More about Israel.

[HeIsHere]

Thanks, that is the classical argument for the view that Revelations was written in 95AD.
I have already described it as "flimsy at best", so now I feel compelled to explain myself.

It seems to me that the backbone of the argument hangs on the Irenaeus quote that you gave us a translation of.
This translation of course reflects the understanding of Eusebius, who passed it on to us in his commentary on Irenaeus.
The critical line in the quote as you have written it here is:
"for it (the Apocalypse evidently) was seen no very long time ago;"
The reason this translation is disputed is that there is a single Greek word for "it was seen" that can be grammatically translated into "he/she or it was seen".
In the context it may mean that "he" John was seen or "it" the book of Revelations was seen.
You may think I am biased by the historical interpretation I already have of the book, but in reading the entire quote it seems to me that Irenaeus' thoughts make more rational sense if he was referring to John.

if we were to approach the matter not through the church Fathers, but through familiarity with the book and a basic understanding of the major events of the time, including the kings, kingdoms and high priests, what would we conclude about the beast that comes out of the sea, the beast that comes out of the land and the Mother of Harlots?

This is a settled issue, the internal evidence alone is sufficient,

However, the architects of dispensationalism knew this, that is why they had to appeal to outside sources to bolster their claim.

 

[Churchgoer]

This is a settled issue, the internal evidence alone is sufficient,

However, the architects of dispensationalism knew this, that is why they had to appeal to outside sources to bolster their claim.

Yet, all of the "Christian" Zionist still did not explain why they are shouting support of a pagan calf?

did Jesus ever command His followers to worship golden calf? Or any pagan gods?

 

[HeIsHere]

Yet, all of the "Christian" Zionist still did not explain why they are shouting support of a pagan calf?

did Jesus ever command His followers to worship golden calf? Or any pagan gods?

@Churchgoer it is really sad to read some of the posts on this thread, and to know "Christians" are so blind disturbs me now beyond measure so I try to avoid these threads. The world is heading to a very dark place because of brainwashed people.

The entire Bible is about Christ Jesus, what is so hard to understand about that.

 

[Churchgoer]

@Churchgoer it is really sad to read some of the posts on this thread, and to know "Christians" are so blind disturbs me now beyond measure so I try to avoid these threads. The world is heading to a very dark place because of brainwashed people.

The entire Bible is about Christ Jesus, what is so hard to understand about that.

Possible God blind their eyes and heart for a season, time?

I do believe in God's sovereignty. God's big plan.

Yet we have responsibilities.

Mystery, mystery.

If it wasn't the jew leaders and crowd, Jesus wouldn't have died on cross and resurrection from death. All is under God's big plan.

 

[WayneNSO]

you are slowly changing/revealing your view, interesting.

I have always said I am not a Preterist and that I am a Historicist - you yourself commented on me saying that - so no idea where this changing/revealing view comes from

 

[WayneNSO]

Why I do not hold either the Futurist view or the Preterist view:


The Reformation saw the Popes as the office of anti-Christ, supported by employing the "year-day" interpretation of Prophecy.

This had to be countered.

In 1585 a Spanish Jesuit called Francisco Ribera, commissioned by the Pope, wrote a commentary on the Book of Revelation, which was published as footnote in the Catholic Vulgate Version of the Bible.

He proposed that the first chapters of the Apocalypse/Revelation applied to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest to a literal 7 year period in the future. Immediately prior to the second coming. During that time, the Roman Catholic Church would have fallen away from the pope into apostasy, and the revealing of a single Antichrist would appear.

To do this he took the prophecy in the book of Daniel about the coming Messiah, commonly known as the 70 weeks, and took the confirmation of the New Covenant by Jesus Christs death on the cross, which caused all sacrifices and the oblations to cease, and said it was not about Christ, it was about a one man Anti-Christ who would appear during an end time great tribulation period.

After the defeat of the Spanish Armada when all hope of crushing Protestantism was gone, we see two more works by the Jesuits published.

In 1614 the Jesuit Luis Del Alcazar, published a work that instead of throwing everything into the future like the previous one, threw everything into the past. Saying that all the events in the book of Revelation were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. So Pagan Rome not Papal Rome was the whore of Revelation.

For over 300 years, futurism and preterism were rejected as deceptions from the Roman Catholic Church. It was not until the turn of the 19th century that things began to change.

 

[WayneNSO]

@Churchgoer it is really sad to read some of the posts on this thread, and to know "Christians" are so blind disturbs me now beyond measure so I try to avoid these threads. The world is heading to a very dark place because of brainwashed people.

The entire Bible is about Christ Jesus, what is so hard to understand about that.

Think of Historicism as Preterism on steroids - as in it goes further than 70AD The only view I can think of -besides outright denying the deity of Christ - that is dangerous is futurism/Zionism - they literally support and pray for war - thinking if they can bring on Armageddon it will hasten Christs return.

On top of that there is wanting the re-instatement of animal sacrifices and supporting the Jewish view that the Jews will one day rule the world.

BTW did you hear about some bill in the USA wanting to join together the military forces of Israel and the United States - as in make them one ? I do not no much about it - and I doubt it will go through - but guess who will support that ? Futurist/zionist

 

[Churchgoer]

Recent bill just passed congress, in it there is mention of that.

 

[WayneNSO]

Recent bill just passed congress, in it there is mention of that.

I heard Pierce Morgan say it on his podcast - maybe I misunderstood what he said

 

[Beekeeper]

Just want to add one more thing. Personally I do not care what date Revelation was written. So long as it was written before the events predicted and not after. Like they used to accuse the book of Daniel of being written after the events predicted took place, until they found an ancient copy of it in the dead sea scrolls. I realise the date of the writing of Revelation is important to Preterist because they want everything fulfilled in Nero and 70AD, but I do not have that burden

For my part I am I am happy to let me be me and you be you on the issue of when Revelations was written.
70 AD marks a highly important event Biblically and historically, but I don't think I am bound to any "preterist" club over it.
I have heard of pre-terorists that hold that even the second coming of Christ and the final battle happened in 70 AD, but never had the privilege of hearing them explain that one.
I am interested in the church fathers (as you might have noticed), and have noticed that some of the Revelations debates that we still have now were already alive and well very early.
Papias of Hierapolis (60-130) for example was a historic premillenialist, and even as early as that there was Amill. vs. Premill. debating.
The only reason that I suggested a Bible first approach to the date issue is because that seems to be the approach recommended in 2Timothe 3:16-17.
That does not mean I would want to ignore the church fathers.

 

[Beekeeper]

And how much has America prospered by supporting Israel.
So you would be satisfied with the middle east being totally run by Iran and its influence on the region.
God siad he would regather and he has and is. GOD siad he will place his throne in Iran and he will.
How would this be accomplished without the interventions of such.

It seems to me that what I believe and some here that our views on prophecy seem to be coming to pass, I really can't believe you and others can't see that. I mean its really not a stretch of the imagination.
I think it has something to do with Rev 18 being Israel as your view. Maybe I'm wrong but what is seen is seen.
In other words if it looks like a duck???.....

I am not really convinced that America has prospered because of it's support for modern Israel, but America is welcome to prove me wrong if it wishes to continue on that path.

My reading of the Bible has not persuaded me that God has a plan to reestablish old covenant Israel, as His kingdom is not of this world.
If His kingdom were of this world, then would His servants fight for it, but now is His kingdom not from hence (John 18:36).

I have not yet heard you views on the Rev. 18 Harlot, but I would find it hard to get past the many clues that it is Jerusalem.
I have already mentioned the parallels with Jeremiah 19, and the fact that in her was found the blood of the prophets.
Jeremiah also called apostate Israel a harlot, and in seeking another Messiah, playing the harlot is what she does.
From what I have seen in these comments even the dispensationalists can see that much, with their prediction that she will usher in the Antichrist who in turn will kill the Jews.
My view of course is that Rev. 18 happened in AD 70, and that since then there continue to be many Antichrists, but I would not write off the possibility of modern Israel being destroyed either, as Rev. 20 is yet future and all nations will be destroyed.

 

[Beekeeper]

Why I do not hold either the Futurist view or the Preterist view:


The Reformation saw the Popes as the office of anti-Christ, supported by employing the "year-day" interpretation of Prophecy.

This had to be countered.

In 1585 a Spanish Jesuit called Francisco Ribera, commissioned by the Pope, wrote a commentary on the Book of Revelation, which was published as footnote in the Catholic Vulgate Version of the Bible.

He proposed that the first chapters of the Apocalypse/Revelation applied to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest to a literal 7 year period in the future. Immediately prior to the second coming. During that time, the Roman Catholic Church would have fallen away from the pope into apostasy, and the revealing of a single Antichrist would appear.

To do this he took the prophecy in the book of Daniel about the coming Messiah, commonly known as the 70 weeks, and took the confirmation of the New Covenant by Jesus Christs death on the cross, which caused all sacrifices and the oblations to cease, and said it was not about Christ, it was about a one man Anti-Christ who would appear during an end time great tribulation period.

After the defeat of the Spanish Armada when all hope of crushing Protestantism was gone, we see two more works by the Jesuits published.

In 1614 the Jesuit Luis Del Alcazar, published a work that instead of throwing everything into the future like the previous one, threw everything into the past. Saying that all the events in the book of Revelation were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. So Pagan Rome not Papal Rome was the whore of Revelation.

For over 300 years, futurism and preterism were rejected as deceptions from the Roman Catholic Church. It was not until the turn of the 19th century that things began to change.

I have noticed that some staunch traditional protestants have an ability to read Revelations through the lens of "everything bad equals the Papacy".
I don't know how they manage to sustain that through the interaction between the Beast and the Harlot.
It sounds like the Papacy is going to ride the Pope until the Pope gets angry and destroys the Papacy.
Is there a more reasonable sounding interpretation?

Anyway in Daniel 9:27 "he" is not any antichrist but Jesus Himself.

 

[brightfame52]

"Galatians 3:23 demonstrates the historical continuity of the Church. Paul identifies the Old Testament elect of Israel as the Church in its infancy. Under the Mosaic economy, this Old Testament church was kept under the protective custody of the law—acting as a temporary guardian (paidagogos). Gal 4:1-3 With the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, 'Faith' (the New Covenant era) arrived. Consequently, the Church has passed from its spiritual minority under ceremonial restraints to full covenantal adulthood, where we now serve God in Spirit and Truth."

. 4

 

[WayneNSO]

Is there a more reasonable sounding interpretation?

Yes It is called Historicism

Anyway in Daniel 9:27 "he" is not any antichrist but Jesus Himself.

I agree - in the first sentence I typed I said I am not a futurist

 

[WayneNSO]

Papias of Hierapolis (60-130) for example was a historic premillenialist, and even as early as that there was Amill. vs. Premill. debating.

The pre-mill Amill thing is something I have looked into for a long time and I see contradictions in both and things that might be true in both, so I am wondering if it is something that is a mix of the two But we do not have a name for that - unless its OnTheFenceism

 

[HeIsHere]

Anyway in Daniel 9:27 "he" is not any antichrist but Jesus Himself.

Agreed, an obvious faux pas, perhaps even deliberate on the part of the originators of "the system" having it refer to an "antichrist."

That is where I first found a weakness in "the system" and it kept un-ravelling from there.

 

[WayneNSO]

I have noticed that some staunch traditional protestants have an ability to read Revelations through the lens of "everything bad equals the Papacy".

I do not know these protestants that read Revelation as all about the Papacy - it has Islam in it also but mainly deals with Roman Empire in all its stages

I don't know how they manage to sustain that through the interaction between the Beast and the Harlot.
It sounds like the Papacy is going to ride the Pope until the Pope gets angry and destroys the Papacy.
Is there a more reasonable sounding interpretation?

The harlot woman rides the beasts - as in the Papacy rides the beast empire - she is sustained by it - no idea where you get the papacy rides the pope lol And it God who destroys the Papacy not the Pope - she had her power over the Kingdom taken away at the time of the French Revolution - no idea where you get all that from.

 

[WayneNSO]

Agreed, an obvious faux pas, perhaps even deliberate on the part of the originators of "the system" having it refer to an "antichrist."

That is where I first found a weakness in "the system" and it kept un-ravelling from there.

They had to do this to put everything into the future.

 

[Beekeeper]

A few more comparisons that show Jerusalem as the Harlot:

Mathew 12:43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto THIS WICKED GENERATION.
compare with:
Revelations 18:2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.

Revelations 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the GREAT CITY, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
compare with:
Revelation 17:18
And the woman which thou sawest is that GREAT CITY, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Revelations 14:19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.
compare with:
Revelations 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication

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.
compare with:
Revelations 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

 

[Churchgoer]

A few more comparisons that show Jerusalem as the Harlot:

Mathew 12:43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto THIS WICKED GENERATION.
compare with:
Revelations 18:2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.

Revelations 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the GREAT CITY, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
compare with:
Revelation 17:18
And the woman which thou sawest is that GREAT CITY, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Revelations 14:19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.
compare with:
Revelations 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication

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.
compare with:
Revelations 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Not necessarily the geographic location, but a group of people that promote all anti God agendas, commit horrible sins.