Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Real ID

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Real ID

    Originally posted by marty fox View Post
    I don’t think revelation is about the end of the world I think only the last 2 1/2 chapters mentions the end of the world. To me revelation is about the transition from the old covenant to the new covenant
    That happened at the cross. Rev was written long after the cross and was mainly given by the ascended and resurrected Christ. Also, there is nothing about the old covenant in the book. It's mainly about the events 42 months before the second coming, the second coming events and what happens after ending with the eternity age of the NHNE and NJ.

    It is the gospels which shows the transition from the old covenant to the new covenant, not Rev.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Real ID

      Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
      That happened at the cross. Rev was written long after the cross and was mainly given by the ascended and resurrected Christ. Also, there is nothing about the old covenant in the book. It's mainly about the events 42 months before the second coming, the second coming events and what happens after ending with the eternity age of the NHNE and NJ.

      It is the gospels which shows the transition from the old covenant to the new covenant, not Rev.
      Yes it did but the Jews kept it going so God had to take the temple away

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Real ID

        Originally posted by marty fox View Post
        Yes it did but the Jews kept it going so God had to take the temple away
        The temple was going to be done away with, regardless, unless you want to claim God still found value in that temple after Christ died and rose. If the reason God had it destroyed was because they continued sacrificing animals in it, why would God wait 40 years in order to finally destroy it?

        You might then argue the 40 years were to give Israel space to repent. And let's say that is the case, but that Israel did end up repenting in that period of time. Do you think God would have changed His mind about having the temple destroyed in that case?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Real ID

          Originally posted by divaD View Post
          The temple was going to be done away with, regardless, unless you want to claim God still found value in that temple after Christ died and rose. If the reason God had it destroyed was because they continued sacrificing animals in it, why would God wait 40 years in order to finally destroy it?

          You might then argue the 40 years were to give Israel space to repent. And let's say that is the case, but that Israel did end up repenting in that period of time. Do you think God would have changed His mind about having the temple destroyed in that case?
          The point is that the temple wasn't needed anymore it did its job as it pointed to Jesus. The time between the cross and destruction was a time period for realization

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Real ID

            Originally posted by marty fox View Post
            Yes it did but the Jews kept it going so God had to take the temple away
            They are still keeping it going minus the temple and sacrifices but the rest they keep. None of this has anything to do with what Rev speaks of.

            Originally posted by marty fox View Post
            Yes it did but the Jews kept it going so God had to take the temple away
            They are still keeping it going minus the temple and sacrifices but the rest they keep. None of this has anything to do with what Rev speaks of.
            James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Real ID

              Originally posted by marty fox View Post
              The time between the cross and destruction was a time period for realization
              That doesn't seem like a real thing. No one was realizing anything. The Jews rejected Christ, and thought God would protect them when the rebelled against Roman rule. They were wrong and the Roman's punished them harshly as was their normal behavior when people would rebel.
              James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Real ID

                Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
                That doesn't seem like a real thing. No one was realizing anything. The Jews rejected Christ, and thought God would protect them when the rebelled against Roman rule. They were wrong and the Roman's punished them harshly as was their normal behavior when people would rebel.
                So why was the temple destroyed at that time then then?

                Was it destroyed because the Romans rebelled or because the Jews rejected Jesus?

                Luke 19:41-44
                41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Real ID

                  Originally posted by marty fox View Post
                  I don’t think revelation is about the end of the world I think only the last 2 1/2 chapters mentions the end of the world. To me revelation is about the transition from the old covenant to the new covenant

                  I think Genesis chapters 4-6 tells us more about the end of the world
                  You completely sidestepped the question and clue.

                  Brother, look up who was in charge of the Roman Empire when John was imprisoned and you will have a hard date.

                  Once you have that hard date, you will take that into your heart and then begin the mental struggle many have when they realize that the interpretation held onto is in serious error. Some will continue to hold onto what they know is NOW error but that is the problem man has. When faced with a mental challenge, the type that slaps them up side the head, they will do all they can to ignore correction. They will avoid pursuing the truth.

                  I don't know what side of this you are on, either you did the research and chose to ignore/avoid (will hold to present interpretations), or you haven't done the research but seem to be avoiding such research.
                  Slug1--out

                  ~"In the turmoil of any chaos, all it takes is that whisper that is heard like thunder over all the noise and the chaos seems to go away, focus returns and we are comforted in knowing that God has listened to our cry for help."~

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Real ID

                    Originally posted by marty fox View Post
                    So why was the temple destroyed at that time then then?
                    The Jews rebelled against Rome and it took Rome a few years to end the rebellion. Rome decided to stop allowing the Jews privileges like having a temple and a leadership that used to have influence with the Roman leader in the area.

                    Was it destroyed because the Romans rebelled or because the Jews rejected Jesus?
                    The Jews rebelled not the Romans. Seems it's both but I am not fully convinced the verse is talking about the rejection of Christ in his generation and not something a future generation did which better explains why 40 years passed.
                    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Real ID

                      Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
                      The Jews rebelled against Rome and it took Rome a few years to end the rebellion. Rome decided to stop allowing the Jews privileges like having a temple and a leadership that used to have influence with the Roman leader in the area.



                      The Jews rebelled not the Romans. Seems it's both but I am not fully convinced the verse is talking about the rejection of Christ in his generation and not something a future generation did which better explains why 40 years passed.
                      This was a typo I meant to say that the Jews rebelled it would sure be nice to be able to edit post

                      Please reread the verses and you will plainly see why it happened


                      Luke 19:41-44
                      41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”

                      Of course it was because they rejected and killed their Messiah Jesus

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Real ID

                        Originally posted by Slug1 View Post
                        You completely sidestepped the question and clue.

                        Brother, look up who was in charge of the Roman Empire when John was imprisoned and you will have a hard date.

                        Once you have that hard date, you will take that into your heart and then begin the mental struggle many have when they realize that the interpretation held onto is in serious error. Some will continue to hold onto what they know is NOW error but that is the problem man has. When faced with a mental challenge, the type that slaps them up side the head, they will do all they can to ignore correction. They will avoid pursuing the truth.

                        I don't know what side of this you are on, either you did the research and chose to ignore/avoid (will hold to present interpretations), or you haven't done the research but seem to be avoiding such research.
                        I have been researching and studding this for years I use to believe in the futuristic view for years

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Real ID

                          Originally posted by Slug1 View Post
                          When was John imprisoned? For a clue, research this historically (not Biblically) in determining which Roman Emperor was in command when John was imprisoned.
                          Nero was persecuting the church too both Peter and Paul were martyred under Nero

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Real ID

                            Originally posted by marty fox View Post

                            Of course it was because they rejected and killed their Messiah Jesus
                            It doesn't say that though so it could be something else that happened in the same generation the rebellion happened. It might be referring to Christ but there are issues with that interpretation I don't see good answers for.
                            James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Real ID

                              This documents who was ruling Rome when John was imprisoned.

                              https://www.christiancourier.com/art...lation-written



                              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).
                              Arguments for the Early Date Answered

                              In the absence of external evidence in support of an early date for Revelation, preterists generally rely on what they perceive as internal support for their view.
                              Writing Style Differences

                              It is contended that the Gospel of John has a much smoother style of Greek than does the Apocalypse. Thus, the latter must have been written many years prior to the fourth Gospel—when the apostle was not so experienced in the literary employment of Greek.

                              In answer to this argument, we cite R. H. Gundry:

                              Archaeological discoveries and literary studies have recently demonstrated that along with Aramaic and Hebrew, Greek was commonly spoken among first century Palestinians. Thus John must have known and used Greek since his youth (1970, 365).

                              B. B. Warfield contends that:

                              the Apocalypse betrays no lack of knowledge of, or command over, Greek syntax or vocabulary; the difference lies, rather, in the manner in which a language well in hand is used, in style, properly so called; and the solution of it must turn on psychological, not chronological, considerations (Schaff and Herzog 1891, 2036).

                              R. H. Charles, author of the commentary on Revelation in the International Critical Commentary series, and perhaps the greatest expert on apocalyptic literature, regarded the so-called bad grammar as deliberate, for purposes of emphasis, and consistent with the citation of numerous Old Testament passages (Gundry, 365). It might be noted that in the 404 verses of Revelation, Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament gives over five hundred references and allusions to the Old Testament.

                              Finally, as McClintock and Strong point out:

                              It may be admitted that the Revelation has many surprising grammatical peculiarities. But much of this is accounted for by the fact that it was probably written down, as it was seen, “in the Spirit,” while the ideas, in all their novelty and vastness, filled the apostle’s mind, and rendered him less capable of attending to forms of speech. His Gospel and Epistles, on the other hand, were composed equally under divine influence, but an influence of a gentler, more ordinary kind, with much care, after long deliberation, after frequent recollection and recital of the facts, and deep pondering of the doctrinal truths which they involve (1064).

                              No Mention of Jerusalem’s Destruction

                              It is claimed that Revelation must have been penned before A.D. 70 since it has no allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem; rather, it is alleged, it represents both the city and the temple as still standing.

                              In response we note the following points.

                              First, if John wrote this work near A.D. 96, there would be little need to focus upon the destruction of Jerusalem since the lessons of that catastrophe would have been well learned in the preceding quarter of a century.

                              However, it must be noted that some scholars see a veiled reference to Jerusalem’s destruction in 11:8, where “the great city,” in which the Savior was crucified (Jerusalem), is called Sodom—not merely because of wickedness, but due to the fact that it was a destroyed city of evil (Zahn 1973, 306).

                              Second, the contention that the literal city and temple were still standing, based upon chapter eleven, ignores the express symbolic nature of the narrative. Salmon says that it is:

                              difficult to understand how anyone could have imagined that the vision represents the temple as still standing. For the whole scene is laid in heaven, and the temple that is measured is the heavenly temple (11:19; 15:5). We have only to compare this vision with the parallel vision of a measuring-reed seen by Ezekiel (ch. 40), in which the prophet is commanded to measure—surely not the city which it is stated had been demolished fourteen years previously, but the city of the future seen by the prophet in vision (1904, 238).

                              Nero Associated with 666

                              Some argue for an early date of the Apocalypse by asserting that the enigmatic 666 (13:18) is a reference to Nero. This is possible only by pursuing the most irresponsible form of exegesis.

                              To come up with such an interpretation one must:

                              add the title “Caesar” to Nero’s name;
                              compute the letter-number arrangement on the basis of Hebrew, whereas the book was written in Greek; and
                              alter the spelling of “Caesar” by dropping the yodh in the Hebrew.

                              All of this reveals a truly desperate attempt to find a reference to Nero in the text.

                              Additionally, Leon Morris has pointed out that Irenaeus discussed a number of possibilities for deciphering the 666, but he did not even include Nero in his list, let alone regard this as a likely conjecture (1980, 38). Noted critic Theodor Zahn observed that Nero was not even suggested as a possibility until the year 1831 (447).

                              In view of the foregoing evidence, a very strong case can be made for dating Revelation at about A.D. 96. Accordingly, the theory of realized eschatology, which is grounded upon the necessity of the Apocalypse having been written prior to A.D. 70, is shown to be without the necessary foundation for its successful defense, to say nothing of the scores of other scriptural difficulties that plague it.
                              James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Real ID

                                Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
                                In view of the foregoing evidence, a very strong case can be made for dating Revelation at about A.D. 96. Accordingly, the theory of realized eschatology, which is grounded upon the necessity of the Apocalypse having been written prior to A.D. 70, is shown to be without the necessary foundation for its successful defense, to say nothing of the scores of other scriptural difficulties that plague it.
                                Hooah! I pray this helps Marty who states that the Revelation was written before 70AD
                                Slug1--out

                                ~"In the turmoil of any chaos, all it takes is that whisper that is heard like thunder over all the noise and the chaos seems to go away, focus returns and we are comforted in knowing that God has listened to our cry for help."~

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X