Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
Dating Revelation is complicated. There is a very real possibility that part of the book was written earlier and part of it later.
When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?
- Thread starter Davidpt
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Personally, though I'm not disputing the idea of souls in heaven prior to their bodily resurrection, it is likely meaning in this sense, such as the latter below.
Genesis 4:10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
Yes, I agree, Genesis 4:10 certainly needs to be considered.
In Matthew 23:35 all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias will come on Jerusalem. Whatever Jerusalem is or represents it dwells on the earth when the souls in Revelation 6:10 ask the question about when their blood will be avenged.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
What is the difference between your view and soul sleep? Do you believe that the souls of the dead in Christ are doing literally nothing in heaven?
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
No, they do not.
The Olivet Discourse followed Jesus saying that the temple buildings would be destroyed. So, one of the questions He was asked was about that.
Mark 13:1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here! 2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. 3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?
So, the question is, where in the Olivet Discourse did Jesus answer that question? You quoted from Matthew 24:21 and then skipped to Matthew 24:29 and you assume that what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:21 is the same as what He was talking about in Matthew 24:29. But, you are missing that "the times of the Gentiles" occur after what is described in Matthew 24:15-21 up until what is described in Matthew 24:29-31.
Have you never read Luke 21?
Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Luke 21:20-24 is parallel to Matthew 24:15-21. When the Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem in 70 AD they proceeded to destroy it, including its temple buildings, just as Jesus said would happen. Many of them fell by the edge of the sword and many others were "led away captive into all nations". Believers, heeding Jesus's warning, fled to the mountains before all that happened. That is exactly what happened in 70 AD. And Jerusalem has been trampled upon by the Gentiles ever since during the times of the Gentiles. So, the tribulation of those days has to occur sometime during the times of the Gentiles, not during what is described in Matthew 24:15-21 (Mark 13:14-20, Luke 21:20-24).
And, what about this passage:
Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. 24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 25 Behold, I have told you before. 26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
This passage describes things that would occur some time AFTER what is described in Matthew 24:15-21. But, you have Jesus returning immediately after what is described in Matthew 24:15-21 instead, which doesn't allow for what is described in Matthew 24:23-26 to occur after that. How do you explain that? This passage matches up with 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 which indicates that the type of tribulation that will occur right before Jesus returns is related to a high level of deception and wickedness, not to physical destruction.
Last edited:
Matthew 24
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
If the Judaean Christians had heeded today's futurists, they would have perished.
Thankfully, they heeded Jesus' warning instead, and their lives were preserved.
Well, Preterism just means seeing prophesied things as being fulfilled, I think most people on this forum are partial preterist in that they see at least some things filled. To a Jew, who doesn’t think Jesus was the Messiah, all Christians are preterist.
There’s one thing all eschatological views agree on and that is that at some point in time all things prophesied do get fulfilled and at that point everyone should be a full preterist. So just get used to Preterism, cause you’re going to have to spend eternity there.
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Do you (and @Scott Downey) believe this prophecy was completely fulfilled and there no longer is a future occurrence???
ewq1938
Well-Known Member
- Jul 11, 2015
- 7,316
- 1,455
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Christ said one generation of people would see all the things he spoke of in the OD so there is no gap in the OD.
Luk 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
Luk 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.
Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
ewq1938
Well-Known Member
- Jul 11, 2015
- 7,316
- 1,455
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Preterism is not just any prophecies fulfilled making all of us Preterists but only certain end times prophecies being fulfilled makes one a Preterist.
Example:
A Partial Preterist believes most of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled, mainly in 70 AD.
A full Preterist believes all prophecy including the second coming have been fulfilled.
A Non-Preterist believes all endtimes prophecies have not been fulfilled which essentially would mean non of the OD has happened.
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,028
- 3,773
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
When Was the Book of Revelation Written?
By Wayne Jackson
Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96. Some writers, however, have advanced the preterist (from a Latin word meaning “that which is past”) view, contending that the Apocalypse was penned around A.D. 68 or 69, and thus the thrust of the book is supposed to relate to the impending destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70).
A few prominent names have been associated with this position (e.g., Stuart, Schaff, Lightfoot, Foy E. Wallace Jr.), and for a brief time it was popular with certain scholars. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.D. 96 (1939, 2584). In fact, the evidence for the later date is extremely strong.
In view of some of the bizarre theories that have surfaced in recent times (e.g., the notion that all end-time prophecies were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70), which are dependent upon the preterist interpretation, we offer the following.
External Evidence
The external evidence for the late dating of Revelation is of the highest quality.
Irenaeus
Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30). The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.
Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).
Even Moses Stuart, America’s most prominent preterist, admitted that the “tyrant here meant is probably Domitian.” Within this narrative, Clement further speaks of John as an “old man.” If Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, it would scarcely seem appropriate to refer to John as an old man, since he would only have been in his early sixties at this time.
Victorinus
Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:
When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).
Jerome
Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,
In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).
To all of this may be added the comment of Eusebius, who contends that the historical tradition of his time (A.D. 324) placed the writing of the Apocalypse at the close of Domitian’s reign (III.18). McClintock and Strong, in contending for the later date, declare that “there is no mention in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place” (1969, 1064). Upon the basis of external evidence, therefore, there is little contest between the earlier and later dates.
Internal Evidence
The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.
The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.
The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).
Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.
Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).
Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.
The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.
Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,028
- 3,773
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Your in denial of biblical truth presented, no need to repeat the presented scripture
Just as Millennialist are in denial of biblical truth, you follow the same
Jesus returns "Immediately" after a future great tribulation, and it didn't take place in 70AD as you falsely claim
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,028
- 3,773
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Jesus returns "Immediately" after a future great tribulation, your preterist false teachings aren't going to change the facts
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,028
- 3,773
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Reformed Preterism is a false theology that believes and teaches Many aspects of Matthew Chapter 24 have been fulfilled in 70AD, it also rejects the "Two Witnesses" in Rev Chapter 11 as being literal prophets returned in physical bodies that die, it also rejects a future (The Beast) Rev Chapter 13 as being a literal individual human man
Reformed Preterisn is a false theological teaching, simple and clear, just get in reality of these facts
Last edited:
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
No, you are. You don't even attempt to address the points I made. That's weak.
LOL. Ah, yes. Another lone wolf who thinks he alone knows the truth.
I agree. But, it's spiritual tribulation (see Matthew 24:9-13,23-26, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, Revelation 20:7-9).
Tribulation in the form of God's wrath took place in 70 AD. Why deny it? Do you see the temple buildings still standing there?
Last edited:
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,028
- 3,773
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Jesus didn't return immediately after a 70AD great tribulation, its 3rd grade logic
The great tribulation and second coming are both future events, you can break out your symbolic rubber ruler all you want, your preterist interpretation is "Wrong"
Matthew 24:29-30KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
I never said He returned in 70 AD. He did not. Stop addressing your Preterist straw man and address my view instead.
Similar threads
