|
Tab Menu 1
| Deep Waters 'Deep Calleth Unto Deep ' -The place to go for Ministry discussions. Please keep it civil. Remember to discuss the issues, not each other. |
 |
|
06-23-2007, 02:49 PM
|
 |
Resident PeaceMaker
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Jackson,AL.
Posts: 16,548
|
|
|
When Was The Revelation Written ?
When was the book of Revelation written ?
Is the traditional dating of 95 AD. correct or is a earlier dating of sometime in the earlier or mid sixites AD. more correct ?
How can we know when the book of Revelation was written ?
What do the scriptural evidences point to ?
__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
|
06-23-2007, 02:58 PM
|
 |
crakjak
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: dallas area
Posts: 7,605
|
|
"When John the Revelator spoke of the "great tribulation" in Revelation 7:14 he was referring primarily to the awful persecutions being brought upon the Christian people of his day, mainly at the instigation of the Roman Emperor Nero but including the tribulation and persecutions they were having under the Jewish leaders." "John called himself their "brother and companion in tribulation" ( Revelation 1:9). Quoted from: " Matthew 24 Fulfilled" by John Bray
The tribulation under Nero lasted approximately 3 1/2 years, from A.D. 64 until A.D. 68 when Nero committed suicide.
|
06-23-2007, 04:37 PM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,318
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson
When was the book of Revelation written ?
Is the traditional dating of 95 AD. correct or is a earlier dating of sometime in the earlier or mid sixites AD. more correct ?
How can we know when the book of Revelation was written ?
What do the scriptural evidences point to ?
|
"Tradition" declares it to be 96 AD or so. However, having said that, "Tradition" also declares the trinity, threrfore my automatic acceptence of "traditional" teachings, unless explicitly supported in the scriptures is not going to happen.
Since none of us here was alive then to know for sure, we must examine two things.
1.) Who decided the 96 AD writing and why was it accepted.
2.) Does the Bible demand an early (65 AD) or a later (96AD)
We should not accept or reject a notion based on the percent of people that believe it, because often times the majority is incorrect. Case in point...the trinity.
Lord bless.
|
06-23-2007, 05:27 PM
|
|
crakjak
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: dallas area
Posts: 7,605
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowas
"Tradition" declares it to be 96 AD or so. However, having said that, "Tradition" also declares the trinity, threrfore my automatic acceptence of "traditional" teachings, unless explicitly supported in the scriptures is not going to happen.
Since none of us here was alive then to know for sure, we must examine two things.
1.) Who decided the 96 AD writing and why was it accepted.
2.) Does the Bible demand an early (65 AD) or a later (96AD)
We should not accept or reject a notion based on the percent of people that believe it, because often times the majority is incorrect. Case in point...the trinity.
Lord bless.
|
Well said, yet most traditions are what has be accepted, and what is accepted is what whose in power propagate, many times at the point of the sword.
|
06-24-2007, 05:31 PM
|
|
crakjak
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: dallas area
Posts: 7,605
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson
When was the book of Revelation written ?
Is the traditional dating of 95 AD. correct or is a earlier dating of sometime in the earlier or mid sixites AD. more correct ?
How can we know when the book of Revelation was written ?
What do the scriptural evidences point to ?
|
Where is Bro. Blume, can't believe he hasn't weighed in here? 
|
06-25-2007, 08:09 AM
|
 |
Oneness Pentecostal Preacher
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Groton, CT
Posts: 258
|
|
|
Why is this dating important?
|
06-25-2007, 01:19 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KwaiQ
Why is this dating important?
|
Because if it was written in the 90s A.D. then this proves the preterist heresy wrong (the notion that Revelation was pretty much all fulfilled in 70 A.D.); though if written in the 60s A.D. it doesn't necessarily prove the preterists right.
|
06-25-2007, 01:25 PM
|
 |
Still Figuring It Out.
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,858
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chan
Because if it was written in the 90s A.D. then this proves the preterist heresy wrong (the notion that Revelation was pretty much all fulfilled in 70 A.D.); though if written in the 60s A.D. it doesn't necessarily prove the preterists right.
|
What makes it a heresy?
|
06-25-2007, 01:31 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digging4Truth
What makes it a heresy?
|
Well, if Revelation was written in the 90s A.D. that would prove preterism wrong and being wrong is what would make it heresy.
|
06-25-2007, 01:49 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,318
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chan
Because if it was written in the 90s A.D. then this proves the preterist heresy wrong (the notion that Revelation was pretty much all fulfilled in 70 A.D.); though if written in the 60s A.D. it doesn't necessarily prove the preterists right.
|
Perhaps you are right. However, to remain consistent, if a late date proves preterist a heresy, obviously if a early date could be established it would prove "tradional" interpretive teachings a heresy.
Question. you said..."though if written in the 60s A.D. it doesn't necessarily prove the preterists right"
How can you have one way prove a heresy, and if it is the other way, the other view is not a heresy?
Obviously you are convinced you are correct regrdless of the out come of this.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:26 PM.
| |
Linear Mode
