Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since the fundamentalists are dead set on insisting only their view is logical, I'd like to introduce FOUR views that are prevalent among the couple of billion people who claim Christ as God:
Dating when Revelation was written is critical in reaching a conclusion about being an idealist, preterist, historicist, or futurist. Dating the Book of Revelation
And, Mike, here is your Scriptural "proof" that Revelation was written prior to the destruction of the Temple:
Same source
My point is not to make anyone believe any particular thing --primarily because it has no existentialist meaning of living in the now. But it is very important that impressionable people not be persuaded that any one group "has got it all down pat." That's just hubris on the part of anyone.
I believe Revelation was written prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The measurement of the Temple mentioned in Revelation (which could not have happened had it fallen), and Jesus' own warning that someone of them who stood with Him would see the destruction of the Temple before their generation passed away.
Is that dead certain--no. But it is based on the evidence available--both the internal biblical evidence as well as the weak futurist statements. However, by the time all of it got to Augustine in the fourth century, the Catholic Church had decided that was the way it was going to be---and evangelicals today are following those Catholic decisions.
With regard to your post, post #717, certain statements made both by you and by the articles you linked to are not true.
1.) You said;
''Dating when Revelation was written is critical in reaching a conclusion about being an idealist, preterist, historicist, or futurist.''
This is not true. The dating of Revelation is only critical for the preterist view. In order for the preterist view have any chance at validity the book of Revelation would have to have been written before A.D. 70 which was when the Romans destroyed the temple and the city. But an early dating of Revelation would not disqualify the other views, including the futuristic view because prophecy is about future events. The existence of the second temple at the time of the alleged early writing of Revelation does not necessitate that the existing temple was the one being referred to.
2.) You also said,
''...and Jesus' own warning that someone of them who stood with Him would see the destruction of the Temple before their generation passed away.''
Although at least one of the apostles, the apostle John did live to see the destruction of the temple since he lived to at least C. A.D. 95, it is not true that Jesus said ''someone of them who stood with Him would see the destruction of the Temple before their generation passed away.'' You are mixing passages and blending them together taking them out of their context. In Matthew 16:28 Jesus said the following.
Matt. 16:28 ''Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.''
That statement can only be referring to the transfiguration which took place one week later in which Jesus took Peter, James, and John up on a mountain and was transfigured before them and Moses and Elijah appeared and talked with Jesus. The transfiguration event was a preview of the coming kingdom. Realistically there is nothing else that Jesus could have been referring to in Matthew 16:28.
In Matthew 24:34 Jesus said,
Matt. 24:34 ''Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
In this passage Jesus was not referring to His own generation. He was referring to the generation that would see the signs during the Tribulation that would indicate that He was about to return. Jesus never said, or at least He is not recorded in the Scriptures as saying that some of the disciples who stood with Him would see the destruction of the temple before their generation passed away. Again, you have taken two different passages and conflated them giving the appearance that Jesus said something which He did not say.
3.) You quote one of the articles that you linked to which said,
One of the most compelling proofs that Revelation was written before Jerusalem was destroyed is the fact that the Jewish temple was still standing!
Revelation 11:1-2, "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months."
How do we know that this was the temple of the first century and not some future one? First, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that speaks of a "rebuilt" Jewish Temple. Not one. That alone should be proof enough. [Bolding yours].
That statement is false. First of all the temple that was destroyed in A.D. 70 was itself a rebuilt temple. It replaced the first temple which had been destroyed in 586 B.C. Secondly, Daniel 9:26-27 speaks of a temple other than the one which was destroyed in A.D. 70. It speaks of a future temple.
Daniel 9:26 "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. 27] "And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate."
Daniel 9:26 speaks of the people of the prince who is to come and that they would destroy the city and the temple. The people that would destroy the city and the temple were the Romans who destroyed the temple and Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The prince of those people had not come yet because he ''is to come.'' He would come at some point after the temple had been destroyed.The prince who is to come is a reference to the antichrist, which Paul refers to as ''the man of lawlessness'' in 2 Thessalonians chapter two.
However, the prince who is to come subsequent to the destruction of the temple is said to make a firm covenant with the many for one week (a week of years and therefore seven years) which he will break in the middle of the week (after 3 1/2 years which is the midpoint of the seven year Tribulation period). During the first 3 1/2 years sacrifices are permitted, but then after 3 1/2 years the prince who is to comes puts a stop to the sacrifices.
But there can be no sacrifices without a temple !!! When the temple was destroyed in A.D. 70 the sacrifices stopped. Yet the prince who is to come at some point after the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70 puts an end to sacrifices which somehow had started being made again. This means that the temple will have been rebuilt, and it is that rebuilt temple which is being referred to in Revelation 11:1-2. A temple which does not as yet exist.
You are aware are you not that many Jews want, and are looking for the temple to be rebuilt. What stands in the way is that Moslem mosque (the dome of the rock) which currently stands on the temple mount.
I've already stated in what is currentlypost #652 pending the deletion of any more posts prior to that one, why the events in Revelation concerning the Tribulation and the return of Christ are future events.
The bottom line is that if you believe that the Tribulation has already occurred, then if you are to be consistent you have to believe that Jesus has already returned in the manner in which He described His return in Matthew 24:30:31 since His return is to be at the end of the Tribulation.
Matt. 24:30 "And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory. 31] "And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.
Have all the tribes of the earth seen the Son of Man come on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory? Has Jesus sent forth His angels to gather together His elect from the four winds? The answer of course is 'No.' These things have not as yet happened. And therefore neither has the Tribulation. It is still future.
Furthermore, if you believe that the Tribulation has already taken place, then to be consistent you have to believe that we are now either in the Millennial kingdom or in the eternal state of the new heavens and new earth which Revelation 21-22 speak of.
Really? We are now living in the Millennial kingdom? THIS is the Millennial kingdom? Or this is the eternal state? This is the best that God can come up with? If so, then direct me to the nearest worm hole that takes me to another universe and away from here!!!
The Tribulation and the return of Jesus and the establishment of the Millennial kingdom are future events. The purpose of the Tribulation is to bring the Jews to the point where they will say ''Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord' (Matthew 23:39), at which point Jesus will return. This has not historically happened. It will happen in the future.
Last edited by Michael Way; 08-13-2017 at 09:05 AM..
Since the fundamentalists are dead set on insisting only their view is logical, I'd like to introduce FOUR views that are prevalent among the couple of billion people who claim Christ as God:
Dating when Revelation was written is critical in reaching a conclusion about being an idealist, preterist, historicist, or futurist. Dating the Book of Revelation
And, Mike, here is your Scriptural "proof" that Revelation was written prior to the destruction of the Temple:
Same source
My point is not to make anyone believe any particular thing --primarily because it has no existentialist meaning of living in the now. But it is very important that impressionable people not be persuaded that any one group "has got it all down pat." That's just hubris on the part of anyone.
I believe Revelation was written prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The measurement of the Temple mentioned in Revelation (which could not have happened had it fallen), and Jesus' own warning that someone of them who stood with Him would see the destruction of the Temple before their generation passed away.
Is that dead certain--no. But it is based on the evidence available--both the internal biblical evidence as well as the weak futurist statements. However, by the time all of it got to Augustine in the fourth century, the Catholic Church had decided that was the way it was going to be---and evangelicals today are following those Catholic decisions.
The problem with your "proof" is that it is in error on one very important point. The temple being measured was Ezekiel's, it's a spiritual temple that began to be built with the first cornerstone, Christ Jesus. Jesus said same when He said "Upon this rock" His church/temple would be built, and that rock was the revelation of the Son of G-d who is Spirit. Then we are told elsewhere that we are lively, ie. living STONES.
In addition to that, a late date is mentioned by several scholars of antiquity, such as these in an article about the affixing a date to Revelation. Peace
"Iraneaus, the main spokesmen to this date. He lived in the second century A.D., a principal "Early Church Father" who made a statement in 185 A.D. that the apostle John "saw the revelation...at the close of Domitian's reign(A.D. 81-96). (Ref: Contra Haereses 5.30.3; ANF, 1:559-60 also called in the fifth book of his work "Against Heresies".) "
And...."Some of the other Early Church Fathers give credence to a late date. Jerome, Sulpicius Severus, and Hippolytus all thought that John was exiled to Patmos under Domitian, where he saw the visions and wrote the Apocalypse. Another was Clement of Alexandria, who was an "Ante Nicene Father." In his work, "Who is the rich man that shall be saved? XLII," he gives credence to a late date too."
Oh, I DO get it. They were absolutely sincere in following the bigotry of their leadership. The point is that they are allowed to do that. What they are NOT allowed to do is to continue conducting their business in that manner. If they wish to follow religious bigotry they can't conduct a public business. No problem.
There is more bigotry in your remarks than in the subject of our discussion. You don't see that either .
Even easier if you're a fundie and just roboticaly regurgitate biblical stuff rather than think.
And you fundie skeptics keep robotically regurgitating the same old humanistic doctrines of unbelief as if you can understand the Bible, rather than think.
I can assure you conservative Christian put a lot more thinking into what they believe than any fundie skeptic does.
And you fundie skeptics keep robotically regurgitating the same old humanistic doctrines of unbelief as if you can understand the Bible, rather than think.
I can assure you conservative Christian put a lot more thinking into what they believe than any fundie skeptic does.
What? You don't think, "nuh uh, nanner nanner" counts as thought? Peace
'There are some standing here who will not taste death, until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.'
Which I see, as coming in our heart and minds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aristotles child
RESPONSE:
Then you are misinterpreting what Jesus clearly said.
See also Matt 10:23
But when they persecute you in this city, flee into the next: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
There are a number of ways in which the meaning of this passage or any might be determined.
One is that it's a reference to the day of Pentecost and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
I am sure that most of us will not see things in the same manner.
There are a number of ways in which the meaning of this passage or any might be determined.
One is that it's a reference to the day of Pentecost and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
I am sure that most of us will not see things in the same manner.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Peace
