Date of Revelation

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by steve7150 » Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:40 am

But if it says its telling about things that must shortly come to pass... then it's lying. No?

User avatar
darinhouston


Posts: 1600
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am






The prophecy about Jesus in Isa 53 sounded like it would happen shortly yet it took 750 years and the prophecy about Jesus in Gen 1.15 also sounded almost real time but took thousands of years so the bible authors often had poetic or a diversity of writing styles.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by Singalphile » Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:47 am

darinhouston wrote:
But if it says its telling about things that must shortly come to pass... then it's lying. No?
Others answered that, and I might say the same: not necessarily, if it was explained/understood by the author/readers to be a book set in the time before the destruction of Jerusalem.

However, I wouldn't likely mention that outside of this forum. Just thinking aloud, off of alaskazimm's post. Irenaeus' quote is strong evidence despite the ambiguity or possible textual corruption or mistake, I think.
But I do also hold to the opinion that it was written pre-70, and I think the preterist interpretation works best, generally. If it could be proven that it was written later, then I'd probably move to an idealist view. I wouldn't want to be a cake having/eating person. :)
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by steve7150 » Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:01 pm

then I'd probably move to an idealist view.










I'm a historicist but i can be swayed that the idealist view may be true. To me both preterism and dispensationalism don't make sense.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by darinhouston » Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:13 pm

steve7150 wrote:I'm a historicist but i can be swayed that the idealist view may be true. To me both preterism and dispensationalism don't make sense.
I agree that full preterism doesn't make sense at all. But, does partial preterism have as much defect as full preterism to your mind?

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by steve7150 » Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:27 pm

I agree that full preterism doesn't make sense at all. But, does partial preterism have as much defect as full preterism to your mind?

User avatar
darinhouston

Posts: 1603
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am




Almost because the premise i can't get past is that the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant & the birth of the New Covenant are clearly stated several times before Revelation. So why do we then need a highly symbolic book to reveal events already plainly spelled out. Partial Preterism is the same as Preterism except for believing in Jesus second coming, so that means almost the entire book of Rev is just repeating things Jesus and others plainly stated earlier. If Partial Preterism is true the book should have a different name because it's not a Revelation.

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by dwilkins » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:25 pm

steve7150 wrote:I agree that full preterism doesn't make sense at all. But, does partial preterism have as much defect as full preterism to your mind?

User avatar
darinhouston

Posts: 1603
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am




Almost because the premise i can't get past is that the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant & the birth of the New Covenant are clearly stated several times before Revelation. So why do we then need a highly symbolic book to reveal events already plainly spelled out. Partial Preterism is the same as Preterism except for believing in Jesus second coming, so that means almost the entire book of Rev is just repeating things Jesus and others plainly stated earlier. If Partial Preterism is true the book should have a different name because it's not a Revelation.
The Old Covenant might have become obsolete, and might have started to fade away, but it couldn't have passed until the law of cursings and blessings from Deuteronomy was fulfilled. The cursing portion was found in the Song of Moses of Deuteronomy 32. Rev. 15 describes the host of heaven singing this song, indicating that it was finally going to be fulfilled:

Rev 15:1 Then I saw another sign in heaven, great and amazing, seven angels with seven plagues, which are the last, for with them the wrath of God is finished.
Rev 15:2 And I saw what appeared to be a sea of glass mingled with fire—and also those who had conquered the beast and its image and the number of its name, standing beside the sea of glass with harps of God in their hands.
Rev 15:3 And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, "Great and amazing are your deeds, O Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are your ways, O King of the nations!
Rev 15:4 Who will not fear, O Lord, and glorify your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship you, for your righteous acts have been revealed."
Rev 15:5 After this I looked, and the sanctuary of the tent of witness in heaven was opened,
Rev 15:6 and out of the sanctuary came the seven angels with the seven plagues, clothed in pure, bright linen, with golden sashes around their chests.
Rev 15:7 And one of the four living creatures gave to the seven angels seven golden bowls full of the wrath of God who lives forever and ever,
Rev 15:8 and the sanctuary was filled with smoke from the glory of God and from his power, and no one could enter the sanctuary until the seven plagues of the seven angels were finished.

In other words, you can't have the completion of the Old Covenant without the pouring out of the seven bowls. I'd suggest that they were poured out with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Historicists, as I understand them, and futurists say that the seven bowls are still to come. This means that both systems say that the Old Covenant hasn't fully passed away yet.

Doug

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by morbo3000 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 12:25 am

It is possible that we are asking questions of John's Revelation that are actually outside the scope of what apocalyptic writing had in mind.

John's Revelation is not the only apocalyptic writing of the time. Following is a list. While these were not canonical for various reasons, they demonstrate that apocalyptic literature was a genre with its own intentions, and may not need to be considered prophetic in the foretelling sense. In that sense, in could be that John's Revelation was bringing meaning to Christians living under Roman persecution.

Apocalypse of James (First)
Apocalypse of James (Second)
Apocalypse of Golias
Apocalypse of Methodius
Apocalypse of Paul
Apocalypse of Paul (Coptic)
Apocalypse of Peter
Apocalypse of Peter (Gnostic)
Apocalypse of Samuel of Kalamoun
Apocalypse of Stephen
Apocalypse of Thomas
Apocalypse of the Seven Heavens[14]

I found that list at this wikipedia entry which includes a lot of other interesting reading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalyptic_literature

I just discovered that the previously mentioned talk that Elaine Pagels gave to the Long Now Foundation is available as a video. It is very thought provoking. She talks in depth about many of these different apocalypses.
http://fora.tv/2012/08/20/Elaine_Pagels ... evelations
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by steve7150 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:38 am

Historicists, as I understand them, and futurists say that the seven bowls are still to come. This means that both systems say that the Old Covenant hasn't fully passed away yet.












Historicists look at the bowls as major events in history , so for example some look at the first bowl as WW1 and the second as the Bolshevik Revolution. The Bolshevik Revolution may have now diminished in importance but there was a time the many thought Communism would take over the world and of course crush any religious faith.

dwilkins
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by dwilkins » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:31 am

steve7150 wrote: Historicists, as I understand them, and futurists say that the seven bowls are still to come. This means that both systems say that the Old Covenant hasn't fully passed away yet.



Historicists look at the bowls as major events in history , so for example some look at the first bowl as WW1 and the second as the Bolshevik Revolution. The Bolshevik Revolution may have now diminished in importance but there was a time the many thought Communism would take over the world and of course crush any religious faith.
It's my understanding that Historicists see the seven seals associated with the destruction of Jerusalem/Fall of the Roman Empire, the seven trumpets associated with the sacking of the Byzantine Empire, and the seven bowls associated with some combination of the collapse of the power of the Roman Catholic Church and modern events. This sounds in line with what you said about seeing some bowls associated with the Bolsheviks, etc. If so, then the Song of Moses hasn't been applied even up to this point in history, so the Old Covenant is still in effect.

Doug

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Date of Revelation

Post by steve7150 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:40 am

. This sounds in line with what you said about seeing some bowls associated with the Bolsheviks, etc. If so, then the Song of Moses hasn't been applied even up to this point in history, so the Old Covenant is still in effect.










I have thought the Old Covenant was over on the cross or perhaps the curses portion lasted until 70AD so what you are mentioning i'm totally unaware of but i will look into it.

Post Reply

Return to “Revelation”