1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured A study of the "Revelation" - date & significance, then & now

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Covenanter, Feb 27, 2017.

?
  1. Before AD 70

    6 vote(s)
    42.9%
  2. After AD 70

    8 vote(s)
    57.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Actually, none of these passages are metaphorical, but other figures of speech. Ps. 97:5 is hyperbole, and Micah 1:3 is an anthropormorphism. Zech. 14:1 is personification (or do you mean 4:1?). The great thing about grammatical-historical interpretation is that we know what the figures of speech are and how to interpret them as--wait for it--figures of speech!

    I have no reason to interpret Rev. 10:1 other than literally--unless you have some special knowledge that I don't have about how an angel should always look.

    And by the way, metaphors represent actual things. Just sayin'. :)
     
    #141 John of Japan, Mar 3, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2017
  2. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    New heavens and Earth will be after the Second Coming, and that period will have JUST the Body of Christ, glorified state, living with God there, so how could that have happened yet?
     
  3. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree with you that the language is metaphorical and apocalyptic, but that does not mean that it can be ignored or that it can be made to mean the very opposite of what it rather obviously does.

    Zechariah 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
    2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
    3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
    4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

    The 'nations,' which must surely mean Gentiles, are coming against Jerusalem, and the Lord is going to fight against them. Half the city will be taken, and half not taken. I think that's pretty clear, leaving aside verse 4 which perhaps is more difficult..

    How does this work in relation to AD 70? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Gentiles win and take the whole city?
     
  4. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Didn't paul state that Jerusalem would be under Gentile control until the end times, and God has then dealing withJews regarding that city?
     
  5. Covenanter

    Covenanter Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    2,206
    Likes Received:
    526
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Zechariah has a context - he & Haggai were raised up about 20 years after the temple rebuilding had been started & discontinued.
    They are encouraging the Israelites, led by Zerubbabel & Joshua to get on with the rebuilding - ultimately for Messiah, according to Gabriel's prophecy in Dan. 9.

    Many of Zechariah's prophecies are specific for the last week of our Lord's life on earth & the response to the Apostolic preaching:
    Zec. 3:9, 6:12-13, 9:9, 11:13, 12:10, 13:1,6,7, ​

    So, how do we understand/interpret Rev. 14 in that context?

    The Israelites, in rejecting & crucifying their Messiah have broken the covenant. They looked on the pierced One & mocked him. Now they MUST look on him in repentance & be baptised in the opened fountain. Acts 2 records Peter's preaching & the response of 3000. Acts 3 confirms that Jesus fulfills the covenant, & warns his hearers:
    22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
    The Jews were becoming non-covenant people. Stephen, by the Holy Spirit, declares them 'uncircumcised.' They are the first nation to be destroyed.
    There is a new prophetic Jerusalem being built, a new living temple, a new people of God who according to Zechariah:
    13:9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.

    14:8 ... living waters.... must relate to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit according to Jesus' prophecy.

    The war against Jerusalem should be understood as war against the new Jerusalem, the redeemed people of God - Christians - and the Jewish leaders, now declared 'uncircumcised' are in the forefront of that war, determined to exterminate the followers of their Messiah.

    14:4,5 prophesy the flight of believers from the city. God opens the way, & guards them as they flee. And in v. 9 -
    And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
    There is no longer a rival city, rival temple, of godless people claiming to be chosen. Jesus is fully vindicated - our LORD Jesus Christ.
    Hallelujah!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,500
    Likes Received:
    2,880
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Lol, considering this demonstration of gymnastics with numbers I'd say YOU'RE the one that's desperate:

    "Irenaeus suffers from credibility issues and/or textual and scribal errors. He also wrote when he was very old and/or made major mistakes. For example, in the same work as the aforementioned quote, he states that Jesus was crucified when he was fifty years old. Thus, the principle source for the late dating of the Book of Revelation has some significant holes."

    Wrong. If Irenaeus, as the original source that all others have built upon has shone this sort of gross error, it most definitely negates the consensus of the ECF.

    This is called history also:

    The "Syriac version" of the New Testament, which dates back to the second century A.D., states that Revelation was written during the reign of Nero making a date of 64-68 A.D.

    The "Muratorian Fragment," dating back to 170-190 A.D., states that this work of John was written during the reign of Nero.

    The "Aramaic Peshitta" version has a remark that places its date prior to 70 A.D. The title page of Revelation states this work of John was written right after the reign of Nero.

    The "Monarchian Prologues," that dates back to 250-350 A.D., claims that Paul also wrote to these seven churches (possibly Romans which was a "circular letter," it went out to many addressees) following John's Book, thus, placing the book even before some of the other Pauline epistles.

    A quote, arguably attributed to Papius (130 AD), states that John the Apostle was martyred before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
    http://www.churchleadership.org/apps/articles/?articleid=57879&columnid=4624

    IOW, external evidence is unreliable. Internal evidence should be the source for dating the book of Revelation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What Irenaeus actually said was:
    What he said was a man was young until 30, mature until 40, and old at 50. As the Sanhedrin required a man to be at least 50 years of age to be considered a Master (teacher), all Irenaeus was saying was that Christ fulfilled that requirement, not by his age, but due to his extraordinary teaching ability.

    Irenaeus' point is that Jesus' humanity identifies with human beings of every age, he went on to say:

    Irenaeus is not the source. History is the source.
    Uh, the Muratorian Fragment dates to the 8th century AD. It has been speculated that it is a Latin translation of an older Greek manuscript of unknown origin.

    What you failed to mention is that it does not set any dates for John's exile, but he does consider the Apocalypse of Peter as canon, as well as the Book of Wisdom. And you consider that a trustworthy source?

    You do know that the Peshitta and the Syriac are the same thing, right? You can't offer the same thing twice, especially when it has already been disproved.

    Yeah. Now trot out the fake Papius. "Arguably attributed to Papius?" Really? By whom? Oh! Yes! Those who can't find any legitimate evidence to support their false notion. :rolleyes:
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Six Hour Warning

    This thread will be closed sometime after 3 AM Pacific.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,201
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hank, there is a difference between the Virgin Birth and the Zech. verse about the mountains splitting. For one, the Virgin Birth is taught and assumed in many other passages, most of them clearly straightforward, like in Galatians, Corinthians, and Romans.

    That Zech verse, by contrast, stands alone. The only ones close to them are like the ones I cited, ones I assume you would readily accept as figurative. And if you accept, say, Micah 1:3 as figurative why not this verse in Zechariah?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,201
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Are you willing to accept that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was prophesied to come? If so then you have a fulfillment that is in non-literal fashion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,201
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Jesus is with us always. The verse does not say He will cease to be with us after the end of the age. The focus is on His help and presence during that time. It says nothing about a future absence. This usage is common, even among us today. Do I even need to give an example?

    Not sure when the cut off for responding in this thread is. There is more I wanted to answer but other business calls.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,201
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    There are many OT verses that disagree with that being nonsense. Also, you keep saying words like "became". But I showed from Scripture the terms like "is about to fade away", "is passing away", etc. You overlook this to put undue emphasis on your contention.
    I suggest you read Josephus more carefully, or Ussher's Annals. The disaster to the Jews was not confined only to Jerusalem or Judea. It ranged all round the known world, wherever the Diaspora had reached. There were bloody reprisals in Cyrene, Antioch, Thessalonica, etc. Persecution of Christians from the Jews was put to an end.

    This is exactly what Paul had assured the Thessalonians when he promised both relief and retribution to those who troubled them.

    This is all I have time for.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This thread is closed.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...