Unlearning Tradition, Relearning Scripture

Category: Apologetics

  • Dating the Book of Revelation

    I am publishing verbatim explanation of ecclesia.org on the Dating of the Book of Revelation with a few notes from me.

    With the dating of Revelation, you establish the true historical prospective. If you date it early, you have its fulfillment in God’s judgment on Israel. If you date it late, you have every man’s idea. So dating plays a very important part in its interpretation.

    There are differences of opinion as to when this book was written. These can be summed up as the “late date” and the “early date” theories. First, we’ll cover the late date theory. Then we’ll examine the facts which support the early date theory

    The Late Date Theory

    Those who hold to the “late date,” have Revelation written during the time of Domitian Caesar (AD 95-96). This date is determined by the following statement by Irenaeus (AD 130 to AD 202), as quoted by Eusebius, the church historian, in AD 325: “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 not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”

    There are things about this statement that need to be noted. First, Irenaeus did not witness this. He referred to Polycarp (who supposedly knew the apostle John). Secondly, the key part — “it is not long since it was seen” — is ambiguous. According to Irenaeus recollection, Polycarp saw “it” sometime in AD 95-96, during the last part Domitian’s reign. Thirdly, we do not know if the “it” Polycarp was referring to was John, the visions he saw, the name of anti-christ, or the book itself and we do not know if he meant that the book was written at that time or not. Furthermore, it comes to us through three people separated by three centuries. Simply put, this is hear-say.

    Note (mine, not from the article): Both Irenaeus and Polycarp were not inspired writers, unlike those of the apostles in the New Testament and prophets in the Old Testament Scripture.

    This statement, even with all of this uncertainty, is the only evidence used to support the “late date” theory. It has been accepted by generations of people without really questioning it or examining it in light of the book itself. The late date has been passed on to us in the same way it was passed on to Eusebius, “…it [was] handed down by tradition…” Tradition is not the way to interpret Scripture.

    Another statement by Irenaeus seems to indicate the earlier date also. In his fifth book, he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John and the number of the name of the Antichrist: “As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and ancient copies.” Domitian’s reign was almost in his own day, but now he speaks of the Revelation being written in ancient copies. His statement at least gives some doubt as to the “vision” being seen in 95 AD which was almost in his day, and even suggests a time somewhat removed from his own day for him to consider the copies available to him as ancient.

    The Early Date Theory

    So, where can we turn to find evidence for the dating of Revelation? Within the book itself! It will be shown, from internal evidence, that Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

    John must prophesy again

    The first point to consider in favor of the early date is the fact that John was told that he “must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings” in Revelation 10:11. Now, if Revelation was written in AD 95-96, John would have been over 90 years old and it would have been very difficult for him to travel to the various “nations and…many kings”and 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 feasible.

    The Seven Churches In Asia

    Another point is that John wrote Revelation to a specific group of churches in Asia (Revelation 1:4). 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 (see Revelation 1:11). 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 only seven churches in Asia during the five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish war (66-70 AD).

    Of particular importance is the message to the church of Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13). In verse’s 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. 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. Therefore, Revelation must have been written before that time.

    The Temple was still standing

    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, “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. 

    However, this passage is very similar to Luke 21:20-24. Notice that Jesus told the disciples that they would see this event. They had asked Him about their temple (verse 5), and Jesus told them it would be destroyed before their generation passed away (verse 32). Notice again what Jesus said in verse 24, “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles.” This is the same thing Christ told John in Revelation 11:2. Therefore, since the disciples’ generation has long since passed away, Revelation must have been written before the nations trampled Jerusalem under foot in AD 70. 

    The Tribes of the Earth

    Most writers consider the theme of the book to be Revelation 1:7. This verse is very similar in context to Matthew 24:30

    Revelation 1:7, “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds [Greek word #5443] of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.”

    Matthew 24:30, “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes [Greek word #5443] of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”

    It may not be conclusive standing alone, but you can see that just based on the language, a case can be made that the two verses are speaking of the same event. Matthew 24:30 is a verse that speaks of the fall of Jerusalem. And that is just the case that I am making about the book of Revelation — it speaks of the fall of Jerusalem.

    Notice also the language of Revelation 1:7. It speaks of 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 2:23,36, Peter says that they crucified Jesus. He continues to state this in his following sermons (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30). Stephen, in Acts 7:51-52, calls them murderers. And Paul, in 1Corinthians 2:8, speaks of the Jews killing the Lord. And also in 1Thessalonians 2:14-15, he speaks of the Jews that killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets. So perhaps the book concerns itself with the Jews.

    This view is further reinforced with the phrase, “kindreds of the earth.” (“kindreds” is from the Greek word phule, which means “tribe”). This is a direct allusion to the Jewish tribal system. Now, we must 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. We can do that quite easily by looking at Zechariah 12:10-14.

    Zechariah 12:10-14, “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 that “every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth (or land) shall wail because of him” So, in essence, 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.” This also helps us identify the “earth” in Revelation 1:7. According to Zechariah, the “earth” is the land of Palestine, specifically, Jerusalem. Also, it is those tribes, i.e., the nation of Israel, who would “look upon Me whom they have pierced.” And because of that, “the mourning in Jerusalem” would be great. With all of this information, we can see that the “tribes of the earth” in Revelation 1:7 are the nation of Israel. The “earth” is Palestine. The land that would mourn is Jerusalem.

    So, the main purpose of Revelation would be to reveal Jesus to the nation of Israel. The place of this revealing would be Jerusalem. Lastly, this revealing would be to those who pierced Him, i.e., the Jews. This is not a general reference to the Jewish nation, but to Christ’s contemporary generation. That generation was destroyed in AD 70, by the Roman Legions. Therefore, the book of Revelation must have been written before that event.

    The Woman

    The next thing that we need to look at is “the woman” found in 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?” 

    Note: In my last blog “The Eternal Gospel”, I did mention a need to identify “Babylon the Great,” so here is the answer. Now continuing on my quotation from ecclesia.org.

    John gave 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, Let’s look at the term “Sodom.” John wrote that this is a “figurative” name. That means it does not tell us the actual name of the city, but it’s spiritual condition. Once more, in 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.”

    But what about “Egypt?” No where in the Bible is Jerusalem called Egypt. However, the first century generation was 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. The most recognizable passage that depicts this “new exodus” is found in I Corinthians 10:1-11. Paul wrote, “Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.” His contextual foundation for this statement was the Old Testament exodus from Egyptian bondage. He wrote that they had passed through the sea (verse 1). They ate manna and drank from the rock (verse’s 3-4). He then relays how they wandered in the wilderness (verse 5), became idolaters (verse 7), tried the Lord and were destroyed by serpents (verse 9). This shows us that, just like the “type and shadow” of the Old Testament and their deliverance from bondage, the New Testament saints were undergoing the same exodus. The only difference was that Paul’s generation was the reality to which the Old Testament example pointed. 

    Furthermore, in Luke 13:33-34, Jesus said, “[T]oday and tomorrow, and on the following [day], I must travel on, because it is not possible [for] a prophet to perish outside Jerusalem. Jerusalem! Jerusalem! The [one] killing the prophets, and stoning those having been sent to her.” Then, in Matthew 23:29-37, Jesus blasted the Jews of His day for killing the prophets and the apostles. He declared that they are the children of their fathers who also killed the prophets. Then in verse 32, Jesus said that they would complete the sin that their fathers started. But the most crucial evidence is found in verse 35, where Jesus said, “upon you (i.e., the Jews of His day) may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on the earth.” Then He said, “I tell you the truth, all of these things will happen to you people who are living now. Jerusalem, Jerusalem! You kill the prophets and stone to death those who are sent to you” (verse’s 36-37). In both passages, Jesus told the Jews of His day that they were guilty of “all the righteous blood shed upon the earth” (see also Acts 7:51-52). 

    Therefore, since both of these passages deal with the same crime and the same judgment, the “great city” of Revelation must be the Jerusalem of Christ’s generation. Which further proves that Revelation was been written before Jerusalem fell in AD 70.

    The Sixth King

    So far we have seen that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to first century Israel. As noted above, “the woman” John saw was first century Jerusalem. The “kings,” therefore, were the rulers of the known world of John’s day, i.e., the Roman Empire. The “kings” were not ruling at the same time, for the text stated “five fell,” meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then “one is,” meaning the “king” who was ruling at the time Revelation was written. Here in this verse, we have one of the clearest proofs for dating 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. 

    Here are the Roman Emperors: Julius Caesar; Augustus; Tiberius; Gaius (Caligula); Claudius; and the sixth emperor was…Nero. Nero reigned from 54 AD to June of 68 AD, with Galba to follow who reigns but six months. Here we find the terrible persecutors of the Christians (at whose hand Peter and Paul were martyred), whom God used to destroy the Jews. Nero was in power and he gave the command to Vespasian to destroy Jerusalem. This was the sixth king, proving beyond any doubt that Revelation was written before the Roman/Jewish war. 

    Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all comparison. St. John’s banishment to Patmos was itself a result of the great persecution of Nero. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. The apostle Peter, who was crucified upside down, was another victim of Nero.

    Point of clarification: On the last paragraph, there is another perspective that neither Paul nor Peter were martyred in Rome but in Jerusalem. Interestingly, John alone did not face death at the hands of his persecutors but was banished to Patmos. So what’s so special about John? But I’m not covering that here. Just pointing out I have a different take on the martyrdom of Paul and Peter.

    The Song of Moses

    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.”Question: if these martyrs are Christians living 2,000 years after Christ, why would these Christians be singing the Song of Moses?

    Does any Christian alive today know how to sing this song? Deuteronomy 32:1-43 is the song that John has reference to. 

    The Jews were to sing this song to remind themselves of what would befall them “in the latter days” (Deuteronomy 31:29). The song talks about “their end” – the Jews (verse 20), and details their destruction by a consuming “fire” (verse 22), “famine” (verse 24), “plague” (verse 24) and “bitter destruction” (verse 24). God calls them a “perverse generation” (verses 5 and 20), and says He will “render vengeance” upon them and “vindicate His people” (verse 41 and 36 respectively). Why would Christian martyrs of the 21st century be singing this song about the Romans, when the song had reference to the Jews living in the 1st century? It wouldn’t make much sense. 

    Aren’t these the same martyrs who cried out earlier, “How long, O Lord, wilt Thou refrain from judging and avenging our blood” (Revelation 6:10)? Who was it who had all the “blood of the righteous” martyrs imputed against them? Clearly, it was Christians who had kept their faith in Jesus, in spite of the intense persecution, and “had come off victorious from the Beast.” (See Matthew 23:35 and Luke 13:33)! This passage (Revelation 15:2-3) points very clearly to followers of Christ living in the first century. 

    In Revelation 16:10-11, it says that the people in the Beast’s kingdom “gnawed their tongues because of pain.” They had great sores on their bodies along with other plagues that had been poured out on them. We know from Josephus when the Jews literally gnawed their tongues for lack of food during the siege of AD 70! And, it is interesting that Josephus even calls the Jewish Zealot forces a “wild beast” in several places (Wars V.1.1; IV.7.4; IV.9.8; V.2.5)! This point is emphasized even more by the fact that the whole context of the Song of Moses is full of references to “beasts,” “serpents,” and “dragons” (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-32; Deuteronomy 32:24,33).

    Note: I’m actually surprised that the article did not appeal to Scripture concerning reference to the beast (Revelation 6:8-11). The apostle Paul, Peter and Jude have references to the “beasts”; see 1 Corinthians 15:32; 2 Peter 2:12 and Jude 1:10. Clues to these “beasts” were given by Peter and Jude. These false teachers were denying the Master. It should be no brainer to argue who was the Master in the context of Peter and Jude; of course, it’s the Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, if the false teachers denied the Master, then they must be former believers but have swayed away from the teachings of the Gospel. Consequently, the false teachers were no other than the Judaizers.

    Herein is the definition for the Judaizers:

    In Galatians 2:14 it means to “live like Jews” (RSV, neb, NASB, Phillips),”follow Jewish customs” (NIV), or “live by the Jewish law”(Barclay). The context for this reference is the episode in Antioch when Paul condemns Peter’s withdrawal from table fellowship with Gentile Christians. Peter’s actions a reviewed by Paul as a serious compromise of the gospel of salvation by grace through faith alone, lending support to the position that sought to impose Jewish ceremonial law on the Gentiles. Thus, Paul interprets Peter’s withdrawal in terms of its effect in compelling Gentile Christians to live like Jews.

    The term “Judaizer” has come to be used in theological parlance to describe the opponents of Paul and Barnabas at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) and those who sought to preach “another gospel” in the churches of Galatia ( Galatians 2:4  Galatians 2:12 ;  6:12 ; cf.  Php 3:2 ). In this sense, “Judaizers” refers to Jewish Christians who sought to induce Gentiles to observe Jewish religious customs: to “judaize.” It appears that these individuals agreed with much of the apostolic kerygma but sought to regulate the admission of Gentiles into the covenant people of God through circumcision and the keeping of the ceremonial law. Insisting that “Unless you are circumcised … you cannot be saved” ( Acts15:1 ), these “believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees” ( Acts 15:5 ) posed a serious threat to the gospel of grace and the universality of the Christian mission.

    Paul’s Galatian epistle portrays the Judaizers as having come from the Jerusalem church to his churches in Galatia, stressing the need for Gentiles to be circumcised and keep the law, both for full acceptance by God (legalism) and as the basis for Christian living (nomism[novmisma]).They understood keeping the law not only as the means by which the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant could be appropriated, but also as the regulative guide for Christian life within that covenant relationship. Although the Judaizers appear to be concerned with bringing the Galatian Christians to perfection through the observance of the law, Paul charges them with being motivated by a desire to avoid persecution ( Gal 6:12-13 ). Amidst the rising pressures of Jewish nationalism in Palestine during the mid-first century, and increased Zealot animosity against any Jew who had Gentile sympathies, it would appear that these Jewish Christians embarked on a judaizing mission among Paul’s converts in order to prevent Zealot persecution of the Palestinian church

    So thus far, the article argued from internal evidence; that is, from within the Scripture – particularly the writings of John in Revelation. It mentioned passages from Revelation 10:11 “John must prophesy again”, Revelation 1:4 and 3:7-13 “The Seven Churches in Asia”, Revelation 11:1-2 “The Temple was still standing”, Revelation 1:7 “The Tribes of the Earth”, Revelation 11:8, 17:5-6,18 and 18:20,21 “The Woman”, “the Sixth King” (the paragraph on the topic did not mention the text from Scripture, but it’s Revelation 17:9-10), and lastly, Revelation 15:2,3 “The Song of Moses”. Yet, those are not all.

    The Time Element

    Next consider the expectations of the author, Jesus Christ. He tells John to expect the fulfillment of the prophecy soon (Revelation 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11; 22:6,7,10,12,20).

    In Revelation 1:1,3, right off the bat, John informed his readers, the seven churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume “must shortly come to pass.” Please note, that 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 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.” Remember, as we saw above, this is the main episode of Revelation.

    In Revelation 22:6, John wrote 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. This again 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.

    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.” Once more, we have proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the first century. However, another element was added to this warning. The angel told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important? To answer that, 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, some would be rewarded with “everlasting life” and others with “everlasting contempt” (verse 2). But then, Daniel is told something very peculiar. In verse 4, Daniel was told, “shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end.” Please note that this verse says the “time of the end”, and not “the end of time”. There is a huge difference between the end of time and the time of the end. Now, we must ask “Whose time of the end?” Verse 1 told us that Daniel’s visions concerned 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). 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.” (verse 7). But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked again, “When?” The angel answered “Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.” Now that we have looked at this passage, how does it relate to Revelation 21?

    Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where a sealed book is referred to? Revelation, chapter 5. How Daniel relates to Revelation is that Revelation is the opening of Daniel’s sealed book!! Remember, Daniel’s visions were concerning the “time of the end” of Israel, and Revelation is about God’s judgment on Israel. They are one and the same. The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21, is that Daniel was told to seal his book concerning the end “for it pertains to many days in the future” (Dan.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. All things written had to be fulfilled by the time Jerusalem fell in AD 70 (see Luke 21:20-22). Therefore, since Revelation is the opening of Daniel, then it must have been fulfilled by the summer of AD 70.

    Our next time statement is found in Revelation 22:12. There, Jesus told John, “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 must let Scripture interpret Scripture, and turn to Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27.

    Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in Revelation 21. In Revelation 21, He said He was coming and “he shall reward every man according to his works.” These are the exact same “comings” with the exact same “rewards.” But, Jesus also said in these three verses, “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. He said that some of his listeners would not die until He came. But to whom is He coming? And what will be their reward? Jesus said that the “coming” would be to the first century generation of Israel (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32). Daniel told us that the “rewards” would be that some would be resurrected to “everlasting life” and others to “everlasting contempt”. Now, let’s put these two passages together. Jesus said He was coming and He was going to reward each according to his works, and that some of the disciples wouldn’t die until they saw this take place. Therefore, since all of the disciples are dead, Jesus must have returned and rewarded each according to his works. Furthermore, in Revelation, He said the same thing, therefore it must be fulfilled!

    If a person doesn’t believe the first three verses of Revelation (i.e., the near expectation of the events), neither will he believe 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 desires.

    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; but the gospels and epistles some years later. One of the oddest facts about the New Testament is that what on any showing would appear to be the single most datable and climactic event of the period — the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 — is never once mentioned as a passed fact.

    The inscription to the book of Revelation, in the Syrian version, first published by Deuteronomy Dieu, in 1627, and, afterwards in the London Polyglot, is the following, “The Revelation which God made to John the evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero Caesar.”

    Conclusion

    Note: There are other opinions on the second paragraph of the conclusion. The article placed it about AD 68 or 69, which might be too late. But certainly the dating of Revelation based on the internal evidence must be before AD 70, the Fall of Jerusalem. Also, concerning the article’s mention of the gospels and epistles being written some year later after Revelation, it is perhaps true for one or two of the letters but it’s debatable.

    On the above arguments, the late R.C. Sproul has a video on the same dicussion “The Book of Revelation: The Last Days according to Jesus”. Click on the link to watch. However, to be fair, herein is a video of a futurist, Dr. Peter Walker of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University who has admitted the internal evidence does suggest early dating, though based on his “hunch,” he went with late date dating. Read my blog on the Futurist View and the alternative, see “The Eschatological Divide”.

    Truth of the matter is, the futurist stand would fall leaving no support because the only claim they have rests on that ambitious statement by Irenaeus as mentioned early in the quotation, which was an external evidence – not from within the Scripture.

    As you can see, we shouldn’t take articles, blogs, preachings or teachings of the Scripture line, hook and sinker. Rather, we should read the articles and blogs, listen to sermons, and study vis-a-vis the Scripture. We should check each statement and reference if indeed it is according to the context of the Scripture, not simply quoting a verse or two and ignoring its background. Remember the words of the apostle Paul to Timothy (1 Timothy 4:16), saying:

    Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

    Note: Click on underlines and highlights for definitions or Bible references.

    Peter , in the words of Acts 3:6, declared, “I possess neither silver nor gold, but in the name of Jesus Christ, I offer you what I have.” Share freely, for you freely receive. Stay updated by heading to our about page and subscribe directly to receive notifications in your inbox. Blessing!

  • The Eternal Gospel

    The story of Jesus and Nicodemus may be found through John 3:1-21. Nicodemus was said to be a ruler of the Jews. No, Nicodemus was neither a king or any kind of officer over the Jews but a teacher of Israel (John 3:10). Nicodemus was a Pharisee, therefore an expert of the Law. He was one of the seventy members of the powerful religious governing body of Israel – the Sanhedrin.

    GotQuestions.Org explains:

    The term Sanhedrin is from a Greek word that means “assembly” or “council” and dates from the Hellenistic period, but the concept is one that goes back to the Bible. In the Torah, God commands Moses to “bring Me seventy of Israel’s elders who are known to you as leaders and officials among the people. Have them come to the Tent of Meeting, that they may stand there with you” – (Numbers 11:16).

    The Great Sanhedrin was the supreme court of ancient Israel, made up of 70 men and the high priest. In the Second Temple (Herod’s Temple) period, the Great Sanhedrin met in the Temple in Jerusalem … The Sanhedrin as a body claimed powers that lesser Jewish courts did not have. As such, they were the only ones who could try the king or extend the boundaries of the Temple and Jerusalem, and were the ones to whom all questions of Law were finally put.

    Nicodemus came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with Him. Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you unless one is born again he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (John 3:2-3)

    Without a doubt, the Jews were expecting the coming kingdom of God, which was according to the prophecy of Daniel 2:36-45.

    This was the dream. Now we will tell the king [Nebuchadnezzar] its interpretation. You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, and into whose hand He has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all—you are the head of gold. Another kingdom [Mede and Persia] inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze [Greece], which shall rule over all the earth. And there shall be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron, because iron breaks to pieces and shatters all things. And like iron that crushes, it shall break and crush all these. And as you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom, but some of the firmness of iron shall be in it, just as you saw iron mixed with the soft clay. And as the toes of the feet were partly iron and partly clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly brittle. As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they [iron and clay] will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay. And in the days of those kings [iron and clay] the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever, just as you saw that a stone was cut from a mountain by no human hand, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold. A great God has made known to the king what shall be after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation sure.

    The fourth kingdom was Rome; both Jewish history and the Bible tells us the four Gentile kingdoms starting with Babylon, the first foreign ruler over Israel. Next was Mede and Persia, then Greece and lastly Rome. Jesus Christ came at the time of the Roman rulers, so Nicodemus knew the time was up. He came to Jesus at night, perhaps out of fear of the Sanhedrin, to check on Jesus if indeed He was the promised Messiah of Israel coming to establish God’s kingdom. Hence, Nicodemus must have been dumbfounded hearing Jesus utter those words, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” (John 3:3).

    Note: It is interesting that GotQuestions.Org got everything covered and explained out clearly, yet it suggested that something is still in the future in spite of Rome fulfilling the last of four Gentile Kingdoms spoken by God through Daniel, then the fulfillment of God’s kingdom. Here is another topic that needs to be cleared out. Perhaps in another blog.

    Nicodemus, being a Pharisee, knew the Law. He knew fully well that Jews were born children of God through the sign of circumcision. See Genesis 17:9-14.

    And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall My covenant be in your flesh [circumcision] an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.”

    In other words, the Jews became God’s children, born to the flesh – that is, circumcision, the sign of God’s bilateral covenant made with Abraham. Genesis 17:14 said, “Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from His people; he has broken My covenant.”

    Now, if the Jewish sign of “circumcision” making them God’s children won’t be enough or qualify them to enter God’s kingdom, then it must be another birth Jesus was referring to. You have to remember that male Jews were “circumcised eight days after birth.” That was the condition of God’s covenant with Abraham so that seems to be the assumption of Nicodemus. So Nicodemus said to Jesus, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” (John 3:4)

    Then Jesus replied; see John 3:5-8.

    Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

    Jesus was referring, not to water baptism as commonly suggested today, nor was He talking about a second birth and circumcision; rather, God’s Unilateral Covenant to Israel. See Ezekiel 36:16-27.

    The word of the LORD came to me [Ezekiel]: “Son of man, when the house of Israel lived in their own land, they defiled it by their ways and their deeds. Their ways before Me were like the uncleanness of a woman in her menstrual impurity. So I poured out my wrath upon them for the blood that they had shed in the land, for the idols with which they had defiled it. I scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed through the countries. In accordance with their ways and their deeds I judged them. But when they came to the nations, wherever they came, they profaned my holy name, in that people said of them, ‘These are the people of the LORD, and yet they had to go out of his land.’ But I had concern for My holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the nations to which they came. “Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came. And I will vindicate the holiness of My great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Lord GOD, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes. I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey My rules.

    By “water”, God would make Israel clean, whereas “spirit” refers to both the Holy Spirit and the Words of Christ. See John 6:63.

    It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

    GotQuestions.Org explains:

    A covenant is an agreement between two parties. There are two basic types of covenants: conditional and unconditional. A conditional or bilateral covenant is an agreement that is binding on both parties for its fulfillment. Both parties agree to fulfill certain conditions. If either party fails to meet their responsibilities, the covenant is broken and neither party has to fulfill the expectations of the covenant. An unconditional or unilateral covenant is an agreement between two parties, but only one of the two parties has to do something. Nothing is required of the other party.

    Genesis 17:9-14 is a conditional or bilateral covenant. Consequently, before Moses led Israel out of Egypt, the bilateral covenant with Abraham was renewed; see Exodus 12:43-51.

    And the LORD said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the statute of the Passover: no foreigner shall eat of it, but every slave that is bought for money may eat of it after you have circumcised him. No foreigner or hired worker may eat of it. It shall be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house, and you shall not break any of its bones. All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.” All the people of Israel did just as the LORD commanded Moses and Aaron. And on that very day the LORD brought the people of Israel out of the land of Egypt by their hosts.

    Whereas, Genesis 17:1-7 was God’s unilateral covenant for Abraham, the father of God’s holy nation.

    When Abram was ninety-nine years old the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, that I may make My covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.” Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, “Behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you.

    Paul, in his letter to the Galatians, explained it clearly. See Galatians 4:21-31.

    Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written, “Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband.” Now you [Christians], brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.

    Next, see Galatians 3:25-29.

    But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian [the Mosaic Law], for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

    In conclusion, Jesus then was telling Nicodemus that entrance to God’s kingdom comes by obedience to His word (Spirit, John 6:63); that is, Nicodemus should no longer rely on the law but faith in Christ alone. God’s unconditional or unilateral covenant with Abraham was fulfilled in Christ Jesus, the Anointed One – Prophet, Priest and King eternal.

    Still, Nicodemus said to Jesus, “How can these things be?” (John 3:9)

    Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things? Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except He who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because He has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.” (John 3:10-21)

    To be born again then is to believe in God’s only Son, Jesus Christ, and by believing, we may have eternal life. But to those who rejected Jesus, God’s judgment remains in them.

    Finally, see 1 Peter 1:22-25

    Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; for “All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever.” And this word is the good news that was preached to you.

    Christ Jesus and His Gospel are one. Salvation then may be found by believing in the Eternal Gospel of the Bible.

    Then I saw another angel flying directly overhead, with an eternal gospel to proclaim to those who dwell on earth, to every nation and tribe and language and people. And he said with a loud voice, “Fear God and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come, and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water.” Another angel, a second, followed, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who made all nations drink the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality.” (Revelation 14:6-8)

    If the Eternal Gospel has been fulfilled, what is left then that is yet to come?

    But for the sake of argument, to know the time of its fulfillment, we need to identify who is “Babylon the Great”. But that would be for another time.

    Blessings!

    If you want to follow our journey of unlearning tradition and relearning Scripture, you can stay updated by heading to our about page and subscribe directly to receive notifications in your inbox.

  • The Eschatological Divide

    The Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible defined “eschatology” as

    The department of theology which is concerned with the “last things,” that is, with the state of individuals after death, and with the course of human history when the present order of things has been brought to a close. It includes such matters as the consummation of the age, the day of judgment, the second coming of Christ, the resurrection, the millennium and the fixing of the conditions of eternity.

    Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, StudyLight.org

    The Book of Revelation has been the most neglected writings in the New Testament. It is rarely preached or taught from the pulpit due to the perception that it can cause division. Whenever it has been taught to Christians, controversies—often leading to arguments—ensue. As a result, many Christian congregations avoid the book, not by the members but at the insistence of their leaders. However, the relevance of Revelation cannot be ignored. Like the final words of a dying man, it conveys the last messages of Jesus Christ to the Old Covenant people of God.

    The underlined phrase from Hastings sheds light on the current confusion surrounding eschatology. However, if we adjust this idea by replacing some words, we may be able to explore the unity of Scripture without contradictions. Please compare the statement below with Hastings’ original.

    “Eschatology concerns the ‘last things,” with the state of individuals after death, and with the course of human history when the Old Covenant of God has been brought to a close.”

    I simply change the phrase “the Old Covenant of God” to “the present order of things.” Oops! That statement could already spark controversy, though it might be nothing for ordinary readers.

    Currently, biblical scholars recognize at least four different perspectives on the Book of Revelation and prophetic literature. None of these views is considered heretical or false teaching, as each is supported by passages from Scripture. The issue lies not with the Scripture itself, but with its interpretation. All four proponents of eschatology affirm the absolute authority and inerrancy of the 66 books of the Bible. Therefore, the problem ultimately stems from human error, a point on which all sides can agree.

    Despite Christianity’s two-millennia-long history, many arguments and debates remain unresolved. This is why none of the four perspectives of eschatology are classified as heresy or false teaching; for now, they are simply considered “debatable.”

    The four views of eschatology, namely the Futurist view, the Preterist view, the Historical view, and the Idealist view.

    Christian Theology by Millard J. Erickson was a required reading for us during my time at seminary. It spanned four semesters in our Systematic Theology class. I have a particular interest in this subject, especially because it addresses the topic of death, which I feel compelled to explore in search of the truth about what happens after we die. If you’ve read all my blogs, you may know that I came to faith following the tragic death of my only son. I shared my journey in a blog post titled “Regarding Wilmer.”

    Here is an excerpt from Christian Theology, by Willard J. Erickson:

    At this point it will be helpful to note a system which is used to classify the various interpretations of prophetic or apocalyptic material in Scripture. While it is often most utilized as a means of classifying interpretations of the Book of Revelation or, more generally, all such prophetic literature, the system can also be applied to distinguish views of eschatology:

    1. The futuristic view holds that most of the events described are in the future. They will come to fulfillment at the close of the age, many of them probably clustered together.

    2. The preterist view holds that the events described were taking place at the time of the writer, Since they were current for the writer, they are now in the past.

    3. The historical view holds that the events described were in the future at the time of writing, but refer to matters destined to take place throughout the history of the church. Instead of looking solely to the future for their occurrence, we should also search for them within the pages of history and consider whether some of them may be coming to pass right now.

    4. The symbolic or idealist view holds that the events described are not to be thought of in a time sequence at all. They refer to truths which are timeless in nature, not to singular historical occurrences.

    Christian Theology, Unabridged, one-volume edition p.1154, by Millard J. Erickson

    I understand that the definition provided can be difficult to grasp, even for those who deeply appreciate Scripture. This complexity often arises from the perceived vagueness of some biblical passages. That’s why attending seminary can be beneficial for many. Even after I left the organized religious system and began my ministry independently, I encouraged someone to enroll in the same seminary, and he did. He is now serving in a local congregation.

    I would like to express my gratitude for my professors during my time at the seminary. They provided me with solid training and equipped me well for studying the Bible. However, it’s important to acknowledge that, much like learning to drive a car, while skills can be taught and acquired, true excellence comes with practice and real-world experience. I want to clarify that I am not claiming to have achieved excellence, but rather that I feel eligible to engage in exegesis (the critical explanation or interpretation of a biblical text) and to apply hermeneutics (the knowledge required for interpreting the Bible).

    The futurist view is likely the most familiar perspective for many people. Scripture contains revelations and prophecies that speak of the future; to them only a portion of these prophecies has been fulfilled, while the rest are still pending. Since the 1970s, numerous novels and films have been created about the anticipated Second Coming of Christ, contributing to its popularity. Additionally, the Scofield Reference Bible from the early 1900s has had a significant impact on Christians for over a century.

    In this context, there’s a video teaching by Bruce Gore that offers a comprehensive analysis of the dominant futurist view and explores its questionable origins. The futurist perspective comes in various forms and continues to evolve.

    Herewith also is a shorter video from Ben Witherington III, a professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. However, I encourage you to invest the time to watch Bruce Gore’s more detailed video, as it is well worth it.

    Many pastors today, being futurists, often claim that Jesus Christ is coming soon. However, many may not realize that according to the dispensational futurist view, the kingdom of heaven has yet to arrive. In contrast, Jesus Christ clearly stated the presence of God’s kingdom, as seen in Matthew 12:28.

    But if it is by the Spirit of God that I [Jesus Christ] cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

    Studying the Bible is essential. If you clicked on the link for the Scofield Reference Bible, you’ll find that GotQuestions.org offers positive remarks about it. However, Bruce Gore and Ben Witherington III have differing opinions. Their disagreement isn’t about the Bible itself, but rather about its notes and commentary.

    It has been two millennia since the Book of Revelation was written, where Jesus promised He is coming soon, not just once, but repeatedly, as stated in Revelation 1:1-3.

    The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.

    “I am coming soon. Hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown.” (Revelation 3:11)

    “And behold, I am coming soon. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.” (Revelation 22:7)

    “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing My recompense with Me, to repay each one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (Revelation 22:12-13)

    “He who testifies to these things says, ‘Surely I am coming soon.’ Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” (Revelation 22:20)

    Proponents of futurism, particularly the dispensationalist view commonly associated with contemporary Christianity, are known for their constant vigilance in searching for signs that could indicate the impending arrival of the Second Coming. In light of our current situation, the COVID-19 pandemic has sparked both excitement and fear, with many believing that Jesus Christ’s return is near. However, we can look back to the early 1900s when the “Spanish Flu” pandemic likely generated similar expectations. If that had been the case, Christians would have been proclaiming that Jesus was coming soon for a century now. I find it difficult to consider a hundred years as “soon.” Unfortunately, the futurist perspective may have become akin to the fable of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf.”

    Here is a well-reasoned and valuable presentation by Bruce Gore on the historical context of the Book of Revelation. To view it, click on the highlight. I won’t delve deeper into this perspective, but it’s worth noting that it is also futurist, clearly overshadowed by futurist interpretations.

    Below is an excerpt from GotQuestion.Org on the idealist view. Click the link to read.

    In the idealist interpretation, the symbols in Revelation are not normally thought to refer to specific individuals and historic events but to typical individuals and events. For instance, every generation will have an “antichrist” and a “mark of the beast”—any number of individuals, world leaders, or empires who exalt themselves against God are the “antichrist,” and those who follow those leaders receive his “mark.” Some part of the church is always going through tribulation, and there will be martyrs in every generation. The idealist interprets Revelation as the ongoing struggle between God and His people and Satan and those who follow him.

    The idealist perspective’s refusal to recognize a singular fulfillment of biblical prophecies, viewing them instead as repeated events throughout human history, may unintentionally align closely with the futurist approach. However, the issue arises from the implication that there would be no actual fulfillment of these prophecies, even if this conclusion has not been explicitly stated.

    The Preterist view stands apart from the other three interpretations, but that shouldn’t lead us to dismiss it outright. I admit that I was once guilty of this during my seminary days. I recall a moment when my professor briefly introduced the idea that the second coming might have already been fulfilled. Not a single student in the class considered this possibility or took the initiative to reexamine the Scriptures; it was dismissed without thought. Perhaps that explains why the professor didn’t delve deeper into the topic.

    The professor may find himself in trouble later for exploring and teaching certain ideas, given the strong influence of futurism among local congregations across the country. If you’re familiar with Martin Luther’s struggles during the Reformation in the 16th century, you can understand the potential challenges he might face if he were to delve deeper into the Preterist view. Herewith is a short video explaining the Reformation.

    Looking back, despite its shortcomings, the Reformation opened the floodgate for believers to freely study and rediscover the original teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles.

    “And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers”

    ESV Bible, Acts 2:42

    Yet, like any movement, left in the hands of man, combining Scripture and human ideas, the Reformation movement somehow went south. To read more about my perspective on the Reformation, click on this link “Reformation Went Poof!“

    Again quoting Christian Theology by Millard J. Erickson, here is the written discourse of Charles Harold Dodd (7 April 1884 – 21 September 1973). Though not an adherent of the Preterist view per se, he is actually considered a proponent of Realized Eschatology.

    In formatting his eschatology, Dodd pays particular attention to the biblical references to the day of the Lord. He notes that whereas in the Old Testament the day of the Lord is viewed as a future matter, in the New Testament it is depicted as a present occurrence

    Christian Theology, Unabridged, one-volume edition, p.1159, by Millard J. Erickson

    “Present occurrence” means, at the time of its writing – first-generation Christianity. Herein lies the strong argument for a Preterist view of the Bible. It has been more than a decade since I became a Christian. As you can read from my blog “Regarding Wilmer,” it was due to the death of my only son that I became a Christian. The reality of death came staring at me. All my previous beliefs failed to answer a simple question about human existence – what happens after death? To make the long story short, my earnest desire to find the answer to life’s most practical question and in the course of studying and leading Bible studies, I was led back to that brief moment in the seminary when we were asked if we would consider the possibility that Jesus had returned.

    It was a struggle. I often found myself wanting to ignore clear and obvious biblical passages that indicated Jesus had indeed returned, all to avoid rejection, ridicule, and persecution. However, I eventually surrendered to the teachings of Scripture. My quest to deepen my understanding of the Bible has been rewarding. I was able to reconcile the seemingly loose ends of biblical teachings, particularly regarding the unity of Scripture’s eschatology on the topics of death and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

    A few years ago, my pastor friend, who also believes that Jesus has returned, and I had a friendly discussion with another pastor friend who is a futurist. We posed an important question: “Where do Christians go after death?” His response was, “There are actually three possibilities to that question.” He couldn’t confidently say, “A Christian goes straight to heaven,” even though we often hear that in funeral services. Is this idea just a cliché meant to comfort grieving families? Surely that was not the intention. The issue arises from conflicting passages that oppose each other, especially when we consider the eschatology surrounding death alongside the future return of Jesus Christ.

    To support my point, I want to highlight that my futurist pastor friend is not alone in facing this dilemma. While some may confidently assert that Christians immediately go to heaven upon death, I challenge anyone making that claim—who also believes that Jesus has yet to return—to provide biblical passages that back it up. The reality is more nuanced. I’m quoting an excerpt from Thomas G. Long, a professor at Candler School of Theology, who addressed the question: “Do they go directly to heaven or hell, or to a holding place until Christ returns for the final judgment?”

    “There are two images in the New Testament about what happens. First, the Resurrection Day, when the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised up incorruptible. If you only had that image, what we would imagine is that when people die, they lie in some intermediate state awaiting the great Resurrection Day.

    “The other image, however, is that death contains no victory over us at all. As soon as we die, we are with God. We get this in the Book of Revelation where John looks up and already the saints who have died are praising God around the throne. In terms of linear time, we can’t work this out. We’ve got two competing images: You either wait until the general resurrection or you go immediately to be with God.

    “But the imposition of linear time on what is an eternal idea is what creates the contradiction. I don’t try to make a theologian out of Einstein, but he did show us that events that happen in sequence can also be events that happen simultaneously. If Einstein can imagine that in terms of physics, theologians can imagine it also in terms of the intrusion of eternity into linear time – that we are both immediately raised and raised together.”

    With such an answer, it seems to me that there is no assurance that a Christian can immediately enter heaven after death. Don’t you think that poses a serious dilemma? If the Bible relies on science to explain its teachings, it raises significant doubts about the security of salvation. This is the impact of what could be called an “eschatological divide.” The doctrine of salvation is closely tied to the eschatology surrounding Christ’s return. Without a comprehensive understanding of this return, we may feel as if we’re left in a precarious situation. Clearly, the futurist perspective leaves us wanting for answers.

    Fellow pastors, we can’t be pulling people’s legs just to comfort them. The Bible, in Ephesians 4:11-14, said:

    And He [Jesus Christ] gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds [pastors] and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.

    Since we all affirm in unity that Scripture is true and authoritative in matters of life and death—without error—shouldn’t we approach justice with the Words of Christ? We ought to explain our declarations with firm conviction, supported by clear and valid Scriptural passages. After all, by faithfully fulfilling our duty to Christ Jesus our Lord, we will be rewarded accordingly with the unfading crown of glory.

    “Shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.“

    1 Peter 5:2-4, ESV

    It is a misconception to believe that this passage is no longer relevant if Christ has returned. Jesus Christ is the King Eternal, and His reign has no end. Therefore, pastors must continue to seek the approval of Christ Jesus, the Chief Shepherd of God’s flock.

    I understand that many questions need to be asked and answered. However, I also recognize that it can be challenging to absorb everything at once. This is the goal of this blog: to unlearn traditional beliefs and relearn the teachings of Scripture. As the saying goes, “Patience is a virtue.” With time and dedication to reading and studying the Bible, you too will come to see the light.

    In conclusion, all of my citations come from the futurist perspective, with the exception of Bruce Gore, who is a partial Preterist. If you find futurism lacking in substance, I recommend starting with a couple of videos: one by Bruce Gore and another by Kenneth Gentry, who is also a partial Preterist, discussing the dating of Revelation.

    Disclaimer: We do not fully endorse all the sites or sources we have cited; our endorsement is limited to the ones we share here. Additionally, we cannot claim to have watched or listened to all the videos or teachings that those sites have posted. Over time, you will learn to discern which sources to embrace or disregard.

    Blessings!

    If you want to follow our journey of unlearning tradition and relearning Scripture, you can stay updated by heading to our about page and subscribe directly to receive notifications in your inbox.