- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,030
- 7,265
- 62
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
The word for tribulation is most often translated persecution and in Revelations persecution includes the Jews.
Upvote
0
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.
The word for tribulation is most often translated persecution and in Revelations persecution includes the Jews.Persecution or wrath?
This is possibly describing the destruction of Jerusalem and way before Revelations is even written.
On an early date of Revelations, i.e., late sixties?The word for tribulation is most often translated persecution and in Revelations persecution includes the Jews.
Please state whether you believe Revelation was written either post 70 AD or Pre 70 AD.
Additionally, please provide evidence to support your belief.
You mentioned the sixth king?Don't know when it was written but sure as heck know when John received the vision from heaven.
Revelation . 17:9 And here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sits. 10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he coms, he must continue a short space. 11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goes into perdition. 12 And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast
So during the reign of the 6th Roman emperor. That would put it right around the beginning of the war in Judea. Also keep in mind John was told to write the vision. I doubt he lingered around and got to it 30 years later.
End Time Prophecy
What God is telling John is that the ten kings of the fourth empire of Daniel 7 are out beyond the first 7. The four empires as represented in this beast of Revelation are already named in the book of Daniel. No need for any speculation. No doubt John and others were wondering if the events prophesied about Judea that they see unfolding are heralding the age of promise that was to come at the end of the Roman Empire. God was showing him the ten emperors in Daniel 7 were still future.You mentioned the sixth king?
12 And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast...
These kings have no kingdom to rule at the time, of the writing of the book of Revelations. I do not understand what you wrote?
So obviously you have the six Roman emperors all figured out.What God is telling John is that the ten kings of the fourth empire of Daniel 7 are out beyond the first 7. The four empires as represented in this beast of Revelation are already named in the book of Daniel. No need for any speculation. No doubt John and others were wondering if the events prophesied about Judea that they see unfolding are heralding the age of promise that was to come at the end of the Roman Empire. God was showing him the ten emperors in Daniel 7 were still future.
Have all that in the link of my first post. Not just the seven though. Also the ten and the infamous eleventh horn of Daniel chapter 7.So obviously you have the six Roman emperors all figured out.
There seems to be endless debate on that specific interpretation.
Care to take a shot at the title and list the emperors?
Had trouble locating the seven kings in that gigantic website.Have all that in the link of my first post. Not just the seven though. Also the ten and the infamous eleventh horn of Daniel chapter 7.
Had trouble locating the seven kings in that gigantic website.
Did not seem to have too much to say about the identity of the kings of Revelations in chapter seventeen?
I was looking for the list of the emperors.
We can see Irenaeus speaking in circa 180 AD as the prophecies of Revelation yet future. Second we see him place the date of Revelation written during the reign of Domitian.
Domitian (/dəˈmɪʃən, -iən/; Latin: Titus Flavius Caesar Domitianus Augustus; 24 October 51 – 18 September 96 AD) was Roman emperor from 81 to 96. ... After the death of his brother, Domitian was declared emperor by the Praetorian Guard. His 15-year reign was the longest since that of Tiberius..
Therefore, the date range can be a early as 81AD and as late as 96AD.
Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a direct disciple of the apostle John. That lends credence to Irenaeaus' claim and understanding of Revelation.
Another historic data point to consider is Revelation was considered part of the early church antilegomena. Or the disputed NT books. Reason usually given is the later date (late 1st century AD) and thus not known universally by the church:
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?"
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.
Within the context of what they knew of the world at the time? I would say to them that was the whole world. Within the context of the Greco-Roman world and what transpires in Revelation? Highly debatable as the events of 70 AD were local events not even affecting the rest of the empire.
Jerusalem were already in motion in 68 AD. That allowed less than 24 months to deliver the letters and have them circulate back to Judea where the supposed fulfilled prophecies would occur. This would then put Revelation as more a 'forecast' of events already bubbling up. We don't need Revelation to give prophetic utterances of the destruction of Jerusalem. The Gospel of Luke, chapter 21 already does a great job of that.
Thanks for the list! A lot of 19th century Tubingen school names on the list. Do you have the dates they claim or do I have to do visit all the books? For example, the list I provided went to a link which listed the date range and scholars:
Perhaps Hegesippus via Eusebius as well:
The first person to describe the date Revelation was written in AD 95 is a man named Hegesippus who lived AD 120-190. While there is a limited number of writings that exist today from Hegesippus, Eusebius Pamphili of Caesaria (who lived AD 300-340) heavily relied on Hegesippus’ material when writing his Ecclesiastical History (Andrew James Carriker, The Library of Eusebius of Caesarea, Supplements to Viligiae christianae, ed. J. Van Oort, J. Den Boeft, W. L. Petersen, et al., vol. 67 [Leiden: Brill: 2003], 1-36). In Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical Historyhe mentions a written source that he uses to state that John the apostle was banished to the island of Patmos under the reign of Domitian. The written source that Eusebius uses is most likely Hegesippus’ work written sometime in the second century (Hitchcock, “Domitianic Date of Revelation,” 11-16).
More on that from an early source in Eusebius:
Please state whether you believe Revelation was written either post 70 AD or Pre 70 AD.
Additionally, please provide evidence to support your belief.
Revelation says when when John received the vision from heaven. No need to speculate on that with the incomplete knoweldge and records of extra Biblical figures.About 95 A.D.
1. A letter written around180 A.D. by Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple and successor of John), states that pronouncing the name of the Antichrist would be incurring a risk and if it were necessary at the time it was written, it would have been revealed by Christ. They did not know the name of the Antichrist. If it was Nero in their past, they would have stated it. Nero was an antichrist, no doubt, but not the end times antichrist spoken about in this book. Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Eusibius all support the date of Revelation given by Irenaeus which was around the end of Domitians's reign.
2. Smyrna was not mentioned anywhere else in scripture suggesting that I was a newer church which was started later in the 1st century. Polycarp was said to be the Bishop of Smyrna and born around A.D.70 If he was a disciple and successor of John, then this church began decades after the destruction of Jerusalem. Polycarp also said that no church in Smyrna existed in A.D. 67.
3. If John wrote Revelation before A.D. 70, it would overlap Paul's letter to Timothy who was in Ephesus at the time. The problems Jesus points out in Revelation concerning Ephesus and Laodicea are not evident in Paul's letters. John probably did not move to Ephesus until after Paul and Peter were martyred.
4. Nero murdered Christians and their prophets including Paul and Peter. That was his style. He would have also killed John if he was around. But John became banished to Patmos - which was Domitian's style of punishment.
The Preterist view critically hangs on an early date of Revelation being written prior to 70 A.D., because if it wasn't, their whole view falls apart.
I realize people worked very hard to try to figure out what all that means. Especially during the persecutions of the reformation. The fact of the matter is all these prophecies are in regard to the four empires named in scripture and therefore to us looking back, dated by scripture. It is not about the papacy which was basically started as the imperial church of the Roman Empire. It is about the Roman Empire itself. The prophecies are about the time period of the four gentile empires and what would occur in the world when that era ended. Many simply do not know that the capitol of the Roman Empire was moved to Constantinople in 333 AD. The empire did not end until Constantinople was conquered by the Turks and the last Roman emperor killed. If you want a prophecy about the papacy look at the prophecy about the Roman Empire splitting into and eastern and Western branch. The animal that looked like a lamb with two horns that spoke like a dragon. The two horns are the two branches and the lamb illustrates the empires claims of Christianity. The speaking like a dragon is the fact that the power and doctrine behind the empire were of Satan.The four kings in Daniel 2 were not individual kings but dynasties.
There were a number of dynasties in the Roman state. they are, as I remember them:
1. Kings
2. 1st Republic
3. 2nd Republic
4. Triumverate
5. Dictatorship.
6. Emperors, That which is
7. Christian Emperors
The 10 kings who replaced Roman rule. The ten tribes that overthrew the empire
Heruli
Seuvi
Burgundians
Huns
Ostrogoths
Visigogths
Vandals
Lombards
Franks
Saxons
They gave power to the eighth
8. Different from all the others, but of them. The Papacy.
The papacy overthrew 3 of the former honrs,
The Heruli under Odacer in AD 393
The Vandals in AD 534
The Ostrogoths in 553,
Thus setting up the Papal States which lasted till AD 1870 when Victor Emanuel became King of Italy. The papacy had no state in Rome from that time till 1926 when Mussolini gave him Vatican city.
About 95 A.D.
1. A letter written around180 A.D. by Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple and successor of John), states that pronouncing the name of the Antichrist would be incurring a risk and if it were necessary at the time it was written, it would have been revealed by Christ. They did not know the name of the Antichrist. If it was Nero in their past, they would have stated it. Nero was an antichrist, no doubt, but not the end times antichrist spoken about in this book. Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Eusibius all support the date of Revelation given by Irenaeus which was around the end of Domitians's reign.
2. Smyrna was not mentioned anywhere else in scripture suggesting that I was a newer church which was started later in the 1st century. Polycarp was said to be the Bishop of Smyrna and born around A.D.70 If he was a disciple and successor of John, then this church began decades after the destruction of Jerusalem. Polycarp also said that no church in Smyrna existed in A.D. 67.
3. If John wrote Revelation before A.D. 70, it would overlap Paul's letter to Timothy who was in Ephesus at the time. The problems Jesus points out in Revelation concerning Ephesus and Laodicea are not evident in Paul's letters. John probably did not move to Ephesus until after Paul and Peter were martyred.
4. Nero murdered Christians and their prophets including Paul and Peter. That was his style. He would have also killed John if he was around. But John became banished to Patmos - which was Domitian's style of punishment.
The Preterist view critically hangs on an early date of Revelation being written prior to 70 A.D., because if it wasn't, their whole view falls apart.
1. A letter written around180 A.D. by Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple and successor of John), states that pronouncing the name of the Antichrist would be incurring a risk and if it were necessary at the time it was written, it would have been revealed by Christ. They did not know the name of the Antichrist. If it was Nero in their past, they would have stated it. Nero was an antichrist, no doubt, but not the end times antichrist spoken about in this book. Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Eusibius all support the date of Revelation given by Irenaeus which was around the end of Domitians's reign.
Smyrna was not mentioned anywhere else in scripture suggesting that I was a newer church which was started later in the 1st century. Polycarp was said to be the Bishop of Smyrna and born around A.D.70 If he was a disciple and successor of John, then this church began decades after the destruction of Jerusalem. Polycarp also said that no church in Smyrna existed in A.D. 67.
If John wrote Revelation before A.D. 70, it would overlap Paul's letter to Timothy who was in Ephesus at the time. The problems Jesus points out in Revelation concerning Ephesus and Laodicea are not evident in Paul's letters. John probably did not move to Ephesus until after Paul and Peter were martyred.
Nero murdered Christians and their prophets including Paul and Peter. That was his style. He would have also killed John if he was around. But John became banished to Patmos - which was Domitian's style of punishment.
The Preterist view critically hangs on an early date of Revelation being written prior to 70 A.D., because if it wasn't, their whole view falls apart.
On an early date of Revelations, i.e., late sixties?
Revelations 2
1 To the angel of the church in Ephesus write...
I cannot even grasp a date for the writing of Revelations being before AD 70.
Timothy and Paul were heavily involved in the church at Ephesus during the sixties. Why would John write a letter and refer to the church at Ephesus in the sixties, and say the following?
4 But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.
That is not even feasible given that Timothy was still alive well after AD 70.
I realize people worked very hard to try to figure out what all that means. Especially during the persecutions of the reformation. The fact of the matter is all these prophecies are in regard to the four empires named in scripture and therefore to us looking back, dated by scripture. It is not about the papacy which was basically started as the imperial church of the Roman Empire. It is about the Roman Empire itself. The prophecies are about the time period of the four gentile empires and what would occur in the world when that era ended. Many simply do not know that the capitol of the Roman Empire was moved to Constantinople in 333 AD. The empire did not end until Constantinople was conquered by the Turks and the last Roman emperor killed. If you want a prophecy about the papacy look at the prophecy about the Roman Empire splitting into and eastern and Western branch. The animal that looked like a lamb with two horns that spoke like a dragon. The two horns are the two branches and the lamb illustrates the empires claims of Christianity. The speaking like a dragon is the fact that the power and doctrine behind the empire were of Satan.
4 But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.So the church in Ephesus was perfect, with no sinners in it, as long as timothy was alive?
I disagree, any church can have problem within days, weeks, months, even a few years after it starts.
4 But I have this against you, that you have left your first love.
turning away from the Lord is the sin in reference , I did not see any reference to saying that the "church in Ephesus was perfect, with no sinners in it, as long as timothy was alive?"
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?