All Tribes Of Israel WAKE UP in the name of Jesus Christ!!!!

reply to post by jmdewey60


You ignored your own quote.

"For at no long time ago was it seen, but almost our generation, in the end of Domitian's reign."

He's saying here that the Apocolypse (John's vision) was seen at the end of Domitian's reign, which would have been some time in the nineties. Reading comprehension.

Link us to ANY site that says John was martyred in 70 CE. You are badly mistaken because it is universally accepted, without question, that John died naturally at or around 100 CE. Give us one reputable source that says he was martyred.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Seems like you are the one who is doing this, not anyone else.

I didn't have any theories until after I researched the evidence about the authorship and dating of Revelation.

Google when John died and 99% of the links will say at the end of the first century.

I would suggest that these are either biased or not representative of the best scholarship.
I think it is funny finding consensus by Google hits.

reply to post by jmdewey60


The number is closer to 100% if you want to get technical. Please, show us one reputable source that John was ever martyred, just one, because I have yet to see it even mentioned on any google link. Everything says 100 CE of natural causes.

Again, provide something that backs up your claim that he died in 70 CE by martyrdom. You must not have done that much research because you are totally wrong, but I doubt you will admit it.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Where do you get that?

From the book, Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse, by Adela Yarbro Collins, page 26.

I can't find any information on that. When I Google "the martyrdom of the Apostle John" what comes back from numerous sources is that John was the only apostle who was not martyred, but died of old age. Both secular and Christian sources say the same thing.

Try A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John, by R. H Charles, pages xlv-xlix, which is the reference given by Collins in her notes.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

He's saying here that the Apocalypse (John's vision) was seen at the end of Domitian's reign, which would have been some time in the nineties. Reading comprehension.

That's your interpretation.
It could mean several things like I mentioned, including the apocalypse manifesting itself.
Or it could mean that by then the book was well circulated.

Link us to ANY site that says John was martyred in 70 CE.

See my post above. Do you realize that not everything is on the internet and that there is still a purpose for reading books?

You are badly mistaken because it is universally accepted, without question, that John died naturally at or around 100 CE.

What are you basing that on? What I am reading is that Irenaeus is universally viewd skeptically as to his accuracy, by modern biblical scholars.

Give us one reputable source that says he was martyred.

See my comment above.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

. . . I have yet to see it even mentioned on any google link.

See my post above.
Adela Yarbro Collins is the most respected living biblical scholar, so you might want to take your complaint somewhere else as far as I am concerned.

ETA: Martyrdom of John

as a commentary on what the internet says, the Futurists have a motivation to put pages up to support their view, while people not Futurists don't have a motivation since they are not selling anything because they believe in the fulfillment being something that already exists, the church of Jesus.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

The number is closer to 100% if you want to get technical. Please, show us one reputable source that John was ever martyred, just one, because I have yet to see it even mentioned on any google link. Everything says 100 CE of natural causes.

Again, provide something that backs up your claim that he died in 70 CE by martyrdom. You must not have done that much research because you are totally wrong, but I doubt you will admit it.

Papias in his second book says that John the Divine and James his brother were killed by the Jews.

The American Journal of Theology The Martyrdom of John the Apostle

reply to post by windword

The Martyrdom of John the Apostle

What Badham wrote in that essay would have been available to Charles who wrote his commentary some years after that was published.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Interesting, thanks for the link.

I've never heard of this before so it's news to me. I did notice though that the author of that book believes Revelation was added to after chapter 20. Do you agree with that?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I did notice though that the author of that book believes Revelation was added to after chapter 20.

I think that Rev. 22: 12-21, after the part that says to not seal up the prophecy, were probably added later.

reply to post by jmdewey60


So you believe the very VERY tail end of Revelation was added later? What makes you think that and what use would those who added to it have for only 9 lines of text that don't say anything different than the rest of the book?

The author you cited claims that EVERYTHING after chapter 20 was added later and that John only wrote the first 20 chapters. What makes you disagree with her and why do you think "they" would only bother adding 9 lines to the very end of the book?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So you believe the very VERY tail end of Revelation was added later? What makes you think that and what use would those who added to it have for only 9 lines of text that don't say anything different than the rest of the book?

It comes after what looks like the natural end. It has a thing about what looks like a second coming that was something I think came after 70 AD.

The author you cited claims that EVERYTHING after chapter 20 was added later and that John only wrote the first 20 chapters. What makes you disagree with her and why do you think "they" would only bother adding 9 lines to the very end of the book?

I just don't have an opinion on it.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Where do you get that?

From the book, Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse, by Adela Yarbro Collins, page 26.

I can't find any information on that. When I Google "the martyrdom of the Apostle John" what comes back from numerous sources is that John was the only apostle who was not martyred, but died of old age. Both secular and Christian sources say the same thing.

Try A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John, by R. H Charles, pages xlv-xlix, which is the reference given by Collins in her notes.

edit on 17-8-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

How does one book trump the hundreds of other sources that say John was not martyred but died of old age?

reply to post by NOTurTypical

How does one book trump the hundreds of other sources that say John was not martyred but died of old age?

I don't think any real biblical scholars take those seriously.
Partisan hacks will go on claiming a late date forever since their little futurist predictions will never come true.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Verses 12-21 seem like a more natural closing than this:

Revelation 22
10 Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near. 11 Let the one who does wrong continue to do wrong; let the vile person continue to be vile; let the one who does right continue to do right; and let the holy person continue to be holy.”

If the book has a prologue, it must have an epilogue, and these verses are not an epilogue.

Of course you have an opinion on it. Either you agree or disagree with it, and it looks like you disagree.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


REVELATION 22:18-19 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto them the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. NOW DO YOU THINK, that Anybody had the guts To Do So. Or ask yourself this, do you think you have the guts to do so, There GOES YOUR ANSWER.

reply to post by 2WitnessesArrived


Look at the world around you and tell me it hasn't been changed. War is a plague, and those who want Jesus to return ask for war because "that's what the bible says will happen before his return". We've had these "plagues" for a very long time and they are a product of people being lied to and deceived. Open your eyes and look at what's happening in the world today and tell me we aren't plagued by so many bad things.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Not everybody who calls themselves a Christian is one.

reply to post by 2WitnessesArrived


I don't see what your point is. You failed to address anything I said. Do you not see plagues in the world today? So what makes you think they aren't a product of people changing the bible?

You do realize that there were several versions Revelations. The one you are quoting was eddied for and approved by the Roman emperor at the conference of 300AD. Just a though.