Endymion83

Do historians have any idea when Revelation might have been written? The two lines below seem to indicate that the author believed that Jesus would return in his lifetime.
I also wonder if "they also which pierced him" refers the to people responsible for his death?

gregor

The key to dating Revelations may be in the assertion in the book that there was active persecution of Xians occurring at the time. Thus, we need to find recorded persecution of xians to date the book.

B. Mack (Who Wrote The New Testament) places the Revelation to John at roughly 115 C.E. This I think is when Pliny was asking the emperor what to do with these "xians."

Mack notes that while there is a claim of Diocletian persecution of Xians in 80 C.E., there is no evidence to support it. And the Nero persecutions are overstated, potentially erroneous, and limited to Rome.

Magus55

I've heard the date of about 95 A.D as when it was written. As to the lines referring to Jesus returning within his lifetime, why are you assuming that "come to pass shortly" is referring to John's time and not God's? 2000 years to God is a fairly short time. Its God's Revelation and plan, therefore it would make sense to be based on His time scale, not John's.

Julian

So, Magus, you are saying that the statement "which will shortly come to pass" could actually mean any number of millenia? Then why put it in there if it can be taken to mean whatever you want? It seems to me that your assertation is mere apologetics necessitated by the rather long delay of "the final days." Why is it so hard to simply admit that he (John of Patmos) was wrong? Would it not be better to be honest than this incessant grasping at straws? Whatever fits is kept and whatever doesn't is re-interpreted. You are working under the assumptiona that the bible MUST be true, therefore our reading must be wrong, therefore let's change all the words that don't fit. Sigh.

Julian

WinAce

1. Is God the author of confusion?
2. Does the phrase "shortly come to pass" immediately bring to mind near-term or long-term events?
3. Is inspiring a text with an obvious primary meaning (resembling all manner of other near-term apocalyptic predictions) while actually implying something totally different confusing?

QED.

Peter Kirby

From my site:

Early Christian Writings: Revelation

Kummel provides the following information on dating the Apocalypse of John (Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 466-8):


According to the oldest tradition [in Iren., Adv. Haer. 5.30.3] Rev was written toward the end of the reign of Domitian (81-96). The book's own testimony indicates that it originated in the province of Asia in a time of severe oppression of Christians, which is most readily conceivable under Domitian. In the letters included in Rev, persecutions by the officials are expected (2:10), the blood of the martyrs has already flowed (2:13; 6:9), the whole of Christianity is threatened with a fearful danger (3:10): the immediate prospect is for the outbreak of a general persecution of Christians throughout the Roman Empire. In 17:6 John sees the harlot who is Babylon-Rome drunk on the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses of Jesus (cf. 6:10; 16:6; 18:24; 19:2). In 20:4 participation in the thousand-year reign is promised to the martyrs who have been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and for the word of God, and who have not worshiped the beast and his image and have not accepted his sign on their forehead and in their hand, i.e., those who have refused divine honors to the emperor (13:4, 12 ff; 14:9, 11; 16:2; 19:20). Christianity has collided with the state and with the state religion, the Christ cult with the imperial cult. In the interest of faith, Rev raises passionate objections to Rome and the imperial cult. That corresponds to the situation under Domitian.
Prior to Domitian, the state religion did not direct itself against the Christians. Nero's mad acts in Rome against the Christians had nothing to do with the imperial cult. Under Domitian, who according to the Eastern pattern laid claim to divine honors for himself as emperor during his own lifetime, there arose for the first time the persecution of Christians by the state on religious grounds. In 96 in Rome members of the imperial household were called to account for the charge of aqeoths; i.e., violation of the state religion. And in the Christian tradition Domitian is unanimously regarded as the first persecutor of Christians after Nero. In the province of Asia imperial cult was promoted with special zeal. Under Domitian, Ephesus received a new imperial temple. Thus it was precisely in the province of Asia, the classical land of the imperial cult, that at the time of Domitian all the prerequisites were present for a severe conflict between Christianity and the state cult, which is what Rev has in view (cf. also I Pet). The seer nowhere points directly to Domitian as the then reigning emperor, and the Antichrist, the "beast" (13:1 ff, etc.), does not bear the features of any specific ruler but rather those of the demonic form of Nero redivivus, which was still a popular expectation in that time. But the temporal scene which Rev sketches fits no epoch of primitive Christianity so well as the time of the persecution under Domitian.


best,
Peter Kirby

judge

Revelation was written 66-68 A.D. Just prior to the return of Christ around 70 A.D.

http://www.preteristvision.org/quest...ationdate.html

The book of Revelation was written by St. John between AD 66-68, in the final years of the Neronic persecution. The internal evidence of the book strongly suggests the early date, and the external evidence for this date is firmly attested to by many well-known scholars and early Church writings..

gregor

Judge - You'll pardon 99% of readers of the Olivet discourse who reject preterism. You'll also have to explain how an alleged event in Rome somehow translated to empire-wide persecution.


Burton Mack argues in WWTNT that there is no Roman evidence of persecution by Dominition. That's why he dates the authorship of Revelation to 25 years later under Trajan in 111 C.E.

I haven't read the sources on which Mack bases his rejection of the Dominition persecution.