Your Hero Nero

[robycop3]

"Kings of the earth" are actual kings, not high priests, of which there was only one at a time."Seat of Satan" was in Rome & still is. (The Vatican) It's also the 2nd Babylon.The earth & sea are just THAT.And in Matt. 10:23, Jesus meant He would meet the disciples later in jerusalem, which He did.Rev. 2:27 & 19:15 make it plain JESUS is to rule THE NATIONS with a rod of iron, that is, FIRMLY.And all green grass was NEVER burned up in man's history. And "the sea" means the Mediterranean, which has never had all its life die durung man's history.
  Nice try, but it's all guesswork & imagination on your part. You need to learn to believe Scripture LITERALLY AS POSSIBLE. You tell ME to let Scripture define itself, then YOU add a silly private interp full of nonsense.

  Jesus has NOT yet returned; He's only been here physically as a man the ONE TIME, & when He returns He will be in His full power & glory.
Sorry, but preterism remains false, man-made, & phony as a Ford Corvette.

[Larry H]

"Kings of the earth" are actual kings, not high priests, of which there was only one at a time."Seat of Satan" was in Rome & still is. (The Vatican) It's also the 2nd Babylon.The earth & sea are just THAT.And in Matt. 10:23, Jesus meant He would meet the disciples later in jerusalem, which He did.Rev. 2:27 & 19:15 make it plain JESUS is to rule THE NATIONS with a rod of iron, that is, FIRMLY.And all green grass was NEVER burned up in man's history. And "the sea" means the Mediterranean, which has never had all its life die durung man's history.
  Nice try, but it's all guesswork & imagination on your part. You need to learn to believe Scripture LITERALLY AS POSSIBLE. You tell ME to let Scripture define itself, then YOU add a silly private interp full of nonsense.

  Jesus has NOT yet returned; He's only been here physically as a man the ONE TIME, & when He returns He will be in His full power & glory.
Sorry, but preterism remains false, man-made, & phony as a Ford Corvette.

Fair enough Roboycop3  lets run with the Idea.

You said "And in Matt. 10:23, Jesus meant He would meet the disciples later in jerusalem, which He did"

To your understanding the scripture is saying according to your premise, which no Scholar, preterist or none preterist, or commentator agrees with. That is the ones  I looked at. Perhaps you can find someone to agree with you?

In other words this is the way you see the scripture.

"You will not have finished your preaching in the cities of Israel until I come, that is, until I catch up with you."In a word: "Hold on, men, I'm coming"

The question is who meets who where in Jerusalem

"The reference in Luke 10:1 does not indicate that he eventually "overtook" them [the seventy ]; rather, they "returned" to him (10:17)" Not the other way around.

Luke 10:1 The Seventy Sent Out After these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two by two before His face into every city and place where He Himself was about to go.

Luke 10:17 The Seventy Return with Joy Then THE SEVENTY RETURNED with joy, saying, "Lord, even the demons are subject to us in Your name."

I believer you got some homework to do to figure this out.

[robycop3]

  The fact that Jesus has NOT yet returned is pretty obvious. The earth is the same as it was in 65 AD, 70 AD, & 75 AD. And, of course, the apostles are all deceased. So, obviously, Jesus' words meant something else besides His still-future return. No rocket science needed.

[Larry H]

  The fact that Jesus has NOT yet returned is pretty obvious.

The earth is the same as it was in 65 AD, 70 AD, & 75 AD. And, of course, the apostles are all deceased. So, obviously, Jesus' words meant something else besides His still-future return. No rocket science needed.

You did the wrong homework Robycop3, remember the disciple got to Jerusalem after, NOT BEFORE, Jesus got there. So how could the Son of Man come Matthew 10:23 if  he was already in Jerusalem.

Luke 10:1 The Seventy Sent Out After these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two by two before His face into every city and place where He Himself was about to go.

Luke 10:17 The Seventy Return with Joy Then THE SEVENTY RETURNED with joy, saying, "Lord, even the demons are subject to us in Your name."

Sorry Robycop3 the world will never be the same following the first century. YOU WOULD HAVE NOBODY TO BASH in this forum. Instead of providing some sound doctrine to back up your views. 

You got some homework to provide evidence preterism is nothing more than a scriptural phononomen, then people will listen. And you will not be alone on a mission.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Hi Jarrod,

How about that...learned a new word today from you.  I guess an example of an "apocryphon" would be something like the Book of Nicodemus perhaps?

I'm not familiar with that book.  The best example I can give you is a chapter from the Book of Enoch.  Hopefully you don't mind a long quotation?

1. And after this I saw another dream, and I will show the whole dream to thee, my son. 2. And Enoch lifted up (his voice) and spake to his son Methuselah: 'To thee, my son, will I speak: hear my words--incline thine ear to the dream-vision of thy father. 3. Before I took thy mother Edna, I saw in a vision on my bed, and behold a bull came forth from the earth, and that bull was white; and after it came forth a heifer, and along with this (latter) came forth two bulls, one of them black and the other red. 4. And that black bull gored the red one and pursued him over the earth, and thereupon I could no longer see that red bull. 5. But that black bull grew and that heifer went with him, and I saw that many oxen proceeded from him which resembled and followed him. 6. And that cow, that first one, went from the presence of that first bull in order to seek that red one, but found him not, and lamented with a great lamentation over him and sought him. 7. And I looked till that first bull came to her and quieted her, and from that time onward she cried no more. 8. And after that she bore another white bull, and after him she bore many bulls and black cows. (1Enoch 85)

This is simply an apocryphal re-telling of the story of Cain and Abel.  The first bull and cow are Adam and Eve, the black bull is Cain, the red bull is Abel, and the second white bull is Seth.  If you doubt this interpretation, go read the subsequent chapter or two and you will see that the entire rough history of Israel is given in this way.

The important features here are that (a) the entire thing is prefaced by saying that it is a dream or vision, and (b) all the people (or groups of people) have been re-named as something else. It is typical to re-name the characters as animals.

This is basically a coded message.  In this way you could convey unflattering information concerning powerful enemies (corrupt priests, Roman emperors, etc) without risking crucifixion or beheading if your letter was intercepted and read by the wrong people.  To the wrong people, this is a silly story about cattle.  Jesus' parables in the gospels are very similar to this, and may be based on it, at least in form.

The difference between an apocryphon such as the one quoted, and an apocalypse, is that an apocalypse explains it.  Either the original author or the intended recipient has gone back over the work and told us what is symbolized, either in part or in full.

There are quite a few apocalypses in the early church of this sort.  Very few apocryphons remain that were not revealed at some point.

Hopefully, you can see why I would think that Revelation falls into this category.  It contains an opening that explains this as a dream/vision, it contains clear symbols (i.e. the candlesticks of chapter 1) which are then explained to the reader.

Appreciate your stepping in here for a comment, since previous posts you have made lead me to think you are in agreement with Rev. 17's "kings of the earth" being the high priests of the nation of Israel.  (Unless you have recently changed your mind, of course.)

My position is probably confusing to everybody.  I'll attempt to explain, but if this doesn't make any sense to you, then oh well...

I suspect that the original apocryphon on which Revelation is based was penned not only before 70AD, but substantially before (no later than the 50's, but possibly decades earlier).  That being said, the explanations which have been added I believe to be well afterwards (perhaps around 90AD - the traditional dating of the book).  And the whole thing is clearly an extension of the apocryphon present in the 2nd half of the book of Daniel.

The original author of the apocryphon was primarily concerned with the affairs in pre-70AD Israel.  The explainer who came later was aware of all these events, but also had an eye to his own future.  And Daniel refers first to the events surrounding the war between the Macabbees and the Seleucid Empire. 

Now, the way Jewish prophecy works is that if God says so, it doesn't just come true once and you're done with the prophecy.  The Word of God that goes out from Him doesn't predict the future so much as it shapes it.  By re-speaking the Word of God, it can be fulfilled, and poured back out, and re-filled many times.  Thus, it is no great thing for the author of revelation to seize parts of Daniel and claim them as a pattern for the events in his own day (even though they were fulfilled in Daniel's immediate future; Daniel is not a false prophet).  Neither is it any great thing for the latter intepreter to take the original author's predictions, and re-apply what had already happened to the future.

Now as anti-intuitive as that may be to our way of looking at history... the history actually bears it out, at least in this case.  The Jewish revolt (and destruction) in 70AD is very similar to the later Jewish revolt (and destruction) in 135AD.

Multiple authors for Revelation?  I can hardly see how that's possible, since there are the two duplicating "bookends" of Rev. 1:1-3 and Rev. 22:6-10 that credit John with being the one who heard and saw "ALL things" sandwiched in between Rev. chapter 1-22.

While an apocalypse explains an apocryphon, it does not stand beside it as a separate work.  The explanations are given inline.  In the case of Revelation, a figure has been added specifically for the purpose of explaining all the symbols, and he walks John through them all, answering his questions as he goes.

For authorship of Revelation, I'm an adherent of the view that John was actually named John Eleazar, or we would know him better by his given name of Lazarus, the beloved disciple.  Lazarus adopted several aliases in order to avoid undue attention by the Sanhedrin who wanted him dead.  I believe one example of an alias was the nickname of Barnabas, "the son of consolation".   Christ had given Lazarus/ John Eleazar the charge of being Mary's "son" at the crucifixion who would console and protect her after His death , burial, resurrection, and final ascension. 

In that case, this would mean that a resurrected man (Lazarus) wrote Revelation.  It would explain why Rev. 22:9 has the interpreting "angel" (a human messenger, not a celestial one) calling himself a "fellow-servant" with John, one of John's brethren, the prophets, and one of the group of the resurrected "fellowservants", and "brethren" named in Rev. 6:9-11.  Both John and the "angel" kept the sayings of the book, which resurrected saints would be capable of doing. 

If you're interested, the comments after a post at the following link discuss how Barnabas could be another alias for John  / Lazarus / the rich young ruler:

https://smoodock45.wordpress.com/2018/01/30/identifying-the-rich-young-ruler/

I've heard a version of the John/Lazarus theory, and it seems to be fairly sound.  What I read didn't include the idea that this was the person who wrote the Revelation, and basically confined itself to the gospel of John.

As for me, I'm of the opinion that the author of the original apocryphon may have been John... the Baptist.  Yes, the one who was be-headed.  The latter explainer would seem to be John the Elder, who was also the author of 2nd/3rd John, and is not the same person as the apostle John.

So many Johns!!!

Jarrod

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

The earth is the same as it was in 65 AD, 70 AD, & 75 AD.

No it isn't.

[robycop3]

 YES, IT is. The only thing different is more people, & man-made inventions & changes. There are still the same continents & seas.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

YES, IT is. The only thing different is more people, & man-made inventions & changes. There are still the same continents & seas.

So, the only things that changed are the changes?  Got it.

[3 Resurrections]

Hi Jarrod,  Your wry sense of humor just kills me...maybe one day I'll have your gift of condensing thoughts into a compact, short passage that gets to the heart of the point using few words to do the job.  But for the time being, I've not got the skill.

Yes, in response to your comment, the multiplicity of characters named "John" is certainly a brain twister for us (John the Baptist, John the elder mentioned by Papias, John Eleazar / the "beloved disciple" Lazarus, John the son of Zebedee).  Social Security numbers for identification back then would have been helpful!

John the Baptist as Revelation's author?  I can see why that might be considered a possibility.  After all, Jesus' 12 disciples in  Matt. 10:8 were sent out and told to "heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, RAISE THE DEAD...". What better candidate for the 12 disciples to select for raising from the dead than the faithful, recently-martyred John the Baptist? 

It is quite likely that John the Baptist WAS chosen for resurrection by the disciples, and quite possibly Elijah and Moses also, since we read of those last two on the Mount of Transfiguration being seen by the disciples.  How would they have known who those two men were standing with Jesus, unless they had already participated in raising them from from the dead?  Just a thought.  After all, there is the record in Luke 9:7-8 that a rumor had been spreading that John the Baptist, Elijah, and one of the ancient prophets had been raised from the dead at that time.  The rumor could have actually been based in fact.

A resurrected John the Baptist as Revelation's author would align with Tertullian's and Jerome's record of John the author of Revelation surviving being boiled in oil at Nero's orders (since resurrected people can't possibly die again, even in a deep-fat fryer).

But on my part, I believe that the "beloved disciple" (Lazarus) would have been a better fit for Revelation's authorship, simply because of Christ's question to Peter in John 21:22.  "If I will that he" (the beloved disciple) "TARRY TILL I COME, what is that to thee?...".  I believe Lazarus /John Eleazar did indeed remain on earth or "tarry" until Jesus came in AD 70, writing the apocalypse of Revelation and the 3 epistles of John, and dictating the gospel of John.  All those Johannine works I believe to be part of the fulfillment of the angel's prediction to John in Rev. 10:11.  "...Thou must prophesy AGAIN before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings." 

The common thread that unites the 3 epistles, the gospel of John, and Revelation together is the UNQUESTIONED TRUTHFULNESS of their author (since resurrected people can't possibly lie).  This record of unimpeachable truth is found in III John verse 12, John 21:24, and the angel's testimony of his "fellowservant", the prophet John's faithful keeping of the book in Rev. 22:9.  This repeated record of impeccable truthfulness would seem to indicate that all these books shared a common authorship.

Another reason why I don't think Revelation was subjected to multiple authors contributing to the finished book's content (that "inline" explanation of the mysteries, written by other contributing authors that you spoke of), is that Revelation closes with TWO strong commands in Rev. 22:18-19 for *NO ONE* TO ADD or to TAKE AWAY FROM THE WORDS OF THE BOOK OF THIS PROPHECY.  These commands would seem to confirm, as you have said, that such additions or editing of prophetic writings may have been a frequent practice (such as the Jews' oral traditions and explanatory writings added to Moses' laws). 

But in the case of John's Revelation, such additions were STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  This book as written was not to be tampered with or altered in any way, shape, or form.  The punishment for those who did so would be to receive the plagues contained in the book.  This would seem to counter the idea that Revelation had later insertions by other authors explaining its mysteries (as you have already mentioned; such insertions being dated perhaps to the AD 90s).

Moreover, as you know, there are a number of references within the text of Revelation that have particular application to the exact TIMING of the authorship.  I speak of all the terms of imminence such as things that were "ABOUT TO" happen, things "AT HAND", or that would happen "QUICKLY" or "SHORTLY", and declarations of EXISTING REALITIES, such as the currently-living "King" or former high priest at that time, Theophilus.  All these terms related to time would have no relevance at all if subsequent authors were allowed to expand on Revelation's prophecies.  It was intended to be presented as an intact, stand-alone prophetic work by John as the sole author, according to Jesus' command passed to John through the interpreting "angel". 

You spoke of multiple repetitions of Revelation's prophecies (such as the AD 135 Jewish revolt under Bar Kochba).  This seeming repetition of Jerusalem's destruction would be as irrelevant as Saladin's 1187 siege of Jerusalem, since the former AD 70 era's Great Tribulation disasters that Revelation was predicting were NOT EVER to be replicated, either BEFORE or AFTER AD 70 (Daniel 12:1 and Matt. 24:21).  The only way that unprecedented, unsurpassed Great Tribulation could be true was due to the demonic realm being allowed full freedom for a time to torment that "wicked generation" of unbelieving Jews (as Jesus promised in Matt. 12:43-45).  After the demonic realm's "short time" and "little season" was over in AD 70, they were utterly destroyed from existence - never again to be around to torment following generations. 

I agree with you that certain prophecies can be and were repeated throughout history.  Some examples would be:
"a virgin shall conceive" (Isaiah's prophetess wife conceiving baby Immanuel, and Mary
conceiving Jesus);
"out of Egypt have I called my son" (the Jewish Exodus from Egypt, and infant Jesus leaving Egypt for Nazareth);
"They shall look on me whom they have pierced" (at Christ's AD 33 crucifixion, and again during an AD 70 viewing of a returning Christ);
The "Second Death" of Jerusalem in the AD70 era being a duplicate of her first death under the 586 BC Babylonian invasion.

But other prophecies are impossible to be duplicated.  Those such as:
the passing of the Old Covenant - never to be restored;
the permanent destruction of the demonic realm in the AD 70 era;
the "shattering of the holy people", as Daniel 12:7 predicted, so that the "Israel of God" mystery could be revealed;
the mighty angel casting the great city Babylon (Jerusalem) like a millstone into sea, so that it " shall be found no more at all" (Rev. 18:21);
the establishment, once for all, of today's city New Jerusalem, where God would forever dwell with His people.

Sorry Jarrod...another one of my trademark long comments...

Actually, I'm just avoiding crawling into my overheated attic to purge it's hoarded contents.  Writing is much more enjoyable...

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

John the Baptist as Revelation's author?  I can see why that might be considered a possibility.  After all, Jesus' 12 disciples in  Matt. 10:8 were sent out and told to "heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, RAISE THE DEAD...". What better candidate for the 12 disciples to select for raising from the dead than the faithful, recently-martyred John the Baptist? 

It is quite likely that John the Baptist WAS chosen for resurrection by the disciples, and quite possibly Elijah and Moses also, since we read of those last two on the Mount of Transfiguration being seen by the disciples.  How would they have known who those two men were standing with Jesus, unless they had already participated in raising them from from the dead?  Just a thought.  After all, there is the record in Luke 9:7-8 that a rumor had been spreading that John the Baptist, Elijah, and one of the ancient prophets had been raised from the dead at that time.  The rumor could have actually been based in fact.

A resurrected John the Baptist as Revelation's author would align with Tertullian's and Jerome's record of John the author of Revelation surviving being boiled in oil at Nero's orders (since resurrected people can't possibly die again, even in a deep-fat fryer).

I don't think physically resurrecting John is necessary.  He could have written the apocryphon before his death.  (Remember when I said it may have been written a LOT earlier than 70AD?)

At any rate, I don't really know.  All of this is just theorizing.

Another reason why I don't think Revelation was subjected to multiple authors contributing to the finished book's content (that "inline" explanation of the mysteries, written by other contributing authors that you spoke of), is that Revelation closes with TWO strong commands in Rev. 22:18-19 for *NO ONE* TO ADD or to TAKE AWAY FROM THE WORDS OF THE BOOK OF THIS PROPHECY.  These commands would seem to confirm, as you have said, that such additions or editing of prophetic writings may have been a frequent practice (such as the Jews' oral traditions and explanatory writings added to Moses' laws). 

But in the case of John's Revelation, such additions were STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  This book as written was not to be tampered with or altered in any way, shape, or form.  The punishment for those who did so would be to receive the plagues contained in the book.  This would seem to counter the idea that Revelation had later insertions by other authors explaining its mysteries (as you have already mentioned; such insertions being dated perhaps to the AD 90s).

Easy explanation: those verses belong to the later interpreter, not the earlier author.  (Actually, you can kind of see that in the final chapter, where the speaker suddenly shifts..)

Moreover, as you know, there are a number of references within the text of Revelation that have particular application to the exact TIMING of the authorship.  I speak of all the terms of imminence such as things that were "ABOUT TO" happen, things "AT HAND", or that would happen "QUICKLY" or "SHORTLY", and declarations of EXISTING REALITIES, such as the currently-living "King" or former high priest at that time, Theophilus.  All these terms related to time would have no relevance at all if subsequent authors were allowed to expand on Revelation's prophecies.  It was intended to be presented as an intact, stand-alone prophetic work by John as the sole author, according to Jesus' command passed to John through the interpreting "angel."

"Expand" is the wrong word.  How about "re-load?"  It's similar to the way modern preachers reach to the Biblical pattern to claim "the sure mercies of Jacob" or to implore God to work on their current situation in the same way He did something in one of the Biblical stories.

You spoke of multiple repetitions of Revelation's prophecies (such as the AD 135 Jewish revolt under Bar Kochba).  This seeming repetition of Jerusalem's destruction would be as irrelevant as Saladin's 1187 siege of Jerusalem, since the former AD 70 era's Great Tribulation disasters that Revelation was predicting were NOT EVER to be replicated, either BEFORE or AFTER AD 70 (Daniel 12:1 and Matt. 24:21).  The only way that unprecedented, unsurpassed Great Tribulation could be true was due to the demonic realm being allowed full freedom for a time to torment that "wicked generation" of unbelieving Jews (as Jesus promised in Matt. 12:43-45).  After the demonic realm's "short time" and "little season" was over in AD 70, they were utterly destroyed from existence - never again to be around to torment following generations.

I feel like I'm digressing, but... with rare exceptions, I find that prophecies are limited in scope to the age/aeon in which the prophet lives.  "For ever" in Bible-ese is really "past olam" or "beyond the end of the age."  On the rare exceptions where it goes further, it's usually marked clearly by the phrase "ages of ages" or else "as long as there is day and night."  So even phrases like "never before" or "never again" are limited in context.

To further digress... ages/aeons are a key feature of my paradigm for Biblical interpretation.  I believe that is true to the original authors as well, and that they are best measured in generations (not years).  I believe in a definite progression of ages.  70AD and the destruction of the Jewish house marks the end of the 7th age by my reckoning of the Scriptures, which is sort of a jubilee on prophetic timelines. 

But other prophecies are impossible to be duplicated.  Those such as:
the passing of the Old Covenant - never to be restored;
the permanent destruction of the demonic realm in the AD 70 era;
the "shattering of the holy people", as Daniel 12:7 predicted, so that the "Israel of God" mystery could be revealed;
the mighty angel casting the great city Babylon (Jerusalem) like a millstone into sea, so that it " shall be found no more at all" (Rev. 18:21);
the establishment, once for all, of today's city New Jerusalem, where God would forever dwell with His people.

I suppose even all of those might be re-loaded for application in a different age. =)

That's all clear as mud, I'm afraid.  I find that my understanding of Scripture is rather disparate from the mainstream these days, and I have some trouble finding common ground to start from in many cases.

Jarrod

[robycop3]

  The events of 66-70 AD were the accomplishment of the DAYS OF VENGEANCE Jesus had proclaimed against that generation of Jews, when all that had been written against them previously was performed. It was not the "apocalypse". The Revelation wasn't given til some 20 years later.
   So, some people still believe "the end" came then, that Jesus' "this generation" meant THAT generation?  Well, the Jews received a much-greater punishment for their rejection of Jesus as Messiah, beginning 135-136 AD, a full 2-3 generations later, when Hadrian expelled the Jews from their land & gave it to the Philistines. (Reflected in the names "Palestine/Palestinian", which are Latin for "Philistia/Philistine".) This punishment of exile & persecution continued for some 1800 years, culminating in the nazi holocaust.  And now, God is beginning to restore Israel as He promised, despite themselves. He caused Judah (modern Israel) to be restored, & the rest of Israel will be revealed in the not-too-distant future to be restored to their promised land as well.
  I believe the next major prophetic event will be the building of a new temple in Jerusalem.
  And BTW, Jerusalem is NOT the modern Babylon, to be cast into the sea. I believe that's Rome, Italy, the center of the world's largest pseudo-quasi-Christian cult, the RCC.