Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I would tend to fall into the futurist category, not because of some date before or after the destruction of the temple though. The type of destruction worldwide that Revelations refers to I don't see any evidence of happening in the past. Certainly death and hades are not in the lake of fire. Nor have we seen the type of death and destruction mentioned in Revelations before. Not to mention we haven't seen the two witnesses or many other specific events
when reading a book, especially as difficult as revelation, its important to understand when the book was written and to what audience. I find this topic brought up in a lot of threads, but it is such a big question, that it can derail a forum and most likely needs its own thread.
Preterists argue that revelation was written before 70 ad, linking the prophecy of revelation with the destruction of the temple in 70ad
Futurists (most not all), argue that revelation was written after 70 ad. In other words, none of the prophecy in revelation is about the destruction of 70 AD. If revelation was written after 70 AD, I would agree with futurists, prophecy about the past isn't prophecy.
No one needs it to be prior to 70 AD, I'm a futurist and I'm perfectly comfortable with it. I don't know what your thing is with Preterists and futurists but thats interpretive, the date of authorship is another issue entirely.Between Preterists and Futurists, I fit more in the latter camp than the former. Yet to me it matters little as to when Revelation was written. Even if it was written before 70 AD all that means is that some of the prophecies alleged to be about the events of 70 AD, for sure could be possible, yet it doesn't prove with 100% certainty that it is.
On the other hand, if it could be proven Revelation was written after 70 AD, there is no needless debate with Pretersts then. Only Preterists need Revelation to be written before 70 AD. The futurist view doesn't require it has to be written after 70 AD in order to not be about the events of 70 AD. Whatever the texts involved are about, they are about that regardless when one thinks Revelation was written. Of course though it is only reasonable, that if the texts do involve prophecies concerning the events of 70 AD, the book of Revelation would have had to have been written prior to 70 AD, obviously. Still though, I myself have no opinion as to when it was actually written. My perspective doesn't see why it matters if the texts involved have nothing to do with the events of 70 AD to begin with.
No one needs it to be prior to 70 AD
Most scholars put it in the 90s AD. Two on the list below have it before.And what evidence do you have to support this?
Considering he was writing Against Heresies in 180 AD, there would be older copies of Revelation. If you are focusing on the 'ancient' word, remember he is writing in Greek. Also, consider what would make Revelation 'ancient' if there was only a 20 year difference. Meaning it being written in 90AD as opposed to 70AD, to quote a politician "what difference does it make?"I was curious if there is any other evidence, considering Iraneaus also states in his 5th book about the number of the beast:
As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and ancient copies
Suggesting that there are older copies of revelation
Considering Revelation was written in Greek, that may be the issue. And perhaps Irenaeus knowing only the Greek versions as he was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John the apostle.The syriac version of revelation starts with:
"The Revelation which God made to John the evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero Caesar"
Of course the reason for this is because it has to be so.Preterists argue that revelation was written before 70 ad
So which ones of these did Antichrist overthrown and who was he ? He is supposed to kill 3 of them.
Hank Hanegraff said:First, if the apostle John were indeed writing in AD 95—long after the destruction of the temple— it seems incredible that he would make no mention whatsoever of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history—the demolition of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple at the hands of Titus. Imagine writing a history of New York today and making no mention of the destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center at the hands of terrorists on September 11, 2001. Or, more directly, imagine writing a thesis on the future of terrorism in America and failing to mention the Manhattan Massacre. Consider another parallel. Imagine that you are reading a history concerning Jewish struggles in Nazi Germany and find no mention whatsoever of the Holocaust. Would it not be reasonable to suppose that this history was written prior to the outbreak of World War II? The answer is self-evident. Just as it stretches credulity to suggest that a history of the Jews in Germany would be written in the aftermath of World War II and yet make no mention of the Holocaust, so too it is unreasonable to think that Revelation was written twenty-five years after the destruction of Jerusalem and yet makes no mention of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history.
Furthermore, those who hold that the book of Revelation was written long after the destruction of the temple in AD 70 face an even more formidable obstacle! Consider one of the most amazing prophecies in all of Scripture. Jesus is leaving the temple when his disciples call his attention to its buildings. As they gaze upon its massive stones and magnificent buildings, Jesus utters the unthinkable: “I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down” (Matthew 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6). One generation later this prophecy, no doubt still emblazoned on the tablet of their consciousness, became a vivid and horrifying reality. As noted by Josephus, the temple was doomed August 30, AD 70, “the very day on which the former temple had been destroyed by the king of Babylon.” As incredible as Christ’s prophecy and its fulfillment one generation later are, it is equally incredible to suppose that the apostle John would make no mention of it. As the student of Scripture well knows, New Testament writers were quick to highlight fulfilled prophecy. The phrase “This was to fulfill what was spoken of by the prophet” permeates the pages of Scripture. Thus, it is inconceivable that Jesus would make an apocalyptic prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple and that John would fail to mention that the prophecy was fulfilled one generation later just as Jesus had predicted it.
Finally, let me highlight an additional piece of internal evidence that should give pause to those who are overly dogmatic about the late-dating of Revelation. In Revelation 11 John says, “I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, ‘Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months’” (vv. 1–2). In context, Jesus has sent his angel “to show his servants what must soon take place.” Thus, the prophecy concerns a future event, not one that took place twenty-five years earlier.
In summary, among the reasons we can be certain that the book of Revelation was not written twenty-five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, three tower above the rest. First, just as it is unreasonable to suppose that someone writing a history of the World Trade Center in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, would fail to mention the destruction of the twin towers, so too it stretches credulity to suggest that Revelation was written in the aftermath of the devastation of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple and yet makes no mention of this apocalypse. Additionally, if John is writing in AD 95, it is incredible to suppose he would not mention the fulfillment of Christ’s most improbable and apocalyptic vision. Finally, New Testament documents—including the book of Revelation— speak of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple intact at the time they were written. If Revelation was written before AD 70, it is reasonable to assume that the vision given to John was meant to reveal the apocalyptic events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem—events that were still in John’s future but are in our past. This, of course, does not presuppose that all the prophecies in Revelation have already been fulfilled. Just as thoughtful Christians should distance themselves from the fully futurist fallacy, they should disavow a predominantly preterist (i.e., past) perspective.~http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/...after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70/
Interesting. Did not know that.The biggest issue with Revelations isnt the date or authorship. Its really the limited manuscript evidence, 600 manuscripts if memorry serves. That is pretty slight with regards to New Testament bibliographical testing but extraordinary compared to anything else from the period.
The syriac version of revelation starts with:
"The Revelation which God made to John the evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero Caesar"
For Revelation to be prophecy about 70 AD, it means it would have been written latest by 60 AD. That's why Hank Hanegraff has Revelation penned in 54 AD. About the time of 1 Corinthians.Those who hold to a preterist viewpoint maintain that the events predicted all happened in 70 ad with the destruction of the Temple. Hard to call something that already happened a "prediction."
Hank Hanegraff said:
First, if the apostle John were indeed writing in AD 95—long after the destruction of the temple— it seems incredible that he would make no mention whatsoever of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history—the demolition of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple at the hands of Titus. Imagine writing a history of New York today and making no mention of the destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center at the hands of terrorists on September 11, 2001...
Yea it's the biggest issue, it almost didn't make it in the canon. Hebrews had some problems as well but mostly over authership.Interesting. Did not know that.
What's the stretch? Are you referring specifically to this verse:I like Hank but he is really stretching it here as Christ told John the following:
Yes but way after 70 AD.Nonsense. The Roman empire was overthrown by ten kings or tribes. All historic.
If you don't know history, you won't understand prophecy.
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?