No, what was written about 96 AD is when the canon was completed.
iow, at the completion of Revelation, the canon was completed.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Cessationism- have tongues and prophecy ceased, or are they still active?
- Thread starter godsquadgeek
- Start date
iow, at the completion of Revelation, the canon was completed.
Last edited by a moderator:
I never said either of them did. What does have gender is "made perfect/complete". So that cannot refer to Jesus Christ or His return.
Regarding your words in red: The point is that the actual Greek word means completed, not perfect, certainly not in the way that Christ is perfect.we think different on this i do not expect you to see my point..
I believe that which is perfect is Christ .. you believe it to be the original Scriptures .. while quoting scriptures you believe are not perfect as if they are.. We will stay talking in circles so i will bow out.. You answered just as i expected you would...
Thanks for the conversation and the politeness
So, the debated verse is teaching about when the canon is completed is when the 3 gifts of the Spirit will cease or pass away.
Why? They will no longer be needed. The completed canon makes that so.
Is there evidence for this statement?
Is there evidence for this statement?
Simple question: Is the canon complete today, or is God still giving more relelvation to individuals?
Is there a credible source that explains this?
Please explain where this may be found in Revelation.
This is quite a stunning statement. The Bible was written in 3 languages: Hebrews, Aramaic, and Greek. Not English.
Do you believe that the English translation was inspired as the original autographs?
When one wants to speak about an English Bible, please note that one is speaking about one of MANY translations of what was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek.
Sister Christian
Member
My dear man or woman, I simply assigned education as to the gender of language. There is no need to defend the claim that knowledge has a sex, or gender as was put, because that is simply without merit.
That such a one would then dismiss with animus grammar articles have gender and after stating Gnosis does, is merely hogwash and not worth feeding with any emotional standard save for disappointment in the claimants efforts to defend.Such a one would likely be surprised that Holy Spirit is without gender.Spirit being the operative word itself to impart that knowledge.
While patriarchal systems of spiritual jurisprudence in the age of the Hebrews did necessarily assign male to the power of the verb, GOD. In fact, as they did know, it is not actually true.
Sister Christian
Member
Agreed.
*Dating The Book Of Revelation By Kurt Simmons
Most commentators assign the book of Revelation the date of 96 A.D. for its composition. Lay people often assume this date to be correct. After all, isn't this what the marginal notes in their Bibles report? They never suspect that the same teachers who interpret the book wrong, date it wrong also. However, the evidence for this date is so equivocal and ambiguous, its probative value is practically nothing and, in fact, is assigned more by tradition than by solid evidence. As we shall see, the better view is that the book was written sometime between 56-70 A.D. and is primarily concerned with the church's victory over the persecutions of Nero and the Jews, and the destruction of Jerusalem by Rome.
Read in full
*Dating the New Testament - Revelation
[URL='https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/28131/was-the-book-of-john-written-first-or-the-book-of-revelation'][URL='https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com']Biblical Hermeneutics beta =Was the book of John written first or the book of Revelation?[/URL][/URL]
I haven't found one to date. It is just the preterist that needs to force a before 70AD date to fit their theology.
And it is not "highly contended" among scholars. It may be "highly contended" among the preterist that needs that date to fit their theory.......As I know you know. Just putting it out there so anyone who wants to know the truth might go,"what?" And search it out for themselves.
No thanks, I think I'll keep my clothes on.
. Really did laugh out loud when I saw that! Funny.First, Paul didn't say 'made perfect'. He said, 'when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away.' That can only happen at the second coming when the Son of man (who was made perfect Heb. 5:9) returns.
Paul is speaking of the perfect ie. perfect knowledge, perfect understanding; When the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away.
Sister Christian
Member
God only knows scholarship supplants
Amen!
Jim Parker
Member
JohnDB
Member
I am not a preterist...nor do I endorse such a position. Where I do understand it, this preterist theology I find to be stretching the language of the Prophecy too much to fit what they wish it was saying.
Where time is short, we don't have a lot left... acting like chicken little isn't going to get a reception... even if it is true.
Agan, the Greek word is "complete", not perfect, as in Deity. And when the complete comes refers to the closing of the canon.
Also again, the gender is neutral, so "perfect/complete" cannot refer to Jesus Christ or His coming.
brujaq
Member
I think this thread is a perfect explanation , why different denominations . I've had Baptist and other denomination friends that say ''no'' to the gifts of the Spirit yet I fellowshipped with them fine in other matters of the Gospel .. I've had some friends who thought it was a sin to have any musical instruments other than a piano, their problem not mine . Some think candles, certain clothes or other things make you right or more reverent but to me is nonsense.. So imo denominations are good . One day I was talking to a co-worker about hunting and had been witnessing fishing for him a while and he had started to show interest in Jesus . While we were talking I suddenly out of the blue asked him if he wanted a word from the Lord for him . He said ''yeah, I guess'' a few months earlier he would have said ''yeah, right'' .. I told him that Jesus said ''son come to me so I can wrap my arms around you and love you, quit dwelling outside in the dark fringes and come in to me'' .. It meant little to me, actually none of my business and I went back to talking about hunting but he looked like he'd seen a ghost and was shaken .. Jesus had been telling him the same thing. He came in Monday morning had got saved Sunday and even talking in tongues . His whole life and attitude had changed and was on fire for Jesus .. I also believe we are equipped with supernatural gifts if we desire and seek until we are transformed at the second coming, but I won't beat on anyone about it . There's plenty of more important issues like getting out with the gospel than arguing about the gifts too much ..
Among scholars/historians/theologians .........where is the around 96AD date highly contested?
The vast majority of external evidence and internal evidence points to the date being closer to 96AD.
Just one small point is the earthquake in Laodicea. Laodicea was wiped out and had to be completely rebuilt. That quake was around 60/61 AD.
And John described the Laodicean church like this........
14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:
The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:
15‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. 16‘So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth. 17‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,
Hard to imagine the Laodicean's went from completely destroyed, rebuilt and became wealthy and in need of nothing(physically) in their minds in just 5 to 8 years.
And it is hard to imagine that people went from tragedy, to lukewarm in just 5 to 8 years.
Last edited:
One of the definitions of 'perfect' is complete, absolute. So complete is fine. But Paul is talking about knowledge and understanding. Paul's own words - "as for knowledge it will pass away. For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect." "Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully." 1 Cor. 13:9 and 1 Cor. 13:12 I said 'the perfect' refers to perfect knowledge, perfect understanding. Is our theology perfect? Is our knowledge perfect? No.
So while Paul tells us when it will happen, (when the perfect comes) he is not saying it will happen to the Lord. He is saying it will happen to us. We will know and understand fully. And that will happen at the second coming.
But where does Paul say anything about a canon? Paul did not have any knowledge of a canon.