Re-Dating Revelation

While dating books of the Bible is important, in most cases it does not change how we understand the meaning of the Book. Take Genesis for example. When Genesis was written – during the lifetime of Moses – is important for establishing the creditability of the book. It even helps to establish the creditability of Jesus Who taught that Moses wrote it. However, we can understand what the author meant by what he wrote – whether we agree or not – without having conformation of the writing date. In other words, the date, while important, doesn’t change how we understand what the author wrote. Most Bible books are like that. The Book of Revelation is an exception. If we do not start with the right date of Revelation, we will misunderstand and misapply most of what Jesus is saying through John. Let’s say you find a letter by a respected Biblical modern-day prophet.

When Was the Book of Revelation Written?

Debating the Date of Revelation Posted by: Sullivan Copyright and — All rights reserved. On page , Kistemaker goes directly to the heart of his eschatology when he makes a statement that sounds startling—even blasphemous—when one first reads it. Does Kistemaker portray God as failing to fulfill His promise? No at least not knowingly.

Today most scholars date the book of Revelation to late in the first century, during the reign of the Emperor Domitian. According to this view, it was written around A.D.

That is what Jesus came to do in AD After the slaughter of AD 70, the Jews were not in a position to persecute the early Church. Also, it makes sense that the heresy would have been a much smaller issue after so many Jews were slaughtered in AD Only an early date of authorship allows for the heretics to be a significant problem. Time-related Passages The internal time-related portions of Revelation indicate that the events it foretells will come to pass shortly see Rev.

If this is read with an unbiased perspective, we can easily conclude Revelation was not written about events 2, years in the future. The time texts are bookends, which frame the content of the book. This alone could seem compelling, except Irenaeus is noted for making mistakes in recording dates and times in his writings. Because Revelation contains no internal evidence for a later date of authorship, proponents of the later date must lean only upon external evidence to force this conclusion.

Kenneth Gentry has done the world an invaluable service by writing his doctoral dissertation on the dating of Revelation. His irrefutable paper is easily purchasable as a book under the title: Considering these strong proofs for an early date of writing alongside the very poor evidence in favor of a later date, I believe it is common sense to date the writing of Revelation prior to AD

Revelation

This post can also be found here, where all of our chapter-by-chapter studies on Revelation will be posted in the coming months: June 25, Scripture text for this study: Four Views A Parallel Commentary. A good exegetical question is this:

It was a lingering curiosity after taking Dr. Heiser’s course “Why Do Christians Disagree about End Times? and late-night viewing of N.T. Wright videos on preterism. Jonathan’s reasons for dating of the Book of Revelation to be before 68AD has me thinking Through preterism, as well, Robert.

Rochford Why is the dating of Revelation important? If the book of Revelation is a book of prophecy as it claims to be Rev. The events in the mid to late 60s of the first century would be absolutely excluded as possible fulfillments. Sproul writes, If the book was written after A. Either view would still make Revelation future for the futurist. For instance, Zane Hodges is a futurist, who holds to the early date of Revelation.

If Revelation is dated to AD 95, which has been the traditional dating for the last 1, years, then this would render preterist obsolete to Bible believers.

Dating of Revelation

By Wayne Jackson Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A. A few prominent names have been associated with this position e. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.

The date when the book of Revelation was written has been a controversial subject for centuries. The insight I have gained and relate in this article is not likely to .

Internal Evidence There are five widely accepted late-date arguments that support John writing the book of Revelation in AD 95 while exiled to the island of Patmos by Emperor Domitian. Here are five arguments and a brief explanation of each. Banishment of John to Patmos Revelation 1: Second, Nero did not exile people nearly as often as Domitian.

Domitian was known for banishing Christians while Nero was known for killing them. Third, nowhere in history is there a record that says Nero banished Christians. The only punishment known by Nero for Christians was death. Fourth, several secular historians and early church writers specifically mention that John was exiled under the reign of Domitian. Condition of the Churches in Revelation Much of the information scholars have about the churches described in Rev matches a date of AD Paul stayed at Ephesus from AD If John were exiled to the island of Patmos in AD 65, he would have been in Asia the geographical region of Ephesus and more than likely would have been a coworker of Paul in that area.

Regarding the church of Smyrna, this church did not even exist during the ministry of Paul who likely died in AD In the book of Acts, John is with Peter Acts 3:

Re-Dating Revelation

One of many Bible articles on the “Wielding the Sword of the Spirit” web site at www. The abundance of scriptural evidence detailed in Section III of this article makes it very clear that the book of Revelation is doctrine for the nation of Israel, the descendants of Jacob. Revelation was written to those in Israel who believed in Jesus Christ, by an apostle of the circumcision, for direct application in the “kingdom” dispensation which was prophesied in the Old Testament. This article is divided into three major sections:

Indeed, some disputed Revelation as late as the 8th century, and when Revelation did circulate early on, it normally circulated alone. The traditional order of the books was established as follows: The four accounts of Jesus’ life were collected together.

Community answers are sorted based on votes. The higher the vote, the further up an answer is. The late dating after 90AD comes more from tradition and an interpretation of a quote by Iraneaus than from any strong literary or historical support. Here are some of the historical and literary in-text reasons that strongly support Revelation being written prior to 70AD: This would be a pre-siege population. The post-siege population, after 70AD, was far lower.

Currently, the population is over , 2 Laodicea is referenced as a rich and prosperous city Rev 3: There is no date after 70AD in which all seven churches existed simultaneously. This is a lesser support as Revelation is an apocalyptic vision and does not have to be literal, or it could refer to a future temple being built. Scripture is generally quick to point out fulfilled prophecy. Yet, they were not a large problem after the siege as anti-Jewish sentiment took hold and those holding to Jewish customs were persecuted.

There was vicious Christian persecution under Nero, whereas historical evidence for Domitian persecution is scant at best. This would make Rev Yet what of the quote by Iraneaus used by those in support of a late date, and the later historians who quote from him?

La Vista Church of Christ

It would be remiss of any serious student of Revelation not to at least do a cursory examination of the historical context to which Revelation is back-dropped. The first point of reference would have to be to determine when Revelation was written. Most scholars regard there being only two possible dates. In the case of most books of the Bible, determining the date of its authorship, while certainly important, is not necessarily crucial to its interpretation.

But this is absolutely not the case with the Book of Revelation. This has been based almost entirely on one vague statement by the second century Church Father, Irenaeus.

Therefore, John’s reference to “the Lord’s day” in Revelation is “probably a subtle pointer to a late date for the composition of Revelation” (). Actually, it is assumed that Christians began calling the first day of the week “the Lord’s day” by the late first century because it is assumed that Revelation .

I hold to the early Date. All late date testimony rests squarely on the shoulders of one solitary statement by Irenaeus, and it is disputed as to what it even says was John seen? Even Eusebius rejects Irenaeus testimony and prefers that a different John John the Presbyter wrote the book, not the apostle, as Irenaeus believes. This is important, and for certain, the late date folks that came after were merely basing their opinions on Irenaeus!

Scholars agree that Irenaeus’ statement is questionable at best, and it contradicts other things Irenaeus said about “ancient copies” of the book of Revelation Eusebius: The notion of “ancient copies” of the book of Revelation cannot be reconciled with the proposition that Revelation was seen “almost in Irenaeus’ generation” — however it could be reconciled with the view that Irenaeus actually stated that JOHN was seen in Domitian’s reign, not the vision. Then again, Irenaeus also claimed Jesus lived to be over 50 years old!

Scholars admit that Irenaeus’ quote concerning Revelation is all the evidence there is for a late date, and that his quote is inconclusive as to even what it means: Daniel Denham “The testimony of Irenaeus is considered the bastion of the evidence for the Late Date The obscurity of the testimony, as it has come down to us, must be considered as weak and inconclusive to demand the Late Date.

Daniel Denham, Part 1, Steve Gregg “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. Robert Young even thinks NERO was intended, which would fully accord with Irenaeus statement about the “ancient copies” of the book of Revelation.

Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell

Coppell, TX It is no accident that the three most attacked books of the Bible are also the most significant Genesis, Daniel, and Revelation. It is commonly known that if the foundation is faulty, the building will soon fall. This article will seek to refute the view that the Book of Daniel was written in the second century BC as many liberals claim and thus could not have been written by Daniel ca.

Late dating of revelation To bear out the seer’s description of the latter 60s, both in Rome and a half years between that condition and this—too brief a period of Roman Emperors, we should place the dating of the New Testament.

Who Wrote the Book of Revelation? Brian Chilton November 14, As a teenager, I remember being a bit frightened of the book of Revelation. The smell of acne face cleanser filled the room as I dove into mysterious depictions of four-faced angels, beasts from the sea and land, of massive angels, and pound hailstones being hurled to the earth. While Revelation holds mysterious and frightening images of the end-times, the book of Revelation was written to be an encouragement to Christians of all times.

But, who was it that penned the word of Revelation? Tradition has long held that John the apostle, whom we have seen penned the Fourth Gospel and the three letters attributed to him, wrote the last book of Scripture. While there were skeptics, even early on, about the authorship of the text most likely due to the apocalyptic nature of the book , the general consensus was that John the apostle was the author.

Four reasons exist as to why one should accept Johannine authorship of Revelation. This does not necessarily indicate that this John was John the apostle. Tradition states that John the apostle served as the pastor to the churches in Ephesus. Second-century sources indicate that John was exiled to the Isle of Patmos.

Dating the Departure of Lehi from Jerusalem

If the book or Revelation was written after 70ad i. And Daniel 9 describes that end as the destruction of the temple and the city. I conclude that because the book of revelation is clearly a book of “vision and prophecy” If Revelation was written after this time A pre ad dating of Revelation solves this. I also observe that you quote partly, a part of Daniel 9:

W riting on a slab of stone called “Gabriel’s Revelation” or “Gabriel’s Vision” dating from the late first century B.C. or early first century A.D. has some critics of Christianity claiming that the story of a messiah, who was physically dead for three days and then returned to life, was not original or unique to Jesus of Nazareth.. Therefore, they conclude that the story about.

The Nature of Internal Evidence The significance of the date of the book of Revelation depends to a great degree on the interpretive system one holds. The Preterist Interpretation requires that the book be written during the reign of Nero before the destruction of Jerusalem in A. If the book proves to have been written after A. Other systems of interpretation are not so sensitive to the date of writing, since their interpretive frameworks do not connect the events of the book as directly to the events attending the fall of Jerusalem.

The reason the preterist position is intent on dating the book before A. First , they insist that the theme of the book centers on the near-term destruction of Jerusalem prophesied by Jesus Luke Luke Either an early or a late date for the writing of the book of Revelation will not significantly affect the understanding of the book. But if the book of Revelation proves to have been written after the fall of Jerusalem in A.

Hitchcock has noted the narrow date range which modern preterism depends upon for its interpretation of the book. He also observes that many of those who support an early date do not necessarily support a date as early as is required by the modern preterists: While it is true that many scholars do hold to a pre date for Revelation, it is critical to observe that the preterist position requires more than just a pre date. Therefore, for preterists, the earliest Revelation could have been written.

Dating the Book of Revelation

The insight I have gained and relate in this article is not likely to change the debate in favor of any certain date. Eusebius was a fourth century historian who preserved many early writings. Domitian was executed in 96 A. Barring any evidence to the contrary or attacks on the credibility of Eusebius, this information presents a real problem for those who hold to the early date abt.

Please notice the past tense implies John wrote what he experienced after he was off the island. The only logical conclusion is that John wrote the book of Revelation after 96 A.

The majority of scholars in the 20th century advocated the dating of Revelation around 96 AD. However, the majority of scholars in the 19th century advocated the dating of Revelation before 70 AD.

It asserts, in fact, that Revelation describes events that will likely take place in the twenty-first century rather than the first century. This is how Tim LaHaye puts it: First, let me say this: Moreover, the credibility of Irenaeus as a source is called into question by his contention in the same volume that Jesus was crucified when he was about fifty years of age. Furthermore, if the apostle John were indeed writing in AD 95, it seems incredible that he would make no mention whatsoever of the most apocalyptic event in Jewish history — the demolition of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple at the hands of Titus.

This would be tantamount to writing a history of New York City today and making no mention of the destruction of the World Trade Center at the hands of terrorists on September 11, More directly, imagine writing a thesis on the future of terrorism in America and failing to mention the Manhattan Massacre. Imagine that you are reading a history concerning Jewish struggles in Nazi Germany and find no mention whatsoever of the Holocaust. Would it be historically ridiculous or historically reasonable to suppose this history had been written prior to the outbreak of World War II?

The answer is self-evident.

The Beast of Revelation (18 of 25) Late Date vs. Early Date?