Welcome
Prayer
Sing the Word
Silence
Revelation Introduction Part III
Dating the Book
Meat
October 9th 2016
Okay, after last week we are going to proceed forth with our verse by verse study of the Book of Revelation.
I will try not to mention this again but I wonder about the value of this endeavor but I have been reassured that this will bear fruit and will wind up teaching you and me something very important.
I pray it does.
One of the key elements in the thriving debates around Revelation, particularly between preterists and futurists, is the date of writing for Revelation.
Simply put Preterists argue for a pre-AD 70 date while futurists hold to a date of AD 95.
There are several reasons for the later date. First, Irenaeus, in his work Against Heresies, states that John wrote Revelation at the end of Emperor Domitian’s reign, which ended in AD 96.
Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John. He thus had a connection with a contemporary of the Apostle John.
Second, the conditions of the seven churches in Revelation appear to describe a second-generation church setting rather than that of a first-generation.
For example, the Church of Ephesus (Rev. 2:1-7) is charged with abandoning their first love and warned of the Nicolaitan heresy.
If John had written Revelation in AD 65, it would have overlapped with Paul’s letter to the Ephesians and Timothy.
However, Paul makes no mention of either “the loss of first love or the threat of the Nicolaitans in his epistles.
Ephesus was Paul’s headquarters for three years.
Also, the church of Smyrna did not exist during Paul’s ministry (AD 60-64) as recorded by Polycarp, the first bishop of the city.
Then, Laodicea (Rev. 3:14-22) is rebuked for being wealthy and lukewarm. However, in his letter to the Colossians, Paul commends the church at Laodicea three times (2:2, 4:13, 16).
The thought is that it would likely take more than three years for the church at Laodicea to decline to the point that chapter 3 would say that there was be no commendable aspect about it.
Also, an earthquake in AD 61 left the city in ruins for many years. Thus, it is unlikely that in a ruined condition John would describe them as rich.
In response to these objections Preterists suggest . . .
X
So there are some of the reasons why many people believe that Revelation was written well after the destruction of Jerusalem.
If the book is to be seen in the light of either the historicist or the idealist, these facts about the conditions of the churches are irrelevant since the actual churches themselves in both of these views is not important.
Preterists (again, who favor the AD 70 date) pose some objections to the date of 90-95 AD for the writing of the book.
the question, “Why doesn’t John mention the fall of the Temple which occurred in AD 70?” Futurists respond that John wrote about future events, and the destruction of the temple was twenty-five years in the past.
He also wrote to a Gentile audience in Asia Minor which was far removed from Jerusalem. Preterists also point to the fact that the Temple is mentioned in chapter eleven.
Futurists respond that although John mentions a temple in Revelation 11:1-2, this does not mean it exists at the time of his writing.
In Daniel 9:26-27 and Ezekiel 40-48, both prophets describe the temple, but it was not in existence when they described a future temple in their writings.
What did Jesus mean in Matthew 24:34 when He said, “[T]his generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened”?
The common futurist response is that Jesus was stating that the future generation about which he was speaking would not pass away once “these things” had begun.
In other words, the generation living amid the time of the events He predicted will not pass away until all is fulfilled.
With regard to the Preterist view the thinking goes something like this –
If the books of the Bible were truly and primarily written to the believers of that day then all of them (included in the New Testament) had to have been written BEFORE the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Why?
Because if they were written after the 70 AD destruction then they were obviously written to believers who were around AFTER God poured judgment upon the Nation of Israel and therefore the Bible is materially applicable to believers post 70 AD.
I would suggest that the Bible was not primarily written to anyone but the believers of that day and age, and that since that age has been wiped out the contents of the Book do not apply to us materially but as spiritual directives to learn and live by today.
I would also add that in light of the very Jewish language which the Book is written that it seems to have been dedicated to the people of that time – many of whom converted from Judaism – and that it depicts the wrapping up of that age.
While not a hill to die on – after all, what we believe relative to this does NOT alter the fact that we are still here justified by faith through God’s grace through the life and death of His Son Jesus Christ – but if the Preterist view is correct it goes a long way in helping prove to Christians today that our approach to the faith is spiritual and in a new and living way, rather than through what has been attempted in the past through shakeable brick and mortar and ecclesiastical power-plays of Man.
Admittedly – and this is important – if the book of Revelation was composed after the destruction of Jerusalem it proves that John was writing instructions to the church that existed AFTER Jerusalem was destroyed. And if this was the case, then Preterism is a complete fail and so is the spiritual, subjective approach to the faith.
And if the Preterist view is errant then we are still part of a material, objective church and the approach many churches take to its content (and the rest of scripture) ought to be taken very seriously.
I mean, Jesus is coming back to get His church and the contents of this book are still in play!
We should have elders board. There should be church discipline. The Word needs to be taken seriously and I mean women should shut their mouths in church, cover their heads, and widows ought to start serving and divorce is NOT permissible etc. etc.
This is really quite serious because I am guilty of perpetuating “a terrible horrible, no-good, very bad way” to the faith and teaching people to relax – its done.
But the other side of the coin is this. If the Preterist view is correct, then the majority of the Christian approaches are non-sense, an abuse and misapplication of the written word, and millions upon millions have lived their lives and died overwhelmed with futile fears.
So let’s take this chapter and look at that dating of Revelation.
Now, admittedly, the dating of all the New Testament books is a debatable issue. And it is doubtful we will ever agree on the subject completely.
Because of this I would suggest that “dating debates” – meaning debates based on opinion – have little purpose. Instead I suggest that
the content of the New Testament books (what is said in them),
the context (to whom and where the things were said),
and the secular history surrounding what was said,
are far more imposing and important to the dating of Revelation than the traditional dating of the books themselves.
So, to 95 AD. This was a year when a man called Domitian Caesar reigned. This dating was determined by the following statement made by Irenaeus (AD 130 to AD 202), which was quoted by Eusebius, the church historian, (in AD 325).
The Futurist argument for their 95 AD dating rarely admits that this single quote used to establish the late date came from two men – one (Eusebius) in 325 AD who was quoting another (Irenaeus) who lived one hundred and twenty three years earlier (and was speaking of an event that supposedly took place nearly two generations before that)!
Here is Eusibius’ quote that was apparently from Irenaeus:
“We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”
To add fuel to the disputable nature of this quote we ALSO have to note that Irenaeus did not witness what he actually wrote about or quoted. He was referring to Polycarp (who, according to tradition, knew the Apostle John).
Additionally, we are not sure if the “it” Polycarp was referring to was John, the visions he saw, the name of Anti-Christ, or the book itself. Also we do not know if he meant that the book was written at that time or not.
This single statement, which comes to us by three separate people separated by three centuries, is at best hearsay and is certainly obfuscated by time and tone. But it is this statement alone, amidst all of this uncertainty, that serves as the evidence to support the “late date” theory of the dating of the book of Revelation.
How about we let the internal contents of the Revelation tell us when the book was written. I will make ten points that suggest that the date was before 70 AD.
POINT #1
In Revelation 10:11 we read that John “must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.”
Of course to an Idealist or Historicist this passage would not matter but to the futurist and Preterist division this passage is significant.
If Revelation was written in AD 95-96, John would have been over ninety years old and would have to still have had “to prophesy again.” In that day and age ninety was ancient and traveling was brutal. Not that God couldn’t have supported him in such labors but it typically would have been very difficult for him to travel to the various “nations and…many kings” and to then preach. However, with Revelation written earlier, John would have been in his mid-60’s and at that age, his traveling would have been more reasonable.
POINT #2
Chapter one verse four proves that John wrote Revelation to a specific group of churches in Asia. The importance of this statement cannot be overlooked (even though it has been by many scholars). There is only one small window of time in which there were only seven churches in Asia. The early AD 60’s.
The apostle Paul established nine churches in that area, but only seven were addressed in Revelation. The reason for this is that the cities of Colosse, Hierapolis, and Laodicea were all destroyed by an earthquake around AD 61. Laodicea was rebuilt soon afterwards, but the other two cities were not. This left seven churches in Asia during the five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish war.
Of particular importance is the message to the church of Philadelphia found in Revelation 3:7-13. In verses 10 and 11, Christ told John to inform them that an “hour of temptation” was “about to come upon all the world,” (i.e., the Roman Empire “GE,” not the “KOSMOS”).
Christ then told them that He was “coming quickly” and that they should “hold fast.”
The reason this is important (besides the fact that this was directed to an actual church in the first century) is that the first persecution of Christians took place under Nero Caesar in AD 64. Another reason Revelation could not have been written after 70 AD.
POINT #3
As mentioned 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 says,
“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. Nevertheless this passage is very similar in construction to Luke 21:20-24.
“And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 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. or these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”
Notice that Jesus told the disciples that they would see this event. The apostles had asked Him about their temple (Luke 21:5), and Jesus told them it would be destroyed before their (or this) generation passed away (Luke 21:32).
Notice again what Jesus said in verse 24 of Luke, that “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles.” This is the same thing Christ told John in Revelation 11:2!
Since the disciples’ generation has long since passed away, Revelation must have been written before the nations trampled Jerusalem under foot in AD 70.
POINT #4
Most writers consider the theme of the book to be Revelation 1:7. What does it say?
Revelation 1:7 “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.”
This verse is very similar in context to Matthew 24:30,
“And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes (same Greek word as Revelation 1:7) of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
Standing alone this is not conclusive by any means but from it we can see that just based on the language a case can be made; since Matthew 24:30 is a verse that speaks of “the fall of Jerusalem” and the Revelation verse is very similar – even using the same Greek term for the nations (we’ll talk about that more in a minute) we can suggest that they are speaking of the same thing – and therefore had to be written prior to the date of its fall.
Also notice the language of Revelation 1:7- it refers to those who “pierced him.”
Although we know that the Romans crucified him and pierced him, the apostles accused the Jews of the act in Acts 2:23 and 36. In fact Peter says that “they” crucified Jesus.
Acts 3:15; 4:10; and 5:30 say the same thing.
Stephen, in Acts 7:51-52, calls the Jews murderers.
Paul, in 1st Corinthians 2:8, speaks of the “Jews killing the Lord.” And again, in I Thessalonians 2:14-15, Paul speaks of the Jews that killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets.
From this we might further suggest that the Book concerns itself with the Jews, who were utterly dispersed or killed in 70 AD.
When Revelation 1:7 refers to all the “kindreds of the earth” (“kindreds” is from the Greek word “phule,” which means “tribe”). This is a direct allusion to the Jewish tribal system.
So let’s identify, from Scripture, who those “tribes” were. To do that, we must keep in mind this simple rule of interpreting the Bible: let Scripture interpret Scripture.
This we can easily do by looking at Zechariah 12:10-14. There we read,
“And I will pour upon the…inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son…In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem…And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart; All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart.”
Obviously, this is the foundation for John’s statement in Revelation 1:7,
“every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth (or land) shall wail because of him.”
Zechariah was saying that the “tribes of the land” would mourn for “Him whom they had pierced.” Who were those tribes? “The inhabitants of Jerusalem” – not the world or kosmos at some future date.
From these things (and more) we can see that one of the main purposes of the Revelation to the seven churches was to reveal Jesus to the Nation of Israel before the end. The place of this final revealing would be Jerusalem and it would be to those who pierced Him.
This is not a general reference to the Jewish nation, who today are not one bit different in the eyes of God than every Gentile, but was a reference to Christ’s contemporary generation – a generation that was destroyed in AD 70 by the Roman Legions.
POINT #5
The next thing that we need to look at is “the woman” found in Revelation chapters 17 and 18. John wrote that he saw a “woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus” (17:6).
The “woman” had this name written on her forehead: “MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH” (17:5).
The angel said that “the woman” was a poetic symbol of “that great city” (17:18); in whom “was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.” (18:24).
Then John wrote, “Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her… Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.” (18:20-21).
So who was this “woman?” This “great city?” John gives us a clue in Revelation 11:8, where he wrote,
“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.”
This shows us, as we saw above, that John was referring to the Jerusalem of his day. To prove this assertion we need to look at the term “Sodom” that John used to describe it.
This was a “figurative” name describing her spiritual condition rather than an actual location. Letting the Bible interpret itself, we find this is a reference to Jerusalem.
In Isaiah, chapter 1, after declaring that he had a “vision…concerning Judah and Jerusalem” (verse 1), Isaiah wrote, “Hear the words of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom.”
In Jeremiah 23:14, because of the adulterous prophets, God said that Jerusalem and her inhabitants were “all of them unto me as Sodom.”
And then what about the reference to “Egypt?” Nowhere in the Bible is Jerusalem called “Egypt.”
However, the first century generation of Jews were also in an exodus. While Old Testament Israel’s exodus was from the bondage of Egypt, the New Testament Israel’s exodus was from the bondage of the Old Covenant Law – housed at Jerusalem. In this I think we have a fairly clear reference to Jerusalem, that “Sodom,” that “Egypt” being referred to in Revelation.
POINT #6 – perhaps one of the best evidences.
So far we have suggested that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to first century Israel. As we’ve also seen, “the woman” John saw was first century Jerusalem.
Then in Revelation 17:10 we read,
“And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.”
The “kings” spoken of were the rulers of the known world of John’s day (the Roman Empire), since the Jews had “no king but Caesar.”
These “kings” were not ruling at the same time, for as the text says “five fell,” meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then “one is,” referring to the “king” who was ruling at the time Revelation was written.
This is where we have one of the clearest proofs for the dating of this book. If we simply examine the list of Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was, and the time Revelation was written.
These are the Roman Emperors (in order):
Julius Caesar;
Augustus;
Tiberius;
Gaius (Caligula);
Claudius;
and the sixth emperor, the one who “NOW IS” was…
that’s right, Nero.
And when did Nero reign?
From 54AD to June of 68AD. AGAIN,
Revelation 17:10 says,
“And there are seven kings: five are fallen (we named them), and one is (Nero), and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.”
So who was this seventh King who was not yet come, but who when he cometh he must continue a short space.
That would be a man named Galba who would reign only six months after the horrid Nero.
Nero did terrible things to Christians, had Peter and Paul put to death, and whom God used to destroy the Jews in Jerusalem. It was Nero who was in power and gave the command to Vespasian to destroy Jerusalem.
Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all comparison. If John was banished to Patmos it was the result of the great persecution of Nero.
He is undoubtedly the “sixth king” mentioned in Revelation, proving beyond any doubt that Revelation was written before the Roman/Jewish war.
POINT # 7
To anyone familiar with the Law of Moses and Jewish tradition, Revelation 15:2,3 will have meaning.
It says that those martyrs “who had come off victorious from the Beast” were singing “the Song of Moses.”
The first thing we have to ask ourselves is if these martyrs spoken of here are to be Christians living today, why are they singing “the Song of Moses?” How does the song go? Where are the words found? Why aren’t we practicing it in the faith today?
“The Song of Moses” is found in Deuteronomy 32:1-43. The Jews were to sing this song to remind themselves of what would befall them “in the latter days” (Deuteronomy 31:29).
The song specifically talks about “their end” – the end of the Jews (Deuteronomy 31:20), and details their destruction by a consuming “fire” (verse 22), “famine” (verse 24), “plague” (verse 24) and “bitter destruction” (verse 24).
In it God calls them a “perverse generation” (verses 5 and 20), and says He will “render vengeance” upon them and “vindicate His (faithful) people” (verse 41 and 36 respectively).
Why would Christian martyrs of the 21st century be singing this song? I’m not sure they will.
POINT #8
As we pointed out, this is a Revelation of Jesus Christ who tells John that the fulfillment of the prophecies of this book was “soon.”
Right off the bat in Revelation 1:1 and 3, John informed his readers, the seven churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume “must shortly come to pass.”
“The content of this book . . . must shortly come to pass.”
Take note! John did not write that some of the events, or even most of the events must “shortly” take place. He wrote that all of the events contained in Revelation “must shortly come to pass.” Why? Why must those things “shortly come to pass?”
Because the Revelation says “the time (was) at hand.”
At hand for whom?
The seven churches of Asia, specifically, and to the church of the first century in general.
The time for what was at hand?
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ.”
Then, as I’ve mentioned many times in the past, the last chapter in Revelation (22) begins at verse 6 saysing that the “Lord sent an angel to John “to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.”
Here, at the end of the book of Revelation, John recorded the exact same message that he did in chapter 1.
Have you ever noticed this? Again, this emphasizes that all of the events contained in Revelation were about to take place in the first century — not stretched throughout time, and certainly not for any future generation.
Then in Revelation 22:10, the angel of the Lord said to John,
“Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.”
Another proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the first century. However, another element was added to this warning. Do you recognize it? The angel told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important?
To get our answer we have to let scripture explain, so let’s look at the book of Daniel.
After Daniel had received visions concerning his people (the Nation of Israel), he was told, “thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book” (12:1). Daniel is then told how they would be rescued — by resurrection – and some would be rewarded with “everlasting life” and others with “everlasting contempt” (verse 2).
But then, Daniel is told something very peculiar. In Daniel 12:4, Daniel was told, “shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end.”
We have to refuse the temptation to believe that when Daniel says “the time of the end” it is the same as “the end of time.” There is a huge difference between “the end of time” and “the time of the end.”
The time of the end speaks to the time of the End of the Nation of Israel. No Jew, no Greek – remember?
Daniels vision was not about the end of time. but the end concerning the Nation of Israel, not mankind in general.
Next, Daniel saw two angels talking about the fulfillment of all that he had seen (verse 6).
And one asked the other, “How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?” The answer was, “when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.” (Daniel 12:7).
But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked again, “When?”
This is what the angel said in reply:
“Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.”
Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where “a sealed book” is referred to? That’s right. Revelation, chapter 5 which says,
Revelation 5:1 “And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.”
The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21-22 is that Daniel was told to “seal his book” concerning the end “for it pertains to many days in the future” (Daniel 8:26), but John was told not to seal his book “because the time is at hand” (Revelation 22:10).
The end of Old Covenant Israel was at hand. The end of that world or age. All things written had to be fulfilled by the time Jerusalem – that age, that world, that temple, that priesthood, that genealogy, even that people – – – fell.
Then, speaking of timing again Jesus says to John in verse 12:
“And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.”
Notice that Jesus did not say that “when I come, I will come quickly,” He emphatically said that He was coming “quickly.” But He also said something else. He said “that His reward was with Him to give every man according to his works.”
Now some state that this has not happened yet. However, we AGAIN must let Scripture interpret Scripture and so we turn to Matthew 16:27-28, Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27.
Did you know that Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in Revelation 21:12
Again, in Revelation 21, He said He was coming and “he shall reward every man according to his works.” And Jesus used these words in the Gospels but do you know what else He said in these three verses? He said:
“There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.”
Notice that Jesus tied His coming to the lives of His disciples. (to SOME OF THEM STANDING THERE). Some of his listeners would not die until He came.
So to whom was He coming? Those alive within that generation. And what will be their reward?
Daniel told us the “rewards” would be that (ready) some would be resurrected to “everlasting life” and others to “everlasting contempt.”
I am beyond convinced that if we learn ANYTHING from this we learn that the same thing awaits all human beings today – a resurrection to everlasting life or a resurrection to everlasting contempt.
POINT #9
We mentioned this earlier, but to believe that Revelation was written after the destruction of Jerusalem – a destruction spoken of anciently all the way back to Deuteronomy that was so utterly devastating to the House of Israel – but Jesus never refers to it in this book is not empirical evidence but it is really, really odd.
I suggest that had the Book of Revelation been written after 70 AD there would be mention of the temple destruction somewhere within its pages. Again, the futurist’s say that no mention is here because there was a 25 year span between it being written and the fall of the temple but being the Revelation speaks to the Jews so heavily it’s just odd.
Last point – POINT #10
If a person doesn’t believe the first three verses of Revelation I don’t think they will correctly read the rest of the book.
For if a person is unwilling to accept the time constraints of the text, the rest of the document can mean anything that the reader wants it to mean.
If the Apostle John was banished to Patmos under the reign of Nero, as the internal evidence indicates, he wrote the book of Revelation about AD 68 or 69, which was after the death of that emperor.
If all the books of the New Testament were written after 70 AD why do they speak as if Jerusalem is still standing – with its temple and a remaining vibrant community intact?
It is of interest that in the Syrian version of the book of Revelation, first published in 1627 (and, afterwards in the London Polyglot), that we find the following inscription:
“The Revelation which God made to John the evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero Caesar.”
This places John’s hand to paper well before 69AD.
Next week . . . onto chapter one.
