Dating the Book of Revelation

[JM]

I’ve never studied the issue of the dating the Book of Revelation before, just read commentaries and Revelation intro’s from my Bibles [28 of them] that seem to all make the case for the latter date of around 95AD.

What are a few of the reasons you reject or agree with this date.

Thanks.

jm

 

[preterist]

This is one of the first subjects I studied when I began to question my previous eschatological beliefs. The best book on the subject that I have found is "Before Jerusalem Fell" by Kenneth Gentry. It deals with the internal and external evidence of both the early and late dates. What suprised me was the lack of evidence for the late date. In fact, the late date view seems to be soley dependent on one paragraph from the writings of Irenaeus.Even that is questionable as what he was reffering to. Don't know which Bibles and commentaries you referred to but many hold to the early dating.

Philip Schaff (1877)
"On two points I have changed my opinion -- the second Roman captivity of Paul (which I am disposed to admit in the interest of the Pastoral Epistles), and the date of the Apocalypse (which I now assign, with the majority of modern critics, to the year 68 or 69 instead of 95, as before)." (Vol. I, Preface to the Revised Edition, 1882 The History of the Christian Church, volume 1)

"The early date [of Revelation] is now accepted by perhaps the majority of scholars." (Encyclopedia 3:2036.)

"Tertullian’s legend of the Roman oil-martyrdom of John seems to point to Nero rather than to any other emperor, and was so understood by Jerome (Adv. Jovin. 1.26) (History 1:428.)

 

[JM]

That was my next question, what else do we have for a latter date, besides the few short words from Irenaeus? [Irenaeus as a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John himself.]

 

[JM]

Irenaeus wasn't the only church father who held to the late date - Eusebius and Origen also held to the late date of Revelation. Polycarp - the bishop of Smyrna - said the church at Smyrna wasn't in existence during Paul's ministry. That would be a problem for an early date of Revelation, since Smyrna is one of the seven churches addressed in the book. Laodicea was devastated by an earthquake in AD 60. It took 25 years to rebuild it, and the statements concerning Laodicea in Revelation fit much better in the late date.

 

[stranger]

date?

That was my next question, what else do we have for a latter date, besides the few short words from Irenaeus? [Irenaeus as a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John himself.]

Hi JM,

The internal evidence of the book itself - if outside references are few and far between.

In Christ: Stranger

 

[RJS]

Jason,

I was convinced by Gentry's book for an early date...the case for a late date is very weak.

Read it: http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebook ... 06_47e.htm

 

[Remember]

I was convinced by Gentry's book for an early date...the case for a late date is very weak.

I would have to disagree with this. I feel the studied evidence for a later date is much stronger. The evidence revealed in Revelations, itself, is much more convincing to be happening during the reign of Domitian (c 81-96).

Here is an excellent study in progress on this very subject: http://www.siteforthelord.com/index.php

Such a fascinating subject. So revealing. This site has question and answer threads and discussion threads along with the study.

 

[JM]

Jason,

I was convinced by Gentry's book for an early date...the case for a late date is very weak.

Read it: http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebook ... 06_47e.htm

RJS, I studied Gentry and a few other preterists, I didn't find them convincing. The Church has believed the late date, the evidence points to a late date, so I guess I'd give it a late date as well.

peace,

jm