Why Historians Date the Revelation to the Reign of Domitian

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

parousia70 said:
Oh contraire...I'll be happy to get to that in due time.

But first you need to stop trying to skirt the issue at hand. Namely that You CAN NOT PROVE FROM SCRIPTURE that Johns' Beast and Paul's Man of Sin are the same individual.

You are trying valliantly to change the course of the discussion, but I will stand firm and continue to call you to account.

SHOW US THE SCRIPTURE that teaches that Johns Beast of Revelation and Pauls man of Sin of 2 Thess are the same individual.

You can't.

There is only one man who can and will ever declare himself God of this world.

Its never happened. God wont permit a man to have control over the entire population of earth and his wrath will be cast out..

If a man attains the power to declare himself God over the world, we need to understand who this man will be.. God isnt going to leave us in the dark and Jesus Christ sent the Gospel out to warn us of what to expect..

2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

What day?

Lets see what day he is referring to here..

2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

Jesus Christ doesnt come until after the events in Revelation.

So we know the Man of Sin will be revealed before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

You cant show me a "man of sin" because the prophecy is yet to happen.

I cant show you a man of sin, because the prophecy is yet to happen.

Common sense tells us the Beast of Revelation is a man.

He is not satan, or the False Prophet.

Nero was not the false Prophet or Satan.

Antichrist is in this world, its a spirit.. Antichrist is satan the spirit.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

ebedmelech said:
Really? Well...if you don't mind, I'd like to jump in here. Let's nail this down and see how you're making an assumption.

Three of the Gospels speak to the Olivet Discourse...Matthew 24 & 25, Luke 21, and Mark 13. However, John doesn't include it in his gospel because he writes Revelation which is giving a more complete prophecy of the Olivet Discourse.

John closes out the prophecy in Revelation 22;18, 19. So now the issue is... WHEN did John write Revelation, which dispensationalism claims was 95 AD. John the apostle is over 90 years old at this time if your claim is true.

On the other side even within Revelation John tells us these things:

*He was a "partaker IN THE TRIBULATION"

*He had been sent (exiled) to Patmos because of his testimony in Christ.

*As he writes to the 7 churches he mentions tribulation 3 times to them as something THEY would see coming to them.

Should we just blow that off? Or should we realize as John is telling us and the churches he mentions it to...that the tribulation is already upon them?

On the contrary...if the information is in concert with the bible and the prophecy is closed (as John closed Revelation at 22:18, 19)...what is wrong at looking at the prophecy in light of the event it prophesies, to see if that event is the fulfillment of that prophecy? Please answer that APART from what you think...it's a legitimate question.

Like what?

Think again. Jesus has gone to the cross. THE TEMPLE IS NOW HIS CHURCH...NOT Herod's temple...AND THIS IS THE CLEAR ERROR you're making! Jesus pronounced Herod's Temple DESOLATE in Matthew 23:37-39. It was NO LONGER GOD'S HOUSE.

God rips the veil of the temple in half when Jesus dies...A CLEAR SIGN that the way to the Holy of Holies IS NOW JESUS!!! (Hebrews 9:12)

So think again! This idea that Paul is speaking of the Jerusalem temple is the fundamental error since that temple is NOT God's temple. THE CHURCH IS. Paul tells us that in many passages;

1 Corinthians 3:16:
16 Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

1 Corinthians 6:19:
19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?

Ephesians 2:19-21:
19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of Gods household,
20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord,

1 Peter 2:1
4 And coming to Him as to a living stone which has been rejected by men, but is choice and precious in the sight of God,
5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
6 For this is contained in Scripture: Behold, I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone, And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.
7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve, The stone which the builders rejected, This became the very corner stone,

So now...before this goes any further...this is the crux of the argument is the temple a building...OR...is it God's people who HE DWELLS IN???

This is why your point is off! We believe the temple Paul speaks of IS NOT the Jerusalem temple...ESPECIALLY when he's writnig to Thessalonian Christians who are NO WHERE near the temple.

How do you respond?

When you Christian up and respond to my query about Roman11 and how you can refute it, then you have permission to query me again..

Im tired of asking you the same questions only for you to be silent in return.

Now, reap what you sow..

Silence..

keep running all over the bible to make it fit your interpretation.. Ill be waiting on my post over here for you to address what Ive asked you.

No prophet gave a prophecy that was meant to unfold before the prophecy was given... And once given, you will know, we all will know exactly what was fulfilled.

parousia70 · Dec 9, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
There is only one man who can and will ever declare himself God of this world.

Jesus did.

Common sense tells us the Beast of Revelation is a man.

He is not satan, or the False Prophet.

ok...

Nero was not the false Prophet or Satan.

ok....

Antichrist is in this world, its a spirit..

Antichrist was a 1st century heretical spirit affecting many who came FROM the Church, but left. (1 John 2:19)

Antichrist is satan the spirit.

Chapter and verse that teaches this?

Again, your posts are completely void of ANY scripture that teaches the beast of Revelation and the Man of Sin from 2 Thess are the same individual.
You know why?
Because there are NONE that teach what you claim. Not a single one... if there were you'd have posted it by now , but, as you said, your Silence confirms your consent.

ebedmelech · Dec 9, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
When you Christian up and respond to my query about Roman11 and how you can refute it, then you have permission to query me again..

Im tired of asking you the same questions only for you to be silent in return.

Now, reap what you sow..

Silence..

keep running all over the bible to make it fit your interpretation.. Ill be waiting on my post over here for you to address what Ive asked you.

No prophet gave a prophecy that was meant to unfold before the prophecy was given... And once given, you will know, we all will know exactly what was fulfilled.

Where is this query? I haven't seen it. I'll be happy to answer it. Romans 11 is a great chapter for undertsanding.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

parousia70 said:
Jesus did.

ok...

ok....

Antichrist was a 1st century heretical spirit affecting many who came FROM the Church, but left. (1 John 2:19)

Chapter and verse that teaches this?

Again, your posts are completely void of ANY scripture that teaches the beast of Revelation and the Man of Sin from 2 Thess are the same individual.
You know why?
Because there are NONE that teach what you claim. Not a single one... if there were you'd have posted it by now , but, as you said, your Silence confirms your consent.

Christ is God over the Heavens and the Earth.

The man we are looking for only cares about Earth..

The question isnt nor does it matter what the coorelation is to the man of sin, and the beast.

The question you are dodging is which one are you calling Nero? Further, where is your objective proof?

precepts · Dec 9, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
70ad is not anywhere in the Bible.

You obviously don't know scripture and prophecy.

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
As a preterist, you must rely on information outside of the Bible to make that assertion.

Says who? I already told you I provided scriptural facts. Quote me where I've used outside information for my argument.

What outside information do preterists use?

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
No problems with that, but if the preterist is using information other than the Bible to prove their point, then they must accept the same unfolding of prophecy today which is a fulfillment of Jesus Christs promise..

I didn't use any outside source, only scripture.

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
There are also holes in the prophecy that history is unable to account for that you guys say happened already, yet the current reality that is unfolding guarentees the promises Christ paid for with his Blood..

You're lost in Christianity.

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
Forgive me for preaching a Bloody Christ, it was indeed his Blood that bought our salvation..

He died so we would have his Gospel, which is given to ALL generations..

Petty stuff.

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
You guys claim Nero stood in Gods temple and declared himself God.

That is no where in history...

Obviously you didn't read the post. I am called a preterist because I interpret scripture correctly, but read what I write. It's scripturally sound, factual.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

precepts said:
You obviously don't know scripture and prophecy.

I could never have read the Bible and I know for a fact you cant prove without going out of the Bible to pull your 70ad date..

Try me..

Interplanner · Dec 9, 2013

My understanding of the 1st century situation that Mt 24A speaks to, using your terms is that the "man of sin" is the same as the leader of the "rebellion that desolates" of Dan 8, and so I don't know why he wouldn't also be the AofD. He believed that he was messiah and would be helped by God in confrontation with Rome. For a person of that time to call themselves messiah would be seen as calling themselves God (compare Christ himself!), and he was doing so in the temple which he tried to use as a fortress.

I also don't know why, given the above info, he couldn't be called the AC. Against the Christ we know, and an un-Christ (so long as we define Christ by his gospel events). Also an anti-christ in the sense of dooming the country rather than providing relief, which Christ did by advising the country not to follow zealots and not to bother with the unfairness of Rome.

The beast is a different character and is connected to the harlot. In terms of the 1st century, where we should start, he is Rome. He arrives by boat at Caesarea "...came out of the sea..." etc. The woman rides on him for a while (persecuting Christians with Rome's permission) but the beast turns against her and destroys her, either because of a failure to control Christians or rebellion; or both.

precepts · Dec 9, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
I could never have read the Bible and I know for a fact you cant prove without going out of the Bible to pull your 70ad date..

Try me..

Luke 21:20.

I've noticed you love to dodge questions. I'm still waiting for the verses defining the 10 toes as kingdoms. And what outside information do preterists use?

There's nowhere in scripture saying the ten toes represents 10 kingdoms. The 4 beast kingdoms in Dan 7 are the same kingdoms represented in the image. The 4th beast kingdom, which is the two legs of iron in the image, has ten kings, not kingdoms:

Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

Click to expand...

The toes and feet represents this 11th horn, the 5th kingdom on the image, and the 2nd beast in Rev 13 with the two horns, the False Prophet. The 1st beast in Rev 13 represents the legs of iron and the 4th beast in Dan 7 with the ten horns, Rome. Rome is the last of all the empires being the 4th and 5th kingdoms in Dan 7 and the two beasts in Rev 13.

Dan 7:11's 11th horn being given to the flame is Rev 19:20, proving the Beast in Rev 17:12 is also the 8th horn of the 10 on Dan 7's 4th beast kingdom of Rome. These are the facts. The 5th kingdom of the toes and feet doesn't have ten kingdoms because of the ten toes. It is the 11th horn, the 2nd beast in Rev 13, the False Prophet. The reason he has two horns is because they represent him and the "devil" that's cast into the lake of fire post the 1,000 yrs reign.

The "Devil" isn't the "devil" that's cast into the lake of fire, but Gog, the Greek lil horn from Dan 8:11 and 11:31. The False Prophet and Gog are two of the four Euphrates angels released during the 6th trump. Check the connection between Ez 39:22 and Rev 20:9. They're the same event, the reason Dan 11's context jumps from the Greek kings to the 2nd resurrection in Dan 12.

What Christianity hasn't discovered yet is the "Wheat and Tares" harvest resurrection is the 3rd resurrection of this physical world into the New Shalem or the lake of fire. There's no "throne" judgement in the 3rd resurrection. The 2nd Resurrection is the "Great White Throne" judgement. The 1st resurrection was for the just only:

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Click to expand...

Where's the outside sources?

Interplanner · Dec 9, 2013

ChristPeri,
it would be best if you got familiar with the basics of what was going on in Judea in the decades of the early church. As far as I know Acts ends about 62 a couple years before Paul's death. There are some references to rebellion already in Acts, but in 63 there is quite a problem and by 66, the Jewish Revolt is official. Judea is small. You can't have the accounts of Acts and of the rest of the country at the same time without them having some bearing on each other.

The main primary source is Josephus JEWISH WAR. Zondervan published the archeologist Cornfeld's extensive notes and photos on it. Zondervan is a conservative Christian press.

a good summary is found on Wikipedia.

A good book before the age of i.net is W. Keller's THE BIBLE AS HISTORY, with a chapter on this.

A good book on the climate of revolution in 1st century Judea is Rhoads ISRAEL IN REVOLUTION 6-72 CE. 6 because Judas the Galilean first countered Rome, failed.

Josephus was a trained priest and military captain. He quotes Dan 8-9 about the rebellion, with the pessimistic outlook that when this rebellion hit, at the end of Daniels' 490 years, the city and temple would be ruined.

The high priest Annas in Jn 11 and 18 is also struggling with this, and even trying to prevent it. He utters a prophecy by the spirit that the token death of Christ would be better than the total loss of the nation, which he obviously believed was impending.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

precepts said:
I've noticed you love to dodge questions. I'm still waiting for the verses defining the 10 toes as kingdoms. And what outside information do preterists use?

Where's the outside sources?

Nice try..

Dan 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.

The toes in that picture are what someone else thinks, not me..

I believe prophecy is future, and the Ten Kings are yet to be revealed.

Here is a better picture that reflects my personal views..

parousia70 · Dec 9, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
The question isnt nor does it matter what the coorelation is to the man of sin, and the beast.

The question you are dodging is which one are you calling Nero? Further, where is your objective proof?

NO.
YOU made the following claims:
A) Preterists claim Nero was the Man of Sin
B) The Man of Sin and the Beast are the same individual

That is when I chimed in on the thread asking you to prove BOTH of those claims.

So far, you have proven neither, instead preferring to raise straw men and obfuscate the topic away from my calling you to account for the claims you made.

The facts remain:
a) You can not show even one preterist who believes Nero was the man of Sin from 2 Thess.
b) You can not show even one scripture that teaches the Beast of Revelation and the Man of Sin from 2 Thess are the same individual.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

parousia70 said:
NO.
YOU made the following claims:
A) Preterists claim Nero was the Man of Sin
B) The Man of Sin and the Beast are the same individual

That is when I chimed in on the thread asking you to prove BOTH of those claims.

So far, you have proven neither, instead preferring to raise straw men and obfuscate the topic away from my calling you to account for the claims you made.

The facts remain:
a) You can not show even one preterist who believes Nero was the man of Sin from 2 Thess.
b) You can not show even one scripture that teaches the Beast of Revelation and the Man of Sin from 2 Thess are the same individual.

You are lying, retract your statement.

I dont make claims, I ask questions.. Big difference..

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
So you dont believe that Nero was the antichrist, the "beast" of Revelation? The Lawless one? The Man of Sin?

Ive literally been sifting through preterist training sites that teach you guys how to manipulate Nero as a proven Beast, but he doesnt fit the bill according to Roman records..

I "claimed" that Preterists manipulate Nero as the Beast of Revelation.
I can prove this because you guys have websites that teach you how to argue with Christians.

I didnt say anything about Preterists affirming Nero as the Lawless one.

Read what I said if you misunderstood what I posted..

ebedmelech · Dec 9, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx...would you kindly go back to your post at 111 and resize your image?

It has the whole thread out of whack! Make it smaller please.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 9, 2013

ebedmelech said:
xXChristPeripheralXx...would you kindly go back to your post at 111 and resize your image?

It has the whole thread out of whack! Make it smaller please.

Ill try, lol

Biblewriter · Dec 9, 2013

Interplanner said:
BW, and why would it be refuted centuries later? Ie, where is the immediate disproof from back in the day? I have a harder time seeing why a 90 year old (in a social world were 60 was a full life) would be thrown to a prison, than a 60 year old in the prime of his preaching and teaching by a Nero.

It seems to me that you are conflating the words "refute," and "deny." Refutation requires convincing proof that a concept is incorrect. The Dominian date for the Revelation was not "refuted" in the early centuries because everyone knew it to be correct. It began to be widely denied as the dark ages began to descend upon Christendom, but it has yet to be refuted. If it had been refuted, at least the secular historians would agree. But they do not, for the Dominian evidence is so overwhelming it defies refutation.

Every attempted refutation I have seen has been a hodge-podge of unprovable assumptions half truths. Such documents as the wretched attempt by Gentry are only convincing to those who do not know enough facts to perceive the obfuscation. The evidence I have given here has included clear and convincing evidence that every one of his allegations about the historical evidence is incorrect. The OP was, in fact, written as a refutation of Gentry's book, although I did not and do not name it.

Biblewriter · Dec 9, 2013

Interplanner said:
BW, and why would it be refuted centuries later? Ie, where is the immediate disproof from back in the day? I have a harder time seeing why a 90 year old (in a social world were 60 was a full life) would be thrown to a prison, than a 60 year old in the prime of his preaching and teaching by a Nero.

The Dominian date for the Revelation was not "refuted" in the early centuries because everyine knew it to be correct. It began to be widely denied as the dark ages began to descend upon Christendom, but it has yet to be refuted. if it had been refuted, at least the secular historians would agree. But they do not, for the Dominian evidence is overwhelming.

Once again the score is: seven witness previous to the sixth century say one thing, including at least four who based what they said on information that did not come from any of the others, and only one of which is alleged to be an inconclusive statement.

On the other hand, there are a grand total of four witnesses previous to the sixth century that are alleged to say the opposite. Two of those four are challenged as being inconclusive statements, and both of the other two are famous for gross errors and misrepresentations.

This is historical evidence that simply cannot be refuted.

History plainly declares that the Revelation wa given during the reign of Domitian.

So you are left with nothing but your alleged "internal evidence," which exists only if you assume that the subject of the Revelation was the events of the first century.

precepts · Dec 10, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
Nice try..

Dan 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.

The toes in that picture are what someone else thinks, not me..

I believe prophecy is future, and the Ten Kings are yet to be revealed.

Another one of my unanswered questions: Why do you believe prophecy is future when I've provided the facts that you continue to ignore?

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
Here is a better picture that reflects my personal views..

I"m glad to hear you say it's a personal view, because it's not written anywhere in scripture, your outside of scripture source.

My unanswered questions:

What outside information do preterists use?

Originally posted by precepts:
There's nowhere in scripture saying the ten toes represents 10 kingdoms. The 4 beast kingdoms in Dan 7 are the same kingdoms represented in the image. The 4th beast kingdom, which is the two legs of iron in the image, has ten kings, not kingdoms:

Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

Click to expand...

The toes and feet represents this 11th horn, the 5th kingdom on the image, and the 2nd beast in Rev 13 with the two horns, the False Prophet. The 1st beast in Rev 13 represents the legs of iron and the 4th beast in Dan 7 with the ten horns, Rome. Rome is the last of all the empires being the 4th and 5th kingdoms in Dan 7 and the two beasts in Rev 13.

Dan 7:11's 11th horn being given to the flame is Rev 19:20, proving the Beast in Rev 17:12 is also the 8th horn of the 10 on Dan 7's 4th beast kingdom of Rome. These are the facts. The 5th kingdom of the toes and feet doesn't have ten kingdoms because of the ten toes. It is the 11th horn, the 2nd beast in Rev 13, the False Prophet. The reason he has two horns is because they represent him and the "devil" that's cast into the lake of fire post the 1,000 yrs reign.

The "Devil" isn't the "devil" that's cast into the lake of fire, but Gog, the Greek lil horn from Dan 8:11 and 11:31. The False Prophet and Gog are two of the four Euphrates angels released during the 6th trump. Check the connection between Ez 39:22 and Rev 20:9. They're the same event, the reason Dan 11's context jumps from the Greek kings to the 2nd resurrection in Dan 12.

What Christianity hasn't discovered yet is the "Wheat and Tares" harvest resurrection is the 3rd resurrection of this physical world into the New Shalem or the lake of fire. There's no "throne" judgement in the 3rd resurrection. The 2nd Resurrection is the "Great White Throne" judgement. The 1st resurrection was for the just only:

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Click to expand...

Where are the outside sources?

Nice try yourself, and I like the way the reply screen shifted out of alignment when I hit the reply button! The righteous are few.

xXChristPeripheralXx · Dec 10, 2013

precepts said:
Another one of my unanswered questions: Why do you believe prophecy is future when I've provided the facts that you continue to ignore?

I"m glad to hear you say it's a personal view, because it's not written anywhere in scripture, your outside of scripture source.

My unanswered questions:

What outside information do preterists use?

Where are the outside sources?

Nice try yourself, and I like the way the reply screen shifted out of alignment when I hit the reply button! The righteous are few.

Preterists rely on Roman Historical records.

70ad is no where in the Bible, nor is 70ad calculable unless the preterist puts the bible down and searches secular sources for world history.

Prove me wrong..

Most Christians in this world believe the prophecies were given by prophets for the future.

We await the coming of our Lord, and the signs he gave us, which are in fact happening around the world, but those who are blind are not seeing it..

parousia70 · Dec 10, 2013

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
You are lying, retract your statement.

I dont make claims, I ask questions.. Big difference..
I didnt say anything about Preterists affirming Nero as the Lawless one.

Oh really??

Explain THIS:

xXChristPeripheralXx said:
You guys claim Nero stood in Gods temple and declared himself God.

That is no where in history...

You need to look in the mirror when you make accusations of lying.
Not only is the above NOT a question, it is indeed a statement from you accusing preterists of claiming Nero was the Man of Lawlesness from 2 Thess.
It is you who is steeped in lies my friend.

Again, you made the claim above that preterists claim Nero was the Man of Sin, who is the ONLY figure in scripture prophesied to stand in the temple and declare himself God.
The Beast of Revelation is NEVER prophesied to stand in the temple and declare himself God. Not even once. EVER.

You STILL have failed to produce EVEN ONE preterist who claims Nero was the Man of Sin from 2 Thess.

And I get why you have failed to do so, it's because they do not exist.

But, Erecting Straw men seems to be a favorite tactic of yours, so I doubt you will stop anytime soon.....

And yes PLEASE re size the image!! it's awful and very disruptive!

Why Historians Date the Revelation to the Reign of Domitian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

My dog Micah in the pic

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Well-Known Member

My dog Micah in the pic

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency