(On Early Date of Revelation)
"In favor of the earlier date of writing (during Nero's persecution), several internal evidences are adduced. Among them would be the apparent existence of the temple in Jerusalem at the time of writing (11:1-2), and the tension between the church and its Jewish detractors (e.g. 2:9;3:9), both of which, it is argued, changed when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70)." (Revelation, p.15)


"One of the most important arguments for a Neronean date is based upon the cryptic passage in Revelation 17:10, which speaks of the king currently reigning at the time of writing: "There are also seven kings. Five are fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time." Unless the term "kings" here is taken as "kingdoms" (i.e., Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece, Rome), the natural understanding of this statement would be that five Roman emperors had fallen, and the sixth was reigning at the time of writing. Since Nero was the sixth man to be recognized as emperor of the Roman Empire, this would place the date of writing sometime within his reign." (Revelation, p.15)


"It may also be pointed out that many scholars, including those supportive of the late date, have said that there is no historical proof that there was an empire-wide persecution of Christians even in Domition's reign" (Revelation, p.16)


"The loss of love in Ephesus is a condition which can happen to a church in a very short time, as the experience of many modern congregations can demonstrate. Paul marveled at how the Galatian church had so severely regressed almost immediately after he had left them as infant congregations" (Revelation, p.16)


"Notably, Polycarp does not state that the church in Smyrna did not exist in Paul's lifetime, but that the Syrman had not known the Lord at the time when Paul wrote his epistle to the Philippians, which was probably no later than A.D. 63, which allows sufficient time for the church to come into existence in Smyrna before or during the Neronean persecution." (Revelation, p.17)


"The foregoing internal evidence we have considered for the late date of Revelation has been ambiguous at best." (Revelation, p.17)


"Several church fathers indicate that Domition was emperor when John wrote Revelation. All of them, however, seem to base their information on the testimony of Irenaeus" (Revelation, p.17)


"The meaning of Irenaeus' statement has been debated. What was seen toward the end of Domition's reign? Was it the vision which John "beheld"? or was it the apostle himself, who was "seen... face to face" by those who testify? The phrase "that was seen..." may be a corruption of an original that read, "He was seen..." If this is true, then it only proves that John lived into the reign of Domition, though he may have written the Apocalypse much earlier." (Revelation, p.17)


"Those who originally translated Irenaeus' work into English complained of the poor condition of the manuscript evidence for his work. They wrote:
'The great work of Irenaeus, now for the first time translated into English, is unfortunately no longer extant in the original. It has come down to us only in an ancient Latin version, with the exception of a greater portion of the first book, which has been preserved in the original Greek, through means of the copious quotations made by Hippolytus and Epiphanius. The text, in both Latin and Greek, is often most uncertain." (Revelation, p.17-18)


"Since the text is admittedly "uncertain" in many places, and the quotation in question is known only from a Latin translation of the original, we must not place too high a degree of certainty upon our preferred reading of the statement of Irenaeus." (Revelation, p.18)


"Earlier in the passage, Irenaeus refers to "all the.. ancient copies" of Revelation. This presupposes that that the book had been around a good long while before this statement was written. If there were "ancient copies," was not the original more ancient still? Yet, in Irenaeus estimation, the time of Domition's reign was not considered to have been very ancient history, for he speaks of it as "almost in our day." How could Irenaeus speak of ancient copies" of a work the original of which has been written "almost" in his own time?" (Revelation, p.18)


"With reference to his mention of Domition's reign, there are grounds for believing that Irenaeus was speaking of the time of John's last being seen by the brethren, rather than the time of John's having seen the apocalyptic vision." (Revelation, p.18)


(On "land"/"earth"/"world")
"In the Old Testament (and, arguably, the New as well) the gentile nations are symbolically called "the sea" in contrast to "the land' (Israel). Thus, phrases like "those who inhabit the earth (or land)" and "kings of the earth (or land)" might be references to the people of Israel and their rulers, respectively." (Revelation, p.22)


"The word used in the Greek text for "earth" is ge, which can be translated as "earth" or as "land" with equal legitimacy, depending on the context." In any place where the intended meaning is "land," it opens the possibility that reference is being made to the land of Israel, which is often denoted in Scripture by no more elaborate designation than the expression "the land." (Revelation, p.22)


"Likewise "the world" normally speaks to us of the planet earth. But to biblical writers it often was limited in scope to the Mediterranean world or the Roman Empire (see Luke 2:1 and Colossians 1:23). Thus in Revelation, a statement about "the time of trial which shall come upon the whole world to text those who dwell on the earth" (Revelation 3:10) may refer to an empire-wide crisis, which will especially place stress upon those who dwell in Israel." (Revelation, p.22-23)



(On Significance of A.D.70; Nature of Christ's Return)
"The language of prophecy often expresses a perspective different from that of ordinary historical narrative or prosaic literature. The prophets recognized in the great political upheavals of history the acts of the sovereign God (Amos 3:6) exercising his prerogative of "removing" and "raising up" rulers and empires (Dan 2:21). The conquest of one nation by another through invasion and war were little more than God's means of judging the former - a nation that had been ":weighed in the balances and found wanting" (Dan. 5:27). The use of one nation's military machine for the punishment of another sinful nation did not require that the nation so used be aware of its being an instrument in the hands of God (Isa. 10:5-15). God is working invisibly behind the affairs of men, unperceived except by the prophetic vision. A consequence of this prophetic perspective is the frequent occurance in Scripture of the language of God's "coming" to a nation to judge it, even though what is envisaged is not a visible appearance of God, but a military conquest. Thus Isaiah, predicting the wasting of Egypt by the forces of Assyria, can write, "Behold, the Lord rides on a swift cloud, and will come into Egypt" (19:1). Similar language, when applied to Christ (Matt 24:30) is apt to be applied by the reader to his Second Coming, though the language, when used in Isaiah, clearly does not allow this identification." (Revelation, p.24)



(On the "Generation Means Race Theory")
"Some evangelicals - being made uneccessarily uncomfortable by these statements and wishing to salvage their status as true predictions of the Second Coming - have interpreted the expression "this generation" in various ways. The phrase has been made out to mean " this race," or "the generation that sees the signs of the Second Coming," etc. - despite the fact that Jesus spoke of "this generation" in at least four other verses in Matthew in which no meaning can be ascribed to the expression but "those living at this time." In any case, the similar phrase, "there are some standing here who shall not taste death till..." is not so easy to reinterpet. Both passages seem to tell us that something called the coming of the Son of man was to occur within the generation of Jesus' followers." (Revelation, p.24)

"Origen (c. 185-254) repudiated the literal interpretation of the Chialists as "Jewish." (Revelation, p.30)


"Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215) interpreted the 24 elders as a symbol of the equality of Jew and Gentile in the church; locusts' tails as the mischievous influence of immoral teachers; and the many-colored foundation stoned of the New Jerusalem as the manifold grace of apostolic teaching." (Revelation, p.30)


"Those who hold to the classical preterism of centuries past take a high view of the inspiration of the Scripture and date the Book of Revelation prior to A.D.70." (Revelation, p.30)

Planetpreterist.com

Copyright © by Planet Preterist - (393 Reads)