Was The Book Of Revelation Written Pre-70AD As Many Claim?

[Truth7t7]

There are photos of that text......much more there than 85 lines. GO TO WIDIPEDIA.
Matters not anyway, YOUR post verifed the early date.

In a friendly debate, you make a claim, and reference the source used with a link, I posted wikipedia on the text, no mention that John's vision or writing of Revelation was seen during Nero's reign?

Please provide a citation and link on your claim that the Revelation was written during the reign of Nero, waiting?

 

[GraceAndTruth]

In a friendly debate, you make a claim, and reference the source used with a link, I posted wikipedia on the text, no mention that John's vision or writing of Revelation was seen during Nero's reign?

Please provide a citation and link on your claim that the Revelation was written during the reign of Nero, waiting?

Good grief, child, GOOGLE it.

muratorian fragment, then choose Wikipedia.
It is too long to post and a lOT of photos.......you'll like it, very interesting and it also will give you a hundred references to check out.

 

[iamsoandso]

In a friendly debate, you make a claim, and reference the source used with a link, I posted wikipedia on the text, no mention that John's vision or writing of Revelation was seen during Nero's reign?

Please provide a citation and link on your claim that the Revelation was written during the reign of Nero, waiting?

Why would it even make any difference if millennialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism is was what they believed before about 300ad and then the RCC decided to denounce it and teach Amilleniaism afterwards, wouldn't everything the the Catholic Church wrote in the fifth century tend to deny an early date?

 

[GraceAndTruth]

In a friendly debate, you make a claim, and reference the source used with a link, I posted wikipedia on the text, no mention that John's vision or writing of Revelation was seen during Nero's reign?

Please provide a citation and link on your claim that the Revelation was written during the reign of Nero, waiting?

Under section "characteristics" last paragraph
deed, by calling the author of the Apocalypse of John the "predecessor" of Paul, who, he assumes, wrote to seven churches (Rev 2–3) before Paul wrote to seven churches

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Why would it even make any difference if millennialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism is was what they believed before about 300ad and then the RCC decided to denounce it and teach Amilleniaism afterwards, wouldn't everything the the Catholic Church wrote in the fifth century tend to deny an early date?

1. There was no RCC in 300AD. The church in Rome was fairly solid until they were conquored by Constantine. Constantine demanded all the churches in his conquored territories to have the same religion to 'unify' them. This is when the RCC commenced to modify its teachings and worship. To placate Consantine (who was a sun-god worshipper) the RCC incorporated some of Constantine's religion into their own. The monstrance that sits on the RCC altars today has 'sun rays' behind the cross (as an example)
2. With the new power to change the religion, the founding fathers of the RCC began to make dogma for the people which grew through the years. The council of Orange (circa 500AD) held to a high view of most 'calvinist' teaching until the Council of Trent upset EVERYTHING that was Christian. It was the declaration that separated Catholics from Protestants forever.
3. Premillenianism had been the preferred eschatology in later years.......I am not sure of their view earlier but if they followed most of what the other churches were teaching, they were probably Amillenian.

 

[iamsoandso]

1. There was no RCC in 300AD. The church in Rome was fairly solid until they were conquored by Constantine. Constantine demanded all the churches in his conquored territories to have the same religion to 'unify' them. This is when the RCC commenced to modify its teachings and worship. To placate Consantine (who was a sun-god worshipper) the RCC incorporated some of Constantine's religion into their own. The monstrance that sits on the RCC altars today has 'sun rays' behind the cross (as an example)
2. With the new power to change the religion, the founding fathers of the RCC began to make dogma for the people which grew through the years. The council of Orange (circa 500AD) held to a high view of most 'calvinist' teaching until the Council of Trent upset EVERYTHING that was Christian. It was the declaration that separated Catholics from Protestants forever.
3. Premillenianism had been the preferred eschatology in later years.......I am not sure of their view earlier but if they followed most of what the other churches were teaching, they were probably Amillenian.

Yes I rounded off the date to ad300 because it began around then and notice how difficult it is to pinpoint when it deviated from millennialism. I have to admit though it's odd to see him start a thread that's titled there is no millennial on earth(pg. three) which means he is Amillenian but don't realize it yet and to watch you say you are but everything you argue is preterist.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Yes I rounded off the date to ad300 because it began around then and notice how difficult it is to pinpoint when it deviated from millennialism. I have to admit though it's odd to see him start a thread that's titled there is no millennial on earth(pg. three) which means he is Amillenian but don't realize it yet and to watch you say you are but everything you argue is preterist.

Preterism, Semi-Preterism, Amillenianism.........all hold to prophecy fulfilled. Amillenianism differs from the Preterist positions in that we (us normal Amills) believe that we look for a future 2nd coming of Christ........the Preterists say He has come already. I'm not sure how they differ on that because I am NOT a Preterist.

Trutht7 has PANmillenianism......it will all PAN out

 

[iamsoandso]

Preterism, Semi-Preterism, Amillenianism.........all hold to prophecy fulfilled. Amillenianism differs from the Preterist positions in that we (us normal Amills) believe that we look for a future 2nd coming of Christ........the Preterists say He has come already. I'm not sure how they differ on that because I am NOT a Preterist.

Trutht7 has PANmillenianism......it will all PAN out

It's not a bad thing to not be sure how they all differ that's why I pointed out that what you posted so far is prterism 101,you'll see the more you go. Not that I am an preterist though I see closer to those in first and second century Church but that took sorting through the others,I'll just watch for a while.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Yes I rounded off the date to ad300 because it began around then and notice how difficult it is to pinpoint when it deviated from millennialism. I have to admit though it's odd to see him start a thread that's titled there is no millennial on earth(pg. three) which means he is Amillenian but don't realize it yet and to watch you say you are but everything you argue is preterist.

I should have added in my last post to you that....Amill do not hold to a thousand year reign on earth. We adhere to Peter's words when he said that after the rapture the earth will be destroyed by intense heat.

I think that is where Truth7t7 departs from a true Amill view. (well, not the only departure)
So far as I know only Premillenians believe there will be an earthy reign with Christ after the trib.
Too many 'isms' to figure it outl

 

[GraceAndTruth]

It's not a bad thing to not be sure how they all differ that's why I pointed out that what you posted so far is prterism 101,you'll see the more you go. Not that I am an preterist though I see closer to those in first and second century Church but that took sorting through the others,I'll just watch for a while.

Boettner wrote a book many years ago defining the different views. My views happen to follow Amillenianism, just as my doctrines follow the Sovereign God rule. What I am saying is........first I established my doctrine and by chance someone put a label on it for me. Otherwise we'd have the tail wagging the dog. If you would like to know doctrinally which ism is which, I suggest Boetner...there are too many opinions (most of them wrong) in forums.

 

[iamsoandso]

I should have added in my last post to you that....Amill do not hold to a thousand year reign on earth. We adhere to Peter's words when he said that after the rapture the earth will be destroyed by intense heat.

I think that is where Truth7t7 departs from a true Amill view. (well, not the only departure)
So far as I know only Premillenians believe there will be an earthy reign with Christ after the trib.
Too many 'isms' to figure it outl

No seven millennial days https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 2:4&version=KJV (it's a prophecy of seven one thousand year days),,a thousand years is as one day ect. or Six days you will labor and on the seventh rest ect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennial_Day_Theory The Lord came in the midst of the week and sacrifice and oblation ended i.e. half way point of the seven one thousand year days. After six thousand years then the seventh begins.

 

[iamsoandso]

Look at what Irenaeus is saying about the six thousand years in paragraph three https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103528.htm then read chapters 28,29,30,31 ect. and notice what he says about six summing up the six thousand years of apostasy of man. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103528.htm

 

[Truth7t7]

Why would it even make any difference if millennialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism is was what they believed before about 300ad and then the RCC decided to denounce it and teach Amilleniaism afterwards, wouldn't everything the the Catholic Church wrote in the fifth century tend to deny an early date?

Where does millennialismeven fit into the topic, major left turn Big smiles

 

[Truth7t7]

Boettner wrote a book many years ago defining the different views. My views happen to follow Amillenianism, just as my doctrines follow the Sovereign God rule. What I am saying is........first I established my doctrine and by chance someone put a label on it for me. Otherwise we'd have the tail wagging the dog. If you would like to know doctrinally which ism is which, I suggest Boetner...there are too many opinions (most of them wrong) in forums.

I also hold the Ahmillennial views as you, exactly the same

Jesus Christ returns in Final Judgement by fire, the heavens and earth are dissolved, the new heaven and earth are revealed for eternity, judgement complete, No Millennium On This Earth.

However concerning the olivet discourse in Matthew 24, the (Futurist) have it right, and your (Historicist) views in (Partial Preterism) 66-70AD fulfillment is wrong.

Ahmillennialism and the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24 are two completely different subjects

(Future Events Unfulfilled)

Matt 24:15, Daniel's AOD

Matt 24:21, The Great Tribulation

Matt 24:29-3, The Second Coming

 

[Truth7t7]

Yes I rounded off the date to ad300 because it began around then and notice how difficult it is to pinpoint when it deviated from millennialism. I have to admit though it's odd to see him start a thread that's titled there is no millennial on earth(pg. three) which means he is Amillenian but don't realize it yet and to watch you say you are but everything you argue is preterist.

Ahmillennial means nothing more that (Nunct) Or No Milennial

Yes I believe the event of those reigning in the spiritual realm in Rev 20:1-6 is taking place now, 1,000 years isnt literal, one day us a thousand years, not literal

Yes (Grace and Truth) is a (partial preterist) in belief, a standard of the (Historiscist) teaching.

 

[Truth7t7]

Preterism, Semi-Preterism, Amillenianism.........all hold to prophecy fulfilled. Amillenianism differs from the Preterist positions in that we (us normal Amills) believe that we look for a future 2nd coming of Christ........the Preterists say He has come already. I'm not sure how they differ on that because I am NOT a Preterist.

Trutht7 has PANmillenianism......it will all PAN out

Your claims are false once again, ahmillennialism has no association with Preterism, they are two different isolated subjects, don't suggest they are one and the same, a false claim.

1. Ahmillennialism believes Jesus Christ returns in fire and Final judgement, (No Millennium To Follow)

Preterism relates directly to the interpretation of Matthew Chapter 24 Olivet Discourse, namely the three items seen below

(Historicism) that you believe and teach is in the (Partial Preterist) camp

I'm Ahmillennial as you, with a (Futurist) belief as it relates to Matthew 24 and the olivet discourse.

(Partial Preterism) believes items 1&2 below were fulfilled in the 1st century, item 3 is future

(Full Preterism) believes all 3 items below were fulfilled in the 1st century

(Futurism) believes all 3 items below are future

(Olivet Discourse)

1.) Matt 24:15, Daniel's AOD
2.) Matt 24:21, The Great Tribulation
3.) Matt 24:29-30, The Second Coming

 

[posthuman]

The identity of the 7 kings mentioned in Rev. 17:10 sets the timing.
The 7 kings have to be these early Caesers because only those Caesars fit the criteria:
* five of whom have fallen, *one is, the *other has not yet come, and when he does come he must remain only a little while.
NOTE: The count is from Augustus (AD14)because his reign began the Imperial period, his status as the founder of the Roman Principate

Five fallen: Augustus Julius, Tiberius, Gaius, Caligula, Claudius – before Nero
One is: Nero (presently ruling)
One yet to come for little while: Galba – future (reigned 7 months and 7days, shortest reign of all Caesars)

John’s noting the 7 kings with 5 dead, the 6th in power, which is Nero, and one to come makes the timing between 14AD and 69AD…Augustus to Galba… (Nero ruling years 55-68AD…his senate helped him commit suicide in June of 68AD) The fact that John is under persecution as a political prisoner, shows that Nero The Beast had begun his reign of terror on the Christians before that. Galba, succeeding Nero Caesar, would have released John from Patmos in 68 AD*. (John himself mentions he was at Patmos when he received the Revelation), making the Revelation being written before or during 1st half of 68AD while John was still on Patmos.
*Galba was dead by January 15, 69AD………ruled for 7 months and 7 days

in Revelation 17 we're talking about a woman riding a beast with 7 heads & 10 horns.
those 7 heads are the 7 kings.

the beast 'once was, now is not, and yet will come up out of the abyss and go to its destruction'

so ..

if we're saying at the time of writing the 'head which now is' is the then-present emperor of Rome, would that make Rome the beast itself?
because that beast would be 'once was not, now is' at that time. Rome hadn't passed out of existence while Rome had John exiled. but the angel explains to John that the beast 'now is not'

he goes on to tell him that the beast is an 8th king, belonging to the 7 -- that all the world, whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of life, will be astonished at seeing him, because he once was, was not, and yet will come. like they will recognize him. ((?))

if all this is past already who is that beast? can't be Rome -- Rome doesn't fall under 'now is not' either with a late or an early dating of the Revelation.

 

[iamsoandso]

Yep the head received a deadly wound in a war(sword) before the Revelation was given but they make the mistake of jumping from the heads meaning kingdoms/mountains and see them as individual kings and cant see that the eighth is of the seven but not one of the seven, In doing so they never look for an eighth kingdom to rise because they think there are only seven.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

No seven millennial days https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 2:4&version=KJV (it's a prophecy of seven one thousand year days),,a thousand years is as one day ect. or Six days you will labor and on the seventh rest ect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennial_Day_Theory The Lord came in the midst of the week and sacrifice and oblation ended i.e. half way point of the seven one thousand year days. After six thousand years then the seventh begins.

AHHHH....hmmm. Never looked at it like that. I'm putting that in the "pondering" part of my brain.
How did you find a start date??

 

[GraceAndTruth]

in Revelation 17 we're talking about a woman riding a beast with 7 heads & 10 horns.
those 7 heads are the 7 kings.

the beast 'once was, now is not, and yet will come up out of the abyss and go to its destruction'

so ..

if we're saying at the time of writing the 'head which now is' is the then-present emperor of Rome, would that make Rome the beast itself?
because that beast would be 'once was not, now is' at that time. Rome hadn't passed out of existence while Rome had John exiled. but the angel explains to John that the beast 'now is not'

he goes on to tell him that the beast is an 8th king, belonging to the 7 -- that all the world, whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of life, will be astonished at seeing him, because he once was, was not, and yet will come. like they will recognize him. ((?))

if all this is past already who is that beast? can't be Rome -- Rome doesn't fall under 'now is not' either with a late or an early dating of the Revelation.

7 kings = Caesars
10 horns = kings who rule over countries defeated by Rome
The 8th, the bible says, is OF THE 7 So there are the 7 kings not an 8th.
I am thinking that reference by John might be to a bit of history I (at present) am unaware but that the churches would understand....a further identification of John's beast.