Smyrna existed during the ministry of Paul, who died around 66-67 AD., before he was even born.
After reading his last prayer, I will take him at his word.


The Book of Revelation
Written in A.D. 94
Solved by Old Dave

Well said.

 

[Paul K]

jlb,

thanks, however that still proves that revelations is not yet fully completed in AD 70. As technology improves now a days, there are now chips available for identity purposes, and with the advent with cell phone and gps technology, it would be very easy for Anti christ to fool people using Internet and media tools out there. It clearly proves that what has been written in Revelations is soon coming. It is difficult for me to think and fathom of the idea of we currently are in Jesus's reign of Peace(1000 year millenial rule) and we are in heaven with no more sadness and despair.

With my eyes continually fixed to Jesus Christ and looking forward to a life of Hope with Him.

P

 

[Danoh]

I swear you guys - on all sides - remind me of how the characters on that old tv show, Gilligan's Island, react to the character, The Professor, every time he comes up with the gadgets he does, simply because he looks at things from a mind which "by reason of use" as having been trained in universally true principles as to how to look at the underlying structure of a thing, in contrast to their "unskilled" looking at the same things.

Put your "books by" away already, those writers were consistently unaware the need to develop first, those principles having to do with how to look at one's own looking at a thing throughout

 

[Interplanner]

The date may be late, but the topic may still be how to understand what happened to Jerusalem. In some of the 7 churches there are those who claim to be Jews but are not. That's an indicator phrase.

Many passages by the apostles said the end of the world would be right after the DofJ but also allowed for delay of the end and judgement of the whole world.

 

[Dave Watchman]

The date may be late, but the topic may still be how to understand what happened to Jerusalem. In some of the 7 churches there are those who claim to be Jews but are not. That's an indicator phrase.

Many passages by the apostles said the end of the world would be right after the DofJ but also allowed for delay of the end and judgement of the whole world.

interplanner, I think that you are a good guy so don't get me wrong. I never saw you get mad even when guys take shots at you for your theological position. If I had the ammunition to shoot holes into that position, I would still hesitate because I know that it is the house you live in. I'm not even sure that all of the participants here understand what this thread is all about or what is at stake. Two years ago I wouldn't know why anyone would care when Revelation was written.

Preterism looks like a house built on a wobbly set of legs. It's strongest leg is the dating of the book of Revelation. If it can be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that Revelation was written anytime after A.D.70, then down she goes like a house of cards. (It would mean that the temple in Rev. 11 could never be the one at the DofJ.) If John put a date on it like; written in 94, made available to the public in 96, Preterism would not exist as a theology today.

I'm not nearly as nice of a guy as you. Under normal circumstances, I could not care any less about what anyone else thinks. I only ever looked into Bible eschatology for myself, so that I alone could understand it. If we were born in 1910 it wouldn't make any difference what we thought about Daniel or Revelation. The odds favor that normal circumstances will continue on as they have been since the fathers fell asleep. If I drive for 30 years accident free an actuarial analyst at an insurance company might say that my risk probability for an accident is high. Sooner or latter the law of averages kicks in. Someday, when normal circumstances come to an end, some eschatology theologies will not have had a hope in seeing it coming.

I think that the date is late but doesn't concern old time Jerusalem.

 

[Rev20]

interplanner, I think that you are a good guy so don't get me wrong. I never saw you get mad even when guys take shots at you for your theological position. If I had the ammunition to shoot holes into that position, I would still hesitate because I know that it is the house you live in. I'm not even sure that all of the participants here understand what this thread is all about or what is at stake. Two years ago I wouldn't know why anyone would care when Revelation was written.

Preterism looks like a house built on a wobbly set of legs. It's strongest leg is the dating of the book of Revelation. If it can be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that Revelation was written anytime after A.D.70, then down she goes like a house of cards. (It would mean that the temple in Rev. 11 could never be the one at the DofJ.) If John put a date on it like; written in 94, made available to the public in 96, Preterism would not exist as a theology today.

It is actually the other way around, Dave. How can futurists possibly make the assumption that "this generation" means "that generation", and invent all these highly imaginative end-time scenerios based on the figurative language of the Revelation, if the Revelation was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem? Then, when someone brought up, for example, the fact that "the blood of all the prophets" was on both Babylon the Great and Jerusalem, it would be more difficult to explain away.

Preterists, and partial-preterists like myself, don't seem to care one way or the other. They (we) are simply seeking the truth. When something doesn't fit, then we assume misinterpretation is the likely culprit.

One point worth mentioning in the "Great Date Debate" is that a historian who spent virtually his entire life studying, translating, creating and/or editing an extensive library of works on the early Church Fathers, changed his mind later in life and adopted an early date for the Revelation:

"On two points I have changed my opinion -- the second Roman captivity of Paul (which I am disposed to admit in the interest of the Pastoral Epistles), and the date of the Apocalypse (which I now assign, with the majority of modern critics, to the year 68 or 69 instead of 95, as before)." [Philip Schaff, "History of the Christian Church, Volume I: Apostolic Christianity. A.D. 1-100." Christian Classics Ethereal Library, Pref to Rev Ed, p.2]​

.

 

[Danoh]

I seriously doubt that proving an earlier date for Revelation might move some to away from their position on certain issues, as the later date is only one aspect of/within a larger operating context - that of the Scholasticism of the early fathers, the same leaven Christ had fought in the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the "masters of Israel," of His day...

 

[Rev20]

I seriously doubt that proving an earlier date for Revelation might move some to away from their position on certain issues, as the later date is only one aspect of/within a larger operating context - that of the Scholasticism of the early fathers, the same leaven Christ had fought in the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the "masters of Israel," of His day...

The leaven of the Pharisees might be the Dispensationalism of today. Are not both seeking an earthly kingdom in Israel?


.

 

[Bible2]

Rev20 said in post 53:

The leaven of the Pharisees might be the Dispensationalism of today. Are not both seeking an earthly kingdom in Israel?

Note that "restoring the kingdom" to Israel (Acts 1:6) means restoring the kingdom of Israel in a physical way in which it will bear fruit (Matthew 21:43), which won't happen until Jesus' (never fulfilled) 2nd coming (Acts 3:20-21, Zechariah 14:3-21).

Presently, the kingdom of God is in heaven (2 Timothy 4:18, Hebrews 12:22-24), and is on the earth spiritually within Christians (Romans 14:17, Luke 17:21). But in the future, the kingdom will come fully upon the earth as it is in heaven (Matthew 6:10). It will also be physically (Luke 22:30, Matthew 19:28) on the earth (Revelation 5:10), first during the future millennium (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11, Zechariah 14:3-21), and then on the new earth (Revelation 21:1-8).

Jesus' kingdom is Israel (John 1:49, John 12:13-15, John 19:19, Luke 22:30). And at Jesus' 2nd coming, he will sit on the earthly throne of David (Luke 1:32-33, Isaiah 9:7), and restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6-7, Acts 3:20-21). Jesus is, in his humanity, the son of David (Matthew 1:1, Matthew 21:15-16, Romans 1:3), of the house of David (Luke 1:69). So at Jesus' 2nd coming, he will restore the tabernacle, the house, of David (Isaiah 16:5, Amos 9:11) to its royal glory (2 Samuel 5:12), which it had lost (2 Kings 17:21a). And Jesus will fulfill the prophecy and prayer of 2 Samuel 7:16-29. And he will bring salvation to all the still-living, unbelieving elect Jews of the house of David. For they (along with all other still-living, unbelieving elect Jews) will come into faith in him when they see him at his 2nd coming (Zechariah 12:10-14, Zechariah 13:1,6, Romans 11:26-31). And so they will all become part of the church at that time, for now there are no believers outside of the church (Ephesians 4:4-6).

After Jesus' 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:3, Zechariah 14:3-5) will occur the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6, Zechariah 14:8-21), during which time the Gentile nations will come to seek the returned Jesus ruling the whole earth (Zechariah 8:22, Zechariah 14:9, Psalms 72:8-11) on the restored throne of David (Isaiah 9:7) in the earthly Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:1-4, Zechariah 14:8-11,16-19). And the physically resurrected church will reign on the earth with Jesus during the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29). For the church is Israel (Romans 11:1,17,24, Ephesians 2:12,19, Galatians 3:29, Revelation 21:9,12; 1 Peter 2:9-10).

Rev20 said in post 53:

The leaven of the Pharisees might be the Dispensationalism of today. Are not both seeking an earthly kingdom in Israel?

Dispensationalism isn't mistaken for that reason, but because it sets up a mutual exclusiveness between the church and Israel, while the Bible shows that all genetic Jews in the church remain members of whichever tribe of Israel they were born into (Romans 11:1, Acts 4:36). And all genetic Gentiles in the church have been grafted into Israel (Romans 11:17,24, Ephesians 2:12,19, Galatians 3:29), and so have been grafted into its various tribes (cf. Ezekiel 47:21-23). So the entire church is the 12 tribes of Israel (Revelation 21:9,12; 1 Peter 2:9-10). This is necessary, for all those in the church are saved only by the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6, Hebrews 9:15), which is made only with Israel (Jeremiah 31:31-34, John 4:22b). John 10:16 refers to the "other sheep" of believers who are Gentiles being brought into "this fold" of Israel, which is the "one fold" of the church (1 Corinthians 12:13, Ephesians 4:4-6, Revelation 21:9,12). A genetic Gentile believer can pray and ask which tribe of Israel he has been grafted into, and he will receive an answer from God, if he asks in faith (cf. Matthew 21:22), without any wavering (cf. James 1:6-7).

Also, all those in the church, no matter whether they are genetic Jews (Acts 22:3) or genetic Gentiles (Romans 16:4b), have become spiritually-circumcised Jews, if they have undergone the spiritual circumcision of water-immersion (burial) baptism into Jesus (Romans 2:29, Philippians 3:3, Colossians 2:11-13).

Also, note that the book of James is addressing "the twelve tribes" (James 1:1), which is the same as addressing people in the church (James 5:14), people with faith in Christ (James 2:1, James 1:3) (i.e. Christians), people who have been born again (James 1:18, cf. 1 Peter 1:23), who are waiting for Christ to return (James 5:7).

Similarly, the book of Hebrews is about the church (Hebrews 2:12, Hebrews 12:23), the body of Christ (Hebrews 13:3, cf. 1 Corinthians 12:25-27).

 

[Interplanner]

B2 wrote:
which won't happen until Jesus' (never fulfilled) 2nd coming (Acts 3:20-21

That is not at all what Acts 3 is about. it is about then and there and it is happening to them and there. Or was intended to and they were missing out with their 2P2P conceptions.

Aaaaaggg. That's all I can say about 'runaway' futurism. You guys just disappear into the future in the middle of a totally coherent statement.

 

[Danoh]

B2 wrote:
which won't happen until Jesus' (never fulfilled) 2nd coming (Acts 3:20-21

That is not at all what Acts 3 is about. it is about then and there and it is happening to them and there. Or was intended to and they were missing out with their 2P2P conceptions.

Aaaaaggg. That's all I can say about 'runaway' futurism. You guys just disappear into the future in the middle of a totally coherent statement.

Brother, considering your constant knocking what you refer to as 2P2P,, you need to change your handle - INTERplanner?

How's about Intercalation?

 

[Interplanner]

It came from a completely different setting.

There is nothing invented by me about 2P2P. That's the title of a chapter in Ryries book on D'ism. He calls it the sine qua non of D'ism, which is Latin for 'the one thing without which (the subject) has no distinction.' Funny he chose Latin.

It is exactly true--D'ism dies without it, but the support is false.