The Complete Bible Answer Book: Collector’s Edition: Revised and Expanded by Hank Hanegraaff, the host of the 𝘉𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘈𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘔𝘢𝘯 broadcast and the 𝘏𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘜𝘯𝘱𝘭𝘶𝘨𝘨𝘦𝘥 podcast, is coming June 2024. Pre-order your copy here: amzn.to/4auSg0T For further study, get Hank's book "The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times and Why It Matters Today" on Amazon: amzn.to/3c10P8j For more further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/, www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/, and www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-coming-on-clouds-a-reference-to-christs-second-coming/
Rev 11:1 "Go and measure the temple of God and the altar" Any future temple could not be viewed as "the temple of God" simply because it was not commissioned by God to be built in the first place.
It amazes me that people will fight you over giving a later date to the Gospels and Epistles...except when it comes to Revelation. Then they all become German textual critics because it suits their theology.
Such a wonderful video. Thank you. I’ve been studying Revelation and how it is to be interpreted. My opinions are not solidified, but as of now I think everything up until 20:7 has been fulfilled, hence we are in the millennium currently. Still open to other views, but this is what makes the most sense to me currently. Though, it is utterly undeniable that most of Revelation is an echo of Jesus’ Olivet Discourse, which I am a full-preterist on. I’ll absolutely never break fellowship due to eschatology, but I just have the toughest time understanding how people, mainly among the dispensational crowd, utterly twist and abuse the Olivet Discourse to make it say something Jesus plainly didn’t mean it to be. They’ll jump through hoops to twist language and argue how it’s either half-fulfilled or not yet. The Olivet Discourse in my opinion is among the most abused texts in the Bible.
There is one issue however... Revelation tells us in the 1000 year reign, Jesus and the elect will be ruling "upon" the Earth in the flesh physically, the Greek word means to literally be upon. So after his second Advent on the clouds with his angels, Revelation tells us Jesus will be here to stay in the flesh as king of the whole earth, with the removal of all other human governments and institutions, until the attack of gog of magog (rebellious humans led by kings who want to rule with their own government after the 1000 years). According to many church fathers, it was the gnostics who invented A-millenialism, the idea that we are already in the 1000 years, because the gnostics were insistent that there was no physical resurrection on Earth, to support their anti-material theology. Justin Martyr and several others called this a blasphemy against God to deny the coming physical resurrection and rule of Christ. As did Apostle Paul, when he said to pay no heed to those saying the resurrection has happened and the day of the Lord has come. It's for this reason, I believe Revelation has a double prophetic meaning. That it's referring to 70 A.D, but then also spiritualises it for the future, on a grander global scale, with corrupted Christendom falling to the same fate as Jerusalem. This possibly being the meaning of "write the things you saw, are, and will be". Which is also possibly the meaning of the Beast "that was", is not, and then will be". Babylon I believe, the harlot, is both ancient Jerusalem and modern Christendom, in an adulterous state, in comparison to the pure virgin bride of Christ (the ones remaining faithful). As the faithful Jews were told to flee to the mountains, I also believe Christians are taken to heavenly mount zion (a rapture) at the climax of their "70 A.D" in a future sense. Which then results in Christ's physical reign on the Earth with his bride, whereas at the moment, he has a heavenly reign, not fully manifest on Earth yet, but his kingdom at the moment being "within us" as Christians.
@@stephenm8233 Revelation 5:10 speaks of a preview of what's coming for the elect: "You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they 'will' reign 'upon' the earth.” Later in Revelation, we are told this reigning happens in the 1000 years. So we have the 1k reign, with the Bride of Christ, the kingdom of priests 'ruling' 'upon' the Earth, after Babylon's fall and Satan's imprisonment. Rev 20:1-5 "Well, after that, I saw a messenger coming down out of the sky who had a long chain in his hand [that held] the key to the abyss. 2Then he grabbed the Dragon - the original snake, the Slanderer and Opposer - and chained him up for 1,000 years. 3And then he threw him into the abyss… He closed it up and locked it up over him, so he couldn’t mislead the nations anymore until after the 1,000 years had ended.However, he will be set free for a little while after that. Next I saw thrones, and those who sat down on them were the ones who had been executed with axes for testifying about Yeshua, for telling about God, and those who hadn’t worshiped the wild animal or its image, nor had they received its branding on their foreheads or on their hands. For they were appointed to be judges.Yes, they came to life and ruled as kings with the Anointed One for 1,000 years… *This is the first resurrection*." The second coming and rapture, is the time the dead awaken from sleep, this is the "first resurrection". Which happens with the rapture simultaneously ( according to : 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17: "For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the *dead in Christ will be the first to rise* (be resurrected). Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up *together with them* in the clouds *to meet the Lord in the air*. And so we will always be with the Lord" This meaning the dead do not go to Heaven at death (that's a gnostic idea), but they sleep in the grave awaiting the return of Christ, when the faithful dead 'with' the faithful living will be taken up together, which is what is happening in Rev 20. The "first resurrection", which means to "stand up and wake", or "rise",. 1 Thessalonians links the coming of Christ and the meeting in the air with the first resurrection, which is in turn the beginning of the 1000 years in Rev 20.
@@Mr-Tibbster are the 24 elders in chapter 4 considered to be “reigning” with Christ, and do you think that’s a connection with the ruling saints in chapter 20? (Cross reference Ephesians 2:6)
Absolutely agree with the dating due to the internal evidence of Scripture, though I do not understand why it is necessary to remove ourselves from a full preterist view of Scripture? I believe that is what the scriptures point to. It doesn't strip us from our Hope in Christ. It makes the spiritual Kingdom of God a full reality for us today! I do not understand the resistance to it
@jfra7107 Well, the Christian might be looking for their so-called still yet future great tribulation in the Book of Revelation, but that never precludes any anticipation for the essential Christian doctrine of Christ second appearance to judge the living and the dead, the resurrection of the saints to everlasting life and the unrighteous to eternal condemnation, and the restoration of the cosmos. Resurrection is a clear teaching from the panoply of the Scriptures. See www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/ and www.equip.org/bible_answers/when-do-we-receive-our-resurrected-bodies/
Hank does not quite understand when Christ said "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." With that Hank says that he is expecting the literal consummation of a new heaven and new earth. It blows my mind that Hank has no idea what this heaven and earth is referring to, and that he is expecting an future earthly Jerusalem, when Christ says to Pilate "my kingdom is not of this world." Heaven and earth a metaphor for the old and new covenant • God calls Judah and Jerusalem heaven and earth (Isaiah 1:1-2), (Isaiah 51:15-16) • And He built His sanctuary like the heavens, like the earth which He has established till the end of the age. (Psalms 78:69) • Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. (Revelation 21: 1, 22) • In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:13) a covenant that cannot be shaken (Heb 12:27) • “This is the covenant that I will make with them after that day, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,” 17 “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” (Hebrews 10:16-17) The heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22-23) • “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men.” (Revelation 21:3) o No scripture in the entire Bible that says the world (cosmos) will end. o Only the ones that say the world will never end. (Eccl 1:4) (Psalms 119:90( (Ephesians 3:21) o Compare the word world in (John 3:16) (cosmos) and the word world in (Matt 24:3) (eon) age.
@@james-cq3mi No. I discovered the truth of the New Covenant in March 2024. I had been raised Southern Baptist and came out of the IFB religion during the lockdowns.
It was written in AD 95 and was written about the Jewish-Roman war in AD 67-70. You read that right. It's easy to "predict" the duture when it's already happened.
@FAITHandLOGIC Many would say just that in setting a late date of composition for the Book of Revelation, but the Devil is in the details, so they will in the same breath they will say the apocalyptic vignettes were written as vaticinium ex eventu (or history written as prophecy), so therein is an anti- supernatural bias. But John could have written in the late 60s making predictions on the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple in AD 70.
Hank, I appreciate your airing this information again. I remember first hearing you discuss it on the radio show quite a few years back. The single most impactful and tragic strike against the Jewish faith of the age certainly would have been shown as a prophecy fulfilled if NT writers were putting pen to paper late in the 1st century or even 2nd Century as secular critics claim. Reading the Revelation compared with the last letters of the Apostle John have always given me the impression that the former was certainly written by a man up in years, while the vision of given to the John of the Revelation was to a younger man. Furthermore, there is not really any indication that the disciples understood what Jesus was saying to them then in Matthew 24 anymore than his accusers brought up the night of his trial (or used to accuse apostles thereafter while the temple still stood). Based on what I know of the history of Rome and compared to other totalitarian governments,I suspect that the Apostle John was exiled to Patmos more than once, earlier than believed and the chroniclers of his life either missed it or had other things to be concerned with. The events following the Great Fire were certainly chaotic for Christians and Jews, as well as Roman citizens considering the military campaigns that were both ongoing and followed those events plus the persecutions. The disciples of John weren’t following John to honor him but to spread the message of the Gospel. John was special to them as the last of the 12 who walked with Jesus but he obviously had more important things to discuss with them than his personal timeline following the greatest three years of his life. I also understand that the later Council of Nicea had a hard time accepting the Revelation as cannon. I accept that their humble and prayerful consideration did guide them to make the right decision to include the book and it’s authorship. And I appreciate your work. I grew up in a church denomination that followed the teachings of John Wesley only to see it become infected and split - now led by sheep who think they’re smarter than the shepherd - so I don’t care what denomination you worship with on Sundays. Your work has always been true to the Gospel of Christ. Live long and teach…
Revelation of what’s to come…The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Rev 1:1-2 Past may have not played part in what the Angel revealed to John.
Yet nearly every Bible with introduction to books say Revelation was written in AD 95, and a rare few will say, “some scholars think prior to AD 70” . Dispensationalism would crumble if they admitted Revelation was written prior to AD 70. Make wonder if they read the same Bible. By the way Hanks book THE APOCALYPSE CODE is phenomenal!!!
Unfortunately, this is not a popularity context. Sometimes it is Athanasius contra mundum. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ Also check out Redating the New Testament by John A.T. Robinson | www.equip.org/product/redating-the-new-testament/. Another resource to consider is Before Jerusalem Fell (American Vision, 1998) by Kenneth Genty.
I’ve been a full preterist for 25 years partly due to your material. After all these years, I still do not see any solid justification for partial preterism. Thanks for the video though. This is an important topic. Bless you, sir.
@@BibleAnswerMan Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones . The shouter of the ' h ' word is all too often defending a creed or tradition in their own narrow, little glass house. When creeds and traditions are placed alongside Scripture, with a perceived authority on par with God's Word, there's gonna be error and bias. In this case , there is a disruptive, willful accusation of heresy where there should be none .
3 books will help regarding the dating: Before Jerusalem Fell by Gentry, The Beast of Revelation by Gentry, and The Apocalypse Code by Hanegraff , all 3 great books.
Hello - Revelation was in fact written by Lazarus. It is a symbolic account of the stages of the bona fide Initiate experienced during his diabetic coma after which Jesus came to resuscitate him, having known about his condition. He had not been raised from the dead as such. The priesthood altered this from the early Bible Scripture. We now have the true version. Blessings
@drdarrylschroeder5691 Interesting. Was the Lazarus composition of Revelation your own idea or did you get it from another scholar? Hank holds to the author being John the Apostle. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/who-wrote-revelation/
Greetings - Thank you. Far from being one's own idea, it is in fact derived from The Secret History of the World. So much else has been deliberately altered to conform with the ethos of the time. The actual version is intact on the Akashic Record, being the indelible records of everything that has ever happened in all the Universes. Blessings
It is an argument from silence to suggest this, but it is a pregnant silence. The analogy to the holocaust does not apply, we have the histories from Eisenhower, Churchill, and DeGaul and NONE of them mention the "holocaust". So there is that. Having said that, I am convinced of the before Jerusalem fell argument but not for this reason. It is conceivable that John is writing about past events, but I do not think it is likely.
@user-jt2cf9hx6f It is more intelligible to see a pre AD 70 composition than later dates, say AD 90 or AD 120. The temple in Rev. 11 and the time text ("soon take place" & "near") weigh the evidence for the early date. Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry and Redating the New Testament by John A. T. Robinson are worthwhile resources to consult on the early date.
It’s also incredible that. Not one church father or anything spoke about Jesus returning. My goodness bro. You can’t answer that softball question. I’ll wait
Prior to the writings of Justin Martyr, second century Church father and the writings of 2nd Clement, no evidence of any historical teaching that Jesus was believed to still be coming back in the future. Discussions of the supernatural event in the temple in 66 AD where Josephus and Tacitus who were eye witnesses. Eusebius also records the same supernatural event in the fourth century. That all changed with Roman influence by Augustine in 380 with the introduction of eternal conscious torment and process of a second coming, to control the illiterate masses.
This is a new topic I am studying. I can't seem to find a ton of videos about it. If anyone could refer me to more videos about this, including debates or the opposing view, I'd be very grateful!
@albertkleppin2320 You can find treatment on the dating of the Book of Revelation in Steve Gregg's parallel commentary. See www.equip.org/product/revelation-four-views-parallel-commentary/
I’m not advocating for either date (in this post) but I’ve heard the argument before of “if the later date were the correct date, then it would be unconscionable for the destruction of Israel to not be mentioned.” Then a parallel is given of a reporter not reporting on the holocaust or the Twin towers under the same type circumstance. The problem with this argument is that a reporter is writing on what he wishes to write about and to tell it as he sees fit. On the other hand, The holy Bible is completely inspired by God to the writers. They’re not writing what they desire, but what The Spirit of God instructs them to write. It’s very possible (if the later date applies) that for reasons only known to God Almighty, nothing was proposed to John to write on the subject. I, for one, would not dare to impose my puny commentary on why God would have or would not have chosen to mention it.
To add to the defining silence on AD70, which is incredibly significant for all NT writers to never mention (Matthew, Mark, Luke, Paul, John, Peter, and James), so not just a single journalist so to speak, but it is also more intelligible to take Revelation 11 as something written prior to AD 70. Hank says, “In Revelation 11, John said, “I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, ‘Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months’” (vv. 1-2). In context, Jesus had sent His angel “to show his servants what must soon take place” (Revelation 1:1) Thus, the prophecy concerns a future event, not one that took place twenty-five years earlier.” See www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/
@@BibleAnswerMan the 5 have fallen 1 is here and 1 has yet to come . The point of the book of revelation it is written for the 7 congregations of Asia Minor and for them to understand what is taking place . All things were unfolding before them as Babylon the Great which is Jerusalem and its religious system that is being judged as in the case of Matthew chapter 23 . The 7 kings that sat on the throne of David had no legitimate right to be there but they wanted to retain this earthly kingdom and wanted it protected and hence the slaughter of the innocent the death of our king in Jesus Christ and the persecution of Christians to come . It was these kings with the Jewish religious leaders who persecute the Christian community Acts chapter 7
the initial argument makes sense when you frame it as writing the history of an area. "would you leave out the twin towers if you were writing a history of New York?" Revelation is not a history of Jerusalem. Its not a history letter. On that account then why would he add history into a letter that he was writing to record a vision he received from Jesus? Im not saying it wasnt written before 70 ad. im just rebutting that point of the argument.
@user-fq5mf5me7w No. Revelation concerns the things that must soon take place. The temple measured in Revelation 11 implies the temple and city still stood when the vision was received, which makes it more intelligible to set the date of composition around AD 67 prior to the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple in AD 70. No mention of the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul suggest a pre-AD 70 date of composition.
He has insulted Joel Richardson in saying Joel doesn't understand prophecy. Pretty arrogant, if you ask me. I have studied prophecy for over 40 years and was very interested in Amillennialism in the 90s. After much proof texting for several decades, I came to the conclusion, that a prewrath premill position had the least contradictions to it. Peter Goeman currently has a series for a later date, if your interested. Peter Goeman points out two very strong points for later dating. That Paul make no mention of John at in his leadership at Ephesus in the letters. Also, it is solidly supported of the destruction of Leodicea in 60 AD. There are no cities back then that show any rebuilding of city within 6 years and typically would to take at best a minimum of 10 years. A third supporting argument is that church leaders are strangely silent of Revelation's fulfillment if it was an early date. This would be a very important declaration for them in their writings to keep their audience aware of such matters. Paul stresses strongly to the members that it hasn't taken place to the assembly in Thessaloniki so I would think it would be very important that later leaders would clarify such matters. There is no statement of fulfillment until the 4th century later for some strange reason. The fourth supporting arguments are the death of Christian martyrs in every century. The millennial period indicates of the victorious reign of martyrs with Christ not a constant one. In Hebrews, the author states to remember those in chains as in bonds with them. As you can see that the Scripture then become bifurcated and confusing, with the Amillennial perspective, it might lead one to think no position is correct and perhaps Christianity is crazy and default into shipwrecking the faith. That's dangerous and something to seriously think about. The prewrath premill preserves the idea that persecution and suffering will persist and the hope of the resurrection is ahead of us and keeps us looking forward to it.
Hmm, you are not convincing. Why do you not use writings of the early Church fathers to strengthen your case? Jesus spoke of Antipas. Antipas was martyred by Emperor Domitian in 92 A.D. Please do not mislead people.
@lezelroos9241 Well, the early church fathers, particularly the Apostolic Fathers of the second century, help us gain useful information that assists us in understanding the Scriptures and the truth of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ and Son of God who died and rose again. See www.equip.org/articles/jesus-as-god-in-the-second-century/ Little is known about Antipas. The martyrdom by Domitian you allude to is a legend. R.C.H. Lenski notes, “That he was the bishop of the church and was burned alive in a heated metal image of a bull during the days of Domitian is a legend that appeared in the tenth century” (R.C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. John’s Revelation [Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1943], 105).
Assuming that John wrote Revelation prior to 70AD, there is no mention of 70 AD in Revelation of the destruction of the (city and temple ). If he wrote Revelation post 70AD there is no mention of it either simply because it was in the past and John is writing about prophecies re:the future not historical events which are in the past. In our century no one prophesied about 911, but someone could write about it in terms of HISTORY. There is however a PROPHECY regarding Jerusalem (the great city in Rev. 11:8, Rev. 17, Rev. 18) about a future destruction where the temple is not mentioned, which will be found in Rev. 17:15 to 18, since the great city is equated with the HARLOT in Rev. 18, who rides the scarlet first beast of Rev. 13:1-10.
@bernardmichaud1099 - of course John would not mention the destruction of the temple if the even had not yet occurred. But if the temple had already fallen, it is beyond delusion to think John would pass on mentioning or hinting at it, and it is more intelligible to take vision in Revelation 11 as a reference to the still standing and fully operational temple in Jerusalem. Plus all the references to the destruction of Jerusalem are more intelligently understood to be from a composition before the fall in AD 70 rather than afterwards, especially if there is nary any hint that the city has already fell.
Since the Jewish Age ended in AD 70, ushering in the Times of the Gentiles by Christ's Coming in Judgement to Jerusalem just as He predicted in Matt 24 and Lk. 21, wouldn't God provide this last divine Word of His to the Apostle John prior to this very important event?
@@AgeDeo2009Mathew, Mark, Luke and John wrote about this event (70AD, destruction of the city and temple), in their Gospels as a warning to Christians living in their time to escape the tragic event, ... which they did. John writes post 70AD so why would he even mention an event which has already happened in the past? Is there something I'm not understanding here?
@@bernardmichaud1099 When we objectively read and study the Book of Revelation, taking into consideration the context, its literary style, and its direct recipients, we can see - even feel the urgency of the warnings. It has many allusions to the temple which, if was already destroyed many years before (25 years ago) as many believe, the images used by John would not have been that vivid to its recipients anymore. Since the end of the Judaic Age was on AD 70 (where the times of the Gentiles began as recorded in Lk. 21), it is but logical for God to give it before 70 AD to indicate that the Old Covenant has ended and a New Covenant has begun as the prophet Daniel prophesied.
Revelation was written in the mid 90s A.D. while the Apostle John was exiled under Emperor Domitian and this is how we know: **Look at the early century writers. The earliest writings that attest to a later date are Hegesippus (120AD-190AD) and Irenaes. Irenaes stated in 180 A.D. (Adv Haer V. 30, 3) that it was under Domitian's reign. NO early century witnesses questioned Irenaeus until 1,600 years later by Johann Wettstein in 1752. That means they all knew it was under Emperor Domitian in the 90s, so nobody contested it. Early church writer Tertullian (150 AD-212 AD) mentions the liberation of those who were banished by Emperor Domitian in "Apology 5" in 197 A.D. Nero was not known for banishing Christians. Nero killed them just like he did Peter and Paul and made flaming lamp posts out of others. Domitian was the first one to banish left and right. He exiled his own family because they refused to bow down and worship him. They weren't Christian. They were atheist. Domitian is also the first emperor to demand to be recognized as a deity while alive. All the obelisks calling him a god were torn down after he was assassinated in 96 A.D. That's when John was released from Patmos and went to Ephesus since Peter and Paul were dead. **An early date of Revelation conflicts with several of the letters in Revelation chapter 2 and 3. Jesus' letter to the Church of Laodicea couldn't have been written in the 60s A.D. because the city was destroyed by a massive earthquake in 60 A.D. Historical records document it took them 25-years to rebuild it, which would put the church operational in the 80s A.D. Roman historian, Tacticus, wrote that Rome offered to pay for the rebuild of the church but the people refused aid because they were wealthy enough to do it alone. And they did. It took 25-years. Laodicea didn't exist in the 60s AD. Jesus' letter to the church of Pergamum mentions his faithful martyr, Antipas. Antipas was martyred by Emperor Domitian in 92 A.D. The Apostle John appointed Antipas as Bishop to the church of Pergamum in 83 A.D. That's after the 60s. The death of Antipas under Domitian is documented by early century writer Simeon Metaphrastes. Jesus' letter to the church of Ephesus conflicts with Paul's sentiment for the church in his letters to Timothy in the books 1st and 2nd Timothy. Jesus rebuked them and Paul alluded they were doing fine. No instructions to Timothy on how to deal with the "problems" with the church because there weren't any problems until years later that Christ addressed. Similar evidence is found for writings of the rapture of the church. Paul taught it and wrote about it and so did an endless list of early church fathers. But false teachers don't want you to research that either. What did Jesus say first about the signs of the last days? He said "take heed no man deceive you." Jesus uses the word "deceive" 4-times in Matthew 24 in regards to signs of the his coming. Deception is rampant now on every level. If Revelation was written before 70AD, then who was the Antichrist? Why isn't Jesus ruling and reigning in Jerusalem? When did 1/4 of the world population die according to Revelation 6:8? When did an additional 1/3 of the world die according to Revelation 9:15 & 18? What was the mark of the beast globally that stopped people from buying and selling? There's no historical literature written since 70 AD answering these questions. That's because Revelation 4-22 haven't happened yet, but they're about to. If you don't know Jesus Christ as your personal savior, pray to him today. Don't get left behind after the rapture of the church to try and survive the 7-year Tribulation. Because odds are if you wait until then to reach out to Christ, it will cost you your life (Revelation 20:4)
Good point. There is lots of dependance upon the testimonial of Irenaeus. It is possible that the interpreters of Irenaeus miss the point, and error then begat error. So. Irenaeus was wanting to say John was last seen on Patmos as opposed to saying John saw the vision on Patmos. This is explained in "The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times and Why It Matters Today" on Amazon: amzn.to/3c10P8j Also check out Kenneth Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell (Victorious Hope Publishing). For more further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/, www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/, and www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-coming-on-clouds-a-reference-to-christs-second-coming/
@@WhiteDove73-888 You’re absolutely right. You can lay it all out and they reject it. I read tonight “Ecclesiastical History” by Eusebius of Caesarea written in the 2nd century, Book III point 20, says the Apostle Paul was banished by Emperor Domitian. That’s an account by someone during that time. None of the early church fathers disputed that Apostle John wrote the book of Revelation under the rule of Emperor Domitian, which ran from 80AD until his assassination in 96AD. So Revelation didn’t happen in 70AD. It’s future events to take place from chapter 4-22. Satan doesn’t want people to know the season we’re in and be looking for Jesus and it’s worked! Amillennialism is the predominant view in the majority of our churches now & it’s creating these apostate churches the book of Jude warns us about. Well I’m rapture ready bc I don’t follow the majority. I follow the One 🎺☁️
@joshuas1834 John Chrysostom’s Homily LXXV, which concerns Matthew 24, interprets the Olivet Discourse as pertaining to the Fall of Jerusalem. Ambrosiaster took the 70 weeks of Daniel to go from Darius to the Christ and completed with Vespasian (127 Questions on the Old and New Testament, 44:14). Please consult Gary Demar and Francis X Gumerlock, The Early Church and the End of the World (Powder Springs, GA, 2006).
@@BibleAnswerMan thank you so much. That's a difficult thing to get Google to return appropriate search results about. I've tried to do my own research but the information I'm looking for just gets drowned in a bunch of dispensationalist stuff.
TO ALL PRETERISTS: Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away 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. PRETERISTS take away from the words of the book of prophecy. REPENT, while you can
@qwerty-so6ml Can you explain how preterists are taking away from the words of the Book of Prophecy? Are not dispensationalist in danger of adding to God's Word when they read into the Bible the pretribulation rapture story, God is going to remove the Church from the Earth before the start of a future seven-year Great Tribulation that ends with Jesus' Second Coming and the start of the Millennium?
@@BibleAnswerMan Around 70AD the second temple destroyed. Around 95AD, John received the book of Revelation. Yet, he was told that he would be coming back at the end. Revelation 10:11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings. The angel of the Church of Philadelphia has been given Daniel's sealed scroll, unsealed. That revelation (given within the past 20 years): Only one Gospel: The Gospel of Reconciliation. Jesus Christ came into THEIR kingdom to reconcile fallen angels unto Himself. We are the fallen angels (ELOHIM) kept in DNA chains of darkness. If you do not confess being a fallen angel in Lucifer's kingdom, then you are an unbeliever. Unbeliever = those that claim to be made in the image of ELOHIM(gods). REPENT FALLEN ANGELS.
@@BibleAnswerMan YT blocks comments. Around 70AD the second temple destroyed. Around 95AD, John received the book of Revelation. Yet, he was told that he would be coming back at the end. Revelation 10:11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.
@@BibleAnswerMan YT blocks comments, cont. The angel of the Church of Philadelphia has been given Daniel's sealed scroll, unsealed. That revelation (given within the past 20 years): Only one Gospel: The Gospel of Reconciliation. Jesus Christ came into THEIR kingdom to reconcile fallen angels unto Himself. We are the fallen angels (ELOHIM) kept in DNA chains of darkness. If you do not confess being a fallen angel in Lucifer's kingdom, then you are an unbeliever. Unbeliever = those that claim to be made in the image of ELOHIM(gods). REPENT FALLEN ANGELS.
The modern imitation church swears they are to take the gospel to the world,ignoring like usual that the great commission was given to the apostles and true church in Jesus day. Colossians 1:2 Be not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you have and which has been preached to the whole world. Romans 10:17-18 So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. But I say,have they not heard? Yes, their sound has went out into all the earth. Sure enough ,the imitation church also ignores the fact that Jesus death did a million times more than they give him credit. Jesus came to put away sin. Hebrews 9:24-26. God sending His son in the likeness of sinful flesh ,and for sin,condemned sin in the flesh Romans 8:3-4. Now the imitation church will have you think that sin was to be forever when their book says Jesus ended it upon the cross. Seeing that the law is gone,and we were never under it anyway,it looks as though they would believe Romans 4:15. Where there is no law there is no sin. Romans 5:13-14....sin is not imputed when there is no law. 1John 3:4-Sin was the transgression of the law. They do not,will not believe the very book they swear by. Mere religion. The most important chapter in the Bible for us today ,they refuse also. 1Corinthians 15. This chapter explains what happened when Jesus finished His work on earth. It clearly says that Jesus returned to heaven and subjected himself to God. In the original Greek subjected means he actually became subservient. He having all things placed under his feet for a short time by God,all authority and power granted him to do his work,placed all,all things back under the feet of God. He delivered the kingdom once held by Satan back to God and became subject to God. It also says at this time that God was now all and in all. ALL and in ALL. He is in all mankind now. We know good from evil. We have God consciousness whether we fight it or not or like it or not. He is all and in all. Sin being the trespass of the law was of the law and the flesh and is why Jesus became flesh for those under the law and his flesh died. Jesus put away sin. Evil which was before the the law is of the heart and we know the difference between evil and good. After Jesus turned all back over to God ,God reigned again and always will,Jesus work complete. God through Jesus reconciled the world back to Himself. Why do the imitation church not want that? God reigns and we are to flee evil and do good. God and He alone should be worshipped. God alone should be trusted to work in mankinds heart giving them revelation and the ability to know they are the sons and daughters of God. He has revealed all in the past and has not stopped.Thecworld has been reconciled whether the imitation church wants to believe it or not. Our relationship is to be with God now through no mediator. He reigns. He is to be All and in All and no other.
@gwayne11000 Thanks for sharing your thoughts. We still proclaim the gospel to nations? Evangelize? Invite others to Church? Encourage others to evangelize?
I think the obvious answer is revealed as we let the prophecy speak for itself. The teaching of a gap theory in the 70 weeks is a ploy of the devil to deny Jesus Christ: His Crown. This guy is not 100% correct in his theology, either. Nor am I.
WHY DOES HE NOT DISCUSS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE: The book is a revelation: "...What thou seest, WRITE it in a book..." (1:11) (Jesus, Alpha&Omega, first & last) "WRITE the things which thou have seen, and the things which are, and the things which are to come (1:19) (Jesus, he that liveth and was dead... alive evermore and have the keys of hell and of death) John admonishes us to be equally obedient! "For I testify to every man that heareth the words of the PROPHECY of this book, If any man shall ADD unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book" (22:18). (John) The prophet of God reveals ONLY what God shows/tells him/her.🙏
Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, numbered the Roman Caesars in his writings. The first for Josephus was Julius Caesar. Suetonius the first century Roman historian wrote a book on the Roman Caesars and the first he said was Julius Caesar. Rev. 17 is easy if you count the kings as those in the first century did, "five have fallen" (Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius); "one is" (Nero). Revelation had to have been written between 64 to 68 AD. The Christian persecution began in 64, but Nero was forced by the Roman Senate to commit suicide in 68. As Rev. 1:1-4 states, these events would immediately begin in those times, meaning the first century, after all the audience for Revelation was the seven churches in Asia, according to the command that Jesus gave to John to deliver His message to them.
Also if John wrote Revelation in AD 95 he would have been about 93-94 years old. Ancient writings have been found that state that John when he had reached that age he had to be carried into Church bec he was bed ridden. And he never said anything to anyone other than may the Lord Bless you. I would image his eyesight would just about be gone also.
@@delilahrichardson6716 Well I believe old age does have bearing on how good ones eyesight is. As we get older nothing gets better as my doctor once told me. But the point is when John had hit the age of 90 he was bedridden or chair ridden. John was carried into church and he never
@@delilahrichardson6716 said anything to anyone other than God bless you according to what people who knew John have recorded in their writings. So he would not have been in a fit State to record Revelation in AD 95. R C Sproul a Reformed Theologian has a Vid out called " The Book of Revelation" on U tube were he explains how the Erroneous belief that Revelation was written about AD 95 came about. Worth viewing and only 28 minutes long. Many Scholars who study these things believe that all the books of the N T were all written before AD 70
You last sentence you made the mention of his site I was only point out that age don't determine site I work in nursing homes and seen elderly people who didn't need glasses
I once saw a university paper b my grandson who argued that the apostle John could no have written it either in ad 90 or ad loo either because he would have been too old.
What a poor comment, he was commanded by the Master himself to write down "Write in a scroll what you see..." Would the age of John hinder God? Besides, an old man can write...right? And this dude says...good point???
@poseidon3032 The future time when Jesus appears a second time to judge the living and the dead is hardly anticlimactic. It is the blessed hope. When the Lord returns, the dead will be resurrected, the righteous to everlasting life, the unrighteous to everlasting condemnation, the cosmos will be renewed, there will be a new heaven and new earth where indwells righteousness, and the New Jerusalem will descend as a bride beautifully adorned for her husband. Something to look forward too!
🙏 In the Book of Revelation that is. Neither John nor Jesus says anything about the Jerusalem temple having already been destroyed. This makes it more intelligible to take the composition of Revelation before AD 70 rather than afterwards, say AD 90 or AD 120.
@BibleAnswerMan Jesus predicts the temple will be destroyed but John doesn't. It makes more sense to me because it had already been destroyed when John wrote revelation. And its likely that he doesn't mention that it had previously been destroyed because the vision was focused on the future and not something that happened 25 years previously.
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him (Jesus) to show His servant things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he (John) saw. This was not John's Revelation to us, It was Jesus revealing this prophecy of future things that are coming. John wrote what he saw, he was the secretary taking notes of what to write and what not to write (Revelation 10:3-4).
About 10 years ago I was given a book by Gary Demar or something like that, read about 2 chapters and throw the book away. As I look in to who these people were I learn that they were into selling books that was it. And also learn for the first time the word "preterits". Everything happened in 70AD including the second coming of Jesus. I guess you will have to go and buy another book so they can explain that one to you. Save your money and pray for these people including Hank.
@@loyal-warrior What did you read that caused you to throw the book away? I would think that you would have so much confidence in you knowledge of the Bible that you would show scriptural evidence of what you felt that Gary was saying that was wrong. Your problem is, you couldn't. Like Hank, you belly up to your creeds. When I read comments like yours, it reminds me of this quote from Anthony Rogers: "Many ground their confidence on human authority, which is more fragile than a spider's web." Creeds are non-inspired words of men. Scripture is “God-breathed.” the inspired Word of God. (2 Timothy 3:16)
@Spainkiller The later date of AD95-96 is popular among modern scholars, but this is not a popularity contest. Most who date Revelation to AD 95-96 rely on a difficult to interpret statement from Irenaeus. Whether John saw the vision on Patmos or John was last seen on Patmos is unclear. The silence on AD 70 is deafening. John would have been very familiar with Jesus’ prediction of the destruction of the temple, had the fulfillment of that prediction been hindsight, it is incredible that John would never mention it. Positively, it is more intelligible to take the vision about measuring the temple in Revelation 11 to be in reference to a still standing Jerusalem temple. See Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry
@@BibleAnswerMan The silence isn't as deafening as you claim, IMHO, considering the context of Revelation as being written for christians/the church *and* it being a book of prophecy. Why would a book that is written to non-Jews and Jews alike (and is looking forwards in time) mention something that is relevant only to the Jews and has happened in the past? I will admit that the temple being mentioned in Revelation 11 is a very strong argument, though. Then again, John is already seeing visions of the future in that chapter, so it could very well be the THIRD temple he's describing there. I haven't chosen an eschatological position, by the way: I'm merely testing both sides' arguments. As convincing as Hank's interpretation is, there are a lot of problems with it (like 666 supposedly being Nero's number... but that only works if you include both Nero's name AND title). I hope we can ever find true proof of when Revelation was written. It would forever change the world of christendom. After all: truth matters. Thank you.
@@BibleAnswerManJohn was told to write down what he saw, given by the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Jesus. He wasn't giving his own opinions or his conclusions. I'm 'on the fence' in relation to date of Revelation's writing. Cheers
@jodybotha The consummation of the new heaven and new earth with the New Jerusalem descending from above as a bride beautifully adorned for her husband. Hank explains this in Apocalypse When? Why Most End-time Teaching Is Dead Wrong www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/
@@jodybotha You asked a perfect question. Hank does not quite understand when Christ said "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." With that Hank says that he is expecting the literal consummation of a new heaven and new earth. It blows my mind that he has no idea what this heaven and earth is referring to. Heaven and earth a metaphor for the old and new covenant • God calls Judah and Jerusalem heaven and earth (Isaiah 1:1-2), (Isaiah 51:15-16) • And He built His sanctuary like the heavens, like the earth which He has established till the end of the age. (Psalms 78:69) • Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. (Revelation 21: 1, 22) • In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:13) cannot be shaken(Heb 12:27) • “This is the covenant that I will make with them after that day, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,” 17 “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” (Hebrews 10:16-17) The heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22-23) • “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men.” (Revelation 21:3) o No scripture in the entire Bible that says the world (cosmos) will end. o Only the ones that say the world will never end. (Eccl 1:4) (Psalms 119:90( (Ephesians 3:21) o Compare the word world in (John 3:16) (cosmos) and the word world in (Matt 24:3) (eon) age.
@@BibleAnswerMan The problem though is that the gates to the city are already opened, Rex 21-22. Hence, if the gates of the New Jerusalem are already opened, that points to the city as already having come down. The exhortation is to COME drink of that river the gates are opened!!! Also, it appears that when it does come down, there remain unbelievers and evil doers in some sort of proximity to the New Jerusalem. Hence, what kind of New Heaven and New Earth are we to expect? IMO, the NJ and the NHNE have arrived as Spurgeon Edwards and John Lightfoot many others have said.
@@BibleAnswerMan The consummation of the new heaven and the new earth is the new covenant. Of all people, how could you not know that? Quote from Anthony Rogers: "Many ground their confidence on human authority, which is more fragile than a spider's web."
The first argument he gives is really the weakest one I have heard. To say that just because Revelation does not mention the destruction of Jerusalem it must have been written before it’s destruction is to entirely miss the purpose of the book. And he obviously doesn’t understand the purpose because he compares it to a history book. 🤦🏼♂️ Let me ask you this. If the book of Revelation was written around 95AD why would John bother mentioning the destruction of the temple that happened 25 years prior. The entire Roman world would’ve known about it. What would be the purpose of mentioning it, why does it matter whether he mentions it or not. It wouldn’t. This is the worst argument for the book of Revelation being written before the destruction of the temple. Stop using it. It’s ignorant.
@onehappydawg But since Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple in Matthew 24, it is far more intelligible to take John wrote the Apocalypse before rather than after the temple’s destruction, given the measuring of the temple in Revelation 11 gives the impression that the building still stands. That John would never mention the prediction of Jesus having been fulfilled is astounding. For further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/ and www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/
@@BibleAnswerMan If the book of Revelation was written around 95 AD, 25 years after the destruction of the temple, there would be zero reason for John to mention it in the book. First reason why, is because Revelation is a book of prophecy, not a history book. In the video he says if someone wrote the history of New York and did not mention the destruction of the twin towers that would be absurd. True. But Revelation does not claim to be a history of Israel or Jerusalem. It claims to be a prophetic book. So to compare the writing of a history book to a book of prophecy is not understanding what the book of Revelation is. And that argument stands whether it was written in 65AD or 95AD. Second, let’s talk about Revelation 11, John is on the island of Patmos having a vision. When he is told to measure the temple there is not a necessity for there to be an actual temple still standing. It’s a vision. He isn’t actually measuring the real physical temple. If John had stopped there maybe you would have a stronger argument, but he doesn’t. He talks about two witnesses, he says they are killed by the best that rises up from the bottomless pit, they are left in the street 3 1/2 days, there is a resurrection and a great earthquake in which not only a 10th of the city falls but 7,000 people are killed. Where is this recorded in history prior to 70AD? Nothing from the Jews or Rome that I am aware of. I haven’t heard of it in Josephus’ history. Your argument is based off of one mention of the temple in a vision out of the whole book of Revelation. Like I said before, it’s a very weak argument. It uses bad reasoning and comparisons of books that are not alike, historical and prophetic, and then just one mention of the temple in chpt11 to say it must have been written before 70 AD.
@@BibleAnswerMan Revelation 11 is symbolism of the time of the Gentiles. "And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, [67-70 A.D.] then know that the desolation (Dan 9:27) thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written [Dan 9:26-27] may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, 👉until the Times Of The Gentiles be fulfilled.” {Luke 21:20-24} But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot 👉forty and two months. Same time dispensation as, And I will give power unto my *TWO WITNESSES* and they shall prophesy 👉a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. {Revelation 11:2-3} Same time dispensation as, And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another ["little horn" Dan 7:8] shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until 👉a time and times and the dividing of time. {Daniel 7:24-25} --Time of the Gentiles: A time = 360 Times = 720 The dividing of time (an half Dan 12:7) =180. = 1,260 prophetic days = 1,260 years. forty and two months = 1,260 days or a thousand two hundred and threescore days. --From 538 - 1798 A.D. ("the time of the end") when this beast received a deadly wound, but the deadly wound was healed in 1929 when this false church's secular sword was restored unto her, although her spiritual sword she never lost, for she boast that she is the mother church. And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and 👉all the world wondered after the beast. {Revelation 13:3} The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth 👉shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. {Revelation 17:8} *Historicism* (prophetic continuance) principle: And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: 👉I have appointed thee each day for a year. {Ezekiel 4:6} After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, 👉each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise. {Numbers 14:34}
@@larrybedouin2921Larry. Yes, the time periods given regarding the 'time of the Gentiles' of '1260 days', '42 months' and 'time, times and half a time', are all descriptions of the same event and time period. I also like your comment regarding the use of symbolism, which was the description of John's measuring the temple. It wasn't the real temple at Jerusalem, obviously. The real meaning of the 'seven' or in this case half of seven, which is the period of three and a half, is that, throughout scripture, the number seven represents 'complete/completion/whole'. Wherever the number seven is found in scripture, it is related to completion; of an event or the a description of a whole. Seven days make a complete week. The seven churches in Rev 1, represent the complete/whole church. The seven heads of the beast 'out of the sea' in Rev 13:1 represent the complete or whole beast throughout history; the complete, chronological line of Gentile kingdoms, which were prophecied to come through Daniel, to unite the world in rebellion (apostasia) to God. The symbolic meaning of the 'three and a half', which all of the references of 1260 days, 42 months and time, times and half a time, make up, is meaning; a time that does not complete or run its full course; a time which ends unexpectantly, as with the coming 'day of the Lord'. I don't see it having anything to do with prostitute, Babylon 538 to 1798, as many claim. The prostitute, Babylon, is an entirely different entity to 'the beast she rides' Rev 17:7 and who is Christendom, the progeny of the Roman whore. The time scale of the ten kings and the little horn which grows up, is inclusive of the whole beast, because that 'little horn' is symbolic of the Gentile kingdom to which the whole beast belongs - 'is an eighth king/kingdom which belongs to the seven' Rev 17:11. This 'little horn' is the resurrected kingdom which was Babel and why it is denominated with the symbolic eighth numbet - eighth king. It is the kingdom 'which once was, now is not, but will come' - it was before John's vision, wasnit at Johb's writing of the vision, but was to be resurrected in the last days. It is the kingdom 'which was wounded by the sword, but lived' by the Word of God, when God went down and 'wounded' mankind's attempt to unify as one where God said, 'if they be unified like this (one world kingdom) nothing would be impossible for them. This is the resurrected kingdom og man of the last days where the whole world is united in revellion (apostasia - rebel or revolt) to God, becoming his own lord and madter of his own destiny. His measure of success is; peace of earth. If I was to make an assumption, it would be the UN, the united kingdom of mankind with his symbol; the wreath, the olive branch. Cheers
Titus 1: 10.. ( Titus destroyed the temple) Peter and Paul separated gospel due to circumcision.. Galatians 2 : 7-8.. / Acts 21: 21/ Galatians 5: 2-3.. give to Cesar what is Caesar.. phillipians 4: 22... ( in this case Washington/ Acts 22: 27-28. John 7: 23/Luke 2: 21/ Acts 7: 8 Peter is apostle to gentiles .. Acts 15: 7 Peter was misled. 2 Peter 3: 16../ Galatians 1... Matthias was elected 12 apostles in Acts 1: 26./ Only 12.. Revelation 21: 14
John is given a rod and told to measure the temple... and he doesn't. John is given a rod to measure the altar... and he doesn't. John is given a rod to measure the people... and he doesn't. John is not in Jerusalem. John never gives us the purpose for measuring or results of the measuring. It has nothing to do with the temple that was "forty and six years" in building at the time of Christ.
@sunnyjohnson992 The late date (96 CE) is dealt with in the video. For further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/ and www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/
What if he didn't? What if current eschatology is actually the new version that was unheard of for the first 1700 years of the church and just so happened to coincide with the materialist Enlightenment?
@@BibleAnswerMan where is the evidence that John was kept up to date with current events. Also, it’s a possibility that the destruction of the temple had occurred long before revelations was written, making it “old news” and not necessary to mention.
@@BibleAnswerMan Sir, I learn a lot from you. And there are many teachers that I admire. Yet many have outside influences that conflict with the Word of God. In this case, no one can teach what is not in the text righteously. One of the principles of the Bible is ‘not to add to what is written’. Absence is not evidence of anything. Not mentioning something implies nothing. John lived in Asia Minor, writing to Christians who had no need for any Temple. Sacrificing to God required a temple with Levitical priests in Judaism, but not Christianity. The book of Hebrews teaches that now Jesus is the High Priest (5:19-20), Prophet (3:1), and Mediator (8:6). We now go directly to God thru Him (10:19-20). Hebrews 10 tells us about the old system of repeated sacrifices, but now Jesus has made those who follow Him acceptable in the eyes of the LORD (Hebrews 10:14). And when sins are forgiven, there’s no need for more sacrifices (10:18). Now that the Christian oneself is the temple (1 Corinthians 6:19). So the importance of a temple of Judaism is not relevant any longer. There’s no longer any need to focus on the destruction of an old Temple either. To the principle, Galatians 2:11-14 tells us that Paul confronted Peter. Yet the text does not indicate any outcome or response. Therefore, the only thing we DO know is that we don’t know. I pray that you can learn from others as others learn from you.
And when did we see all the birds of Heaven eating the dead of 200 million men? Immediately after the tribulation of those days you will see the signs of the Son of man coming in the clouds? When did that happen... Nowhere in Scripture is Rome ever mentioned in endtime prophecy Hank... Nowhere... You are assuming the fourth beast was Rome Hank, and it's not. The Bible plainly tells us the Anti-Christ will come out of Assyria and not Rome...
Coming on the clouds is not a mode of transportation. It's a Biblical metaphor for judgment on a nation. Also, Hank specifically said that not all of Revelation has been fulfilled yet.
@@Maetryx yes it is... It's also referring to the Battle at Armageddon, the battle of judgement. It won't be metaphorical 100lbs blocks of ice coming down destroying everything in their path will it? Because that's a lot of metaphorical blood. Didn't the angels tell the disciples that he was going to return the same way he left? Are you saying that he didn't go up into the clouds? That's not a metaphor, because he went up into the clouds literally... And why does ALL of the Old Testament prophets tell us the Anti-Christ will be Assyrian? Is that a metaphor for Rome? Y'all know you don't understand endtime prophecy, because y'all have to twist scripture and make every other words a metaphor because you can't explain it...
@@BibleAnswerMan I've been listening to you for over 30 years Hank (if this is you), and quote you on many things, and I always give you credit for those things, but not on this. The reason no one has figured out the Book of Revelation is, no one could before God unsealed the Book of Daniel. That is the key to unlocking the Book of Revelation. God told Daniel that it would be sealed until the time of the end (Dan 12:9)... But, He has unsealed it... Obey the Word of God where it says, test the spirits, and see if they be of God? That is a command, so test me... And see if I know...
The birds did gather around the dead bodies of millions of Jews. It symbolizes the Roman army, which God used to judge Jerusalem as Jesus Christ predicted. The eagle is Rome's symbol placed on their flags or banners. This was also an abomination to the Jews.
@@robrussell6213 Clearly you are not familiar with the actual Biblical narrative.. 👎 Are all Hebrew Israelites Jews? Exodus 2:1 And there went 👉a man of the house of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi.👈 2 And the woman conceived, and bare a son: and when she saw him that he was a goodly child, she hid him three months. 1:What was the faith of Abraham Isaac and Jacob Israel, was it Judaism, were they "Jewish"? 2: Where in the "Hebrew Scriptures" are the "Jews" called God's chosen people? 3: What does the word Jew actually mean? 4: Was Paul of the tribe of Judah? 5: Which of Jacob Israel's sons received the "Fruitful" blessings promised to Abraham's descendants? You know, to "become a multitude of nations", "as numerous as the stars of heaven", as "the sands of the sea", "in thee shall Israel bless", was it Judah?
Whatever a Jew is, Its got nothing to do with the flesh according to the Apostle Paul in Romans 2:28-29. So if you go by Paul's definition, Moses certainly could be called Jewish, cause it does not have anything to do with the flesh... Just saying...
@@robertputt7794 We are in 100% agreement that the "election" in the New Covenant has nothing to do with Fleshly Israel.. But no, absolutely not he could never in any way be accurately described as "Jewish" or as a Jew.. Babylonian Talmud, Kabbalah, ,Zohar etc etc, these are "Jewish".. The Hebrew Scriptures are about the Hebrew Faith of the "Hebrew Israelites", period end of story.. You need to answer the below questions from scripture for yourself, because you are missing 3/4 of the actual Biblical narrative, and half the OT prophecies of the latter days are still highly relevant to "Fleshly Israel".. Believing otherwise is to deny crystal clear scripture.. 1:What was the faith of Abraham Isaac and Jacob Israel, was it Judaism, were they "Jewish"? 2: Where in the "Hebrew Scriptures" are the "Jews" called God's chosen people? 3: What does the word Jew actually mean? 4: Was Paul of the tribe of Judah? 5: Which of Jacob Israel's sons received the "Fruitful" blessings promised to Abraham's descendants? You know, to "become a multitude of nations", "as numerous as the stars of heaven", as "the sands of the sea", "in thee shall Israel bless", was it Judah?
The Complete Bible Answer Book: Collector’s Edition: Revised and Expanded by Hank Hanegraaff, the host of the 𝘉𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘈𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘔𝘢𝘯 broadcast and the 𝘏𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘜𝘯𝘱𝘭𝘶𝘨𝘨𝘦𝘥 podcast, is coming June 2024. Pre-order your copy here: amzn.to/4auSg0T
For further study, get Hank's book "The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times and Why It Matters Today" on Amazon: amzn.to/3c10P8j
For more further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/, www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/, and www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-coming-on-clouds-a-reference-to-christs-second-coming/
BEFORE AD70!!!!!! Don't let Dispensationalists confuse you. It was NOT written after the destruction of Jerusalem.
Thanks! 🙏
Also, when Peter, Andrew, James and John asked Jesus about the end of the age, they were asking when the Old Covenant of the law was coming to an end.
Rev 11:1 "Go and measure the temple of God and the altar"
Any future temple could not be viewed as "the temple of God" simply because it was not commissioned by God to be built in the first place.
It amazes me that people will fight you over giving a later date to the Gospels and Epistles...except when it comes to Revelation. Then they all become German textual critics because it suits their theology.
Obviously before since Revelation is a lot about the destruction of the temple, which occurred in 70.
Such a wonderful video.
Thank you.
I’ve been studying Revelation and how it is to be interpreted. My opinions are not solidified, but as of now I think everything up until 20:7 has been fulfilled, hence we are in the millennium currently.
Still open to other views, but this is what makes the most sense to me currently. Though, it is utterly undeniable that most of Revelation is an echo of Jesus’ Olivet Discourse, which I am a full-preterist on.
I’ll absolutely never break fellowship due to eschatology, but I just have the toughest time understanding how people, mainly among the dispensational crowd, utterly twist and abuse the Olivet Discourse to make it say something Jesus plainly didn’t mean it to be. They’ll jump through hoops to twist language and argue how it’s either half-fulfilled or not yet.
The Olivet Discourse in my opinion is among the most abused texts in the Bible.
There is one issue however... Revelation tells us in the 1000 year reign, Jesus and the elect will be ruling "upon" the Earth in the flesh physically, the Greek word means to literally be upon. So after his second Advent on the clouds with his angels, Revelation tells us Jesus will be here to stay in the flesh as king of the whole earth, with the removal of all other human governments and institutions, until the attack of gog of magog (rebellious humans led by kings who want to rule with their own government after the 1000 years).
According to many church fathers, it was the gnostics who invented A-millenialism, the idea that we are already in the 1000 years, because the gnostics were insistent that there was no physical resurrection on Earth, to support their anti-material theology. Justin Martyr and several others called this a blasphemy against God to deny the coming physical resurrection and rule of Christ. As did Apostle Paul, when he said to pay no heed to those saying the resurrection has happened and the day of the Lord has come.
It's for this reason, I believe Revelation has a double prophetic meaning. That it's referring to 70 A.D, but then also spiritualises it for the future, on a grander global scale, with corrupted Christendom falling to the same fate as Jerusalem. This possibly being the meaning of "write the things you saw, are, and will be". Which is also possibly the meaning of the Beast "that was", is not, and then will be".
Babylon I believe, the harlot, is both ancient Jerusalem and modern Christendom, in an adulterous state, in comparison to the pure virgin bride of Christ (the ones remaining faithful).
As the faithful Jews were told to flee to the mountains, I also believe Christians are taken to heavenly mount zion (a rapture) at the climax of their "70 A.D" in a future sense. Which then results in Christ's physical reign on the Earth with his bride, whereas at the moment, he has a heavenly reign, not fully manifest on Earth yet, but his kingdom at the moment being "within us" as Christians.
@@ProselyteofYah what passage do you refer to in Revelation to support the second coming prior to the millennium?
@@stephenm8233
Revelation 5:10 speaks of a preview of what's coming for the elect:
"You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they 'will' reign 'upon' the earth.”
Later in Revelation, we are told this reigning happens in the 1000 years. So we have the 1k reign, with the Bride of Christ, the kingdom of priests 'ruling' 'upon' the Earth, after Babylon's fall and Satan's imprisonment.
Rev 20:1-5
"Well, after that, I saw a messenger coming down out of the sky who had a long chain in his hand [that held] the key to the abyss. 2Then he grabbed the Dragon - the original snake, the Slanderer and Opposer - and chained him up for 1,000 years. 3And then he threw him into the abyss… He closed it up and locked it up over him, so he couldn’t mislead the nations anymore until after the 1,000 years had ended.However, he will be set free for a little while after that. Next I saw thrones, and those who sat down on them were the ones who had been executed with axes for testifying about Yeshua, for telling about God, and those who hadn’t worshiped the wild animal or its image, nor had they received its branding on their foreheads or on their hands. For they were appointed to be judges.Yes, they came to life and ruled as kings with the Anointed One for 1,000 years… *This is the first resurrection*."
The second coming and rapture, is the time the dead awaken from sleep, this is the "first resurrection". Which happens with the rapture simultaneously ( according to :
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17:
"For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the *dead in Christ will be the first to rise* (be resurrected). Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up *together with them* in the clouds *to meet the Lord in the air*. And so we will always be with the Lord"
This meaning the dead do not go to Heaven at death (that's a gnostic idea), but they sleep in the grave awaiting the return of Christ, when the faithful dead 'with' the faithful living will be taken up together, which is what is happening in Rev 20. The "first resurrection", which means to "stand up and wake", or "rise",.
1 Thessalonians links the coming of Christ and the meeting in the air with the first resurrection, which is in turn the beginning of the 1000 years in Rev 20.
@@ProselyteofYah isn’t the first resurrection Christ’s resurrection?
Isn’t there also other texts that indicate that we currently rule with Christ?
@@Mr-Tibbster are the 24 elders in chapter 4 considered to be “reigning” with Christ, and do you think that’s a connection with the ruling saints in chapter 20? (Cross reference Ephesians 2:6)
Hank actually uses his brain to interpret scripture
That’s where the problems begin. My goodness
Absolutely agree with the dating due to the internal evidence of Scripture, though I do not understand why it is necessary to remove ourselves from a full preterist view of Scripture? I believe that is what the scriptures point to. It doesn't strip us from our Hope in Christ. It makes the spiritual Kingdom of God a full reality for us today! I do not understand the resistance to it
@jfra7107 Well, the Christian might be looking for their so-called still yet future great tribulation in the Book of Revelation, but that never precludes any anticipation for the essential Christian doctrine of Christ second appearance to judge the living and the dead, the resurrection of the saints to everlasting life and the unrighteous to eternal condemnation, and the restoration of the cosmos. Resurrection is a clear teaching from the panoply of the Scriptures. See www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/ and www.equip.org/bible_answers/when-do-we-receive-our-resurrected-bodies/
Hank does not quite understand when Christ said "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." With that Hank says that he is expecting the literal consummation of a new heaven and new earth. It blows my mind that Hank has no idea what this heaven and earth is referring to, and that he is expecting an future earthly Jerusalem, when Christ says to Pilate "my kingdom is not of this world."
Heaven and earth a metaphor for the old and new covenant
• God calls Judah and Jerusalem heaven and earth (Isaiah 1:1-2), (Isaiah 51:15-16)
• And He built His sanctuary like the heavens, like the earth which He has established till the end of the age. (Psalms 78:69)
• Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. (Revelation 21: 1, 22)
• In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:13) a covenant that cannot be shaken (Heb 12:27)
• “This is the covenant that I will make with them after that day, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,” 17 “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” (Hebrews 10:16-17) The heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22-23)
• “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men.” (Revelation 21:3)
o No scripture in the entire Bible that says the world (cosmos) will end.
o Only the ones that say the world will never end. (Eccl 1:4) (Psalms 119:90( (Ephesians 3:21)
o Compare the word world in (John 3:16) (cosmos) and the word world in (Matt 24:3) (eon) age.
Thou must be one who we know as a New Covenanter.
@@patmosboy Interesting comment. Are you one of those that is still living in the old one?
@@james-cq3mi No. I discovered the truth of the New Covenant in March 2024. I had been raised Southern Baptist and came out of the IFB religion during the lockdowns.
@@patmosboy When you say " the truth of the New Covenant," does that mean that you believe that Christ has already come a second time?
On page 134 of Apocalypse Code, the two witnesses, great stuff, thanks again Hank. God bless.
It was written in AD 95 and was written about the Jewish-Roman war in AD 67-70.
You read that right. It's easy to "predict" the duture when it's already happened.
@FAITHandLOGIC Many would say just that in setting a late date of composition for the Book of Revelation, but the Devil is in the details, so they will in the same breath they will say the apocalyptic vignettes were written as vaticinium ex eventu (or history written as prophecy), so therein is an anti- supernatural bias. But John could have written in the late 60s making predictions on the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple in AD 70.
Hank, I appreciate your airing this information again. I remember first hearing you discuss it on the radio show quite a few years back. The single most impactful and tragic strike against the Jewish faith of the age certainly would have been shown as a prophecy fulfilled if NT writers were putting pen to paper late in the 1st century or even 2nd Century as secular critics claim. Reading the Revelation compared with the last letters of the Apostle John have always given me the impression that the former was certainly written by a man up in years, while the vision of given to the John of the Revelation was to a younger man. Furthermore, there is not really any indication that the disciples understood what Jesus was saying to them then in Matthew 24 anymore than his accusers brought up the night of his trial (or used to accuse apostles thereafter while the temple still stood). Based on what I know of the history of Rome and compared to other totalitarian governments,I suspect that the Apostle John was exiled to Patmos more than once, earlier than believed and the chroniclers of his life either missed it or had other things to be concerned with. The events following the Great Fire were certainly chaotic for Christians and Jews, as well as Roman citizens considering the military campaigns that were both ongoing and followed those events plus the persecutions. The disciples of John weren’t following John to honor him but to spread the message of the Gospel. John was special to them as the last of the 12 who walked with Jesus but he obviously had more important things to discuss with them than his personal timeline following the greatest three years of his life. I also understand that the later Council of Nicea had a hard time accepting the Revelation as cannon. I accept that their humble and prayerful consideration did guide them to make the right decision to include the book and it’s authorship. And I appreciate your work. I grew up in a church denomination that followed the teachings of John Wesley only to see it become infected and split - now led by sheep who think they’re smarter than the shepherd - so I don’t care what denomination you worship with on Sundays. Your work has always been true to the Gospel of Christ. Live long and teach…
Revelation of what’s to come…The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Rev 1:1-2
Past may have not played part in what the Angel revealed to John.
Exactly! John wrote what the Spirit told him to, he didn’t write his own history or thoughts.
@ppow0000 Yes. John was writing about the things that must soon take place.
@@BibleAnswerMan true they will soon happen, even a new heaven and a new earth.
Yet nearly every Bible with introduction to books say Revelation was written in AD 95, and a rare few will say, “some scholars think prior to AD 70” . Dispensationalism would crumble if they admitted Revelation was written prior to AD 70. Make wonder if they read the same Bible. By the way Hanks book THE APOCALYPSE CODE is phenomenal!!!
Unfortunately, this is not a popularity context. Sometimes it is Athanasius contra mundum. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ Also check out Redating the New Testament by John A.T. Robinson | www.equip.org/product/redating-the-new-testament/. Another resource to consider is Before Jerusalem Fell (American Vision, 1998) by Kenneth Genty.
@@BibleAnswerMan thank you kindly
Your comment makes sense as to why people need Revelation to be written after the destruction of Jerusalem.
I’ve been a full preterist for 25 years partly due to your material. After all these years, I still do not see any solid justification for partial preterism. Thanks for the video though. This is an important topic. Bless you, sir.
@Chewie576 Understood. Hank considers full preterism to be heresy.
@@BibleAnswerMan Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones . The shouter of the ' h ' word is all too often defending a creed or tradition in their own narrow, little glass house. When creeds and traditions are placed alongside Scripture, with a perceived authority on par with God's Word, there's gonna be error and bias. In this case , there is a disruptive, willful accusation of heresy where there should be none .
3 books will help regarding the dating: Before Jerusalem Fell by Gentry, The Beast of Revelation by Gentry, and The Apocalypse Code by Hanegraff , all 3 great books.
Hello - Revelation was in fact written by Lazarus. It is a symbolic account of the stages of the bona fide Initiate experienced during his diabetic coma after which Jesus came to resuscitate him, having known about his condition. He had not been raised from the dead as such. The priesthood altered this from the early Bible Scripture. We now have the true version. Blessings
@drdarrylschroeder5691 Interesting. Was the Lazarus composition of Revelation your own idea or did you get it from another scholar? Hank holds to the author being John the Apostle. See www.equip.org/bible_answers/who-wrote-revelation/
Greetings - Thank you. Far from being one's own idea, it is in fact derived from The Secret History of the World. So much else has been deliberately altered to conform with the ethos of the time. The actual version is intact on the Akashic Record, being the indelible records of everything that has ever happened in all the Universes. Blessings
It is an argument from silence to suggest this, but it is a pregnant silence. The analogy to the holocaust does not apply, we have the histories from Eisenhower, Churchill, and DeGaul and NONE of them mention the "holocaust". So there is that. Having said that, I am convinced of the before Jerusalem fell argument but not for this reason. It is conceivable that John is writing about past events, but I do not think it is likely.
@user-jt2cf9hx6f It is more intelligible to see a pre AD 70 composition than later dates, say AD 90 or AD 120. The temple in Rev. 11 and the time text ("soon take place" & "near") weigh the evidence for the early date. Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry and Redating the New Testament by John A. T. Robinson are worthwhile resources to consult on the early date.
It’s also incredible that. Not one church father or anything spoke about Jesus returning. My goodness bro. You can’t answer that softball question. I’ll wait
Prior to the writings of Justin Martyr, second century Church father and the writings of 2nd Clement, no evidence of any historical teaching that Jesus was believed to still be coming back in the future. Discussions of the supernatural event in the temple in 66 AD where Josephus and Tacitus who were eye witnesses. Eusebius also records the same supernatural event in the fourth century. That all changed with Roman influence by Augustine in 380 with the introduction of eternal conscious torment and process of a second coming, to control the illiterate masses.
After on the island of Patmos by John
@ricklamb772 Opinion noted. But pre AD70 composition is more intelligible.
This is a new topic I am studying. I can't seem to find a ton of videos about it. If anyone could refer me to more videos about this, including debates or the opposing view, I'd be very grateful!
@albertkleppin2320 You can find treatment on the dating of the Book of Revelation in Steve Gregg's parallel commentary. See www.equip.org/product/revelation-four-views-parallel-commentary/
@@BibleAnswerMan Thank you, that is much appreciated. This is on my reading list so I'll be picking it up sometime soon.
I’m not advocating for either date (in this post) but I’ve heard the argument before of “if the later date were the correct date, then it would be unconscionable for the destruction of Israel to not be mentioned.” Then a parallel is given of a reporter not reporting on the holocaust or the Twin towers under the same type circumstance. The problem with this argument is that a reporter is writing on what he wishes to write about and to tell it as he sees fit. On the other hand, The holy Bible is completely inspired by God to the writers. They’re not writing what they desire, but what The Spirit of God instructs them to write. It’s very possible (if the later date applies) that for reasons only known to God Almighty, nothing was proposed to John to write on the subject. I, for one, would not dare to impose my puny commentary on why God would have or would not have chosen to mention it.
To add to the defining silence on AD70, which is incredibly significant for all NT writers to never mention (Matthew, Mark, Luke, Paul, John, Peter, and James), so not just a single journalist so to speak, but it is also more intelligible to take Revelation 11 as something written prior to AD 70. Hank says, “In Revelation 11, John said, “I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, ‘Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months’” (vv. 1-2). In context, Jesus had sent His angel “to show his servants what must soon take place” (Revelation 1:1) Thus, the prophecy concerns a future event, not one that took place twenty-five years earlier.” See www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/
The 7 kings that are mentioned are the Hasmoean and Herodian kings
@kellyblakeborough3371 - why would that be the case?
@@BibleAnswerMan the 5 have fallen 1 is here and 1 has yet to come . The point of the book of revelation it is written for the 7 congregations of Asia Minor and for them to understand what is taking place . All things were unfolding before them as Babylon the Great which is Jerusalem and its religious system that is being judged as in the case of Matthew chapter 23 . The 7 kings that sat on the throne of David had no legitimate right to be there but they wanted to retain this earthly kingdom and wanted it protected and hence the slaughter of the innocent the death of our king in Jesus Christ and the persecution of Christians to come . It was these kings with the Jewish religious leaders who persecute the Christian community Acts chapter 7
the initial argument makes sense when you frame it as writing the history of an area. "would you leave out the twin towers if you were writing a history of New York?" Revelation is not a history of Jerusalem. Its not a history letter. On that account then why would he add history into a letter that he was writing to record a vision he received from Jesus? Im not saying it wasnt written before 70 ad. im just rebutting that point of the argument.
@user-fq5mf5me7w No. Revelation concerns the things that must soon take place. The temple measured in Revelation 11 implies the temple and city still stood when the vision was received, which makes it more intelligible to set the date of composition around AD 67 prior to the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple in AD 70. No mention of the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul suggest a pre-AD 70 date of composition.
He has insulted Joel Richardson in saying Joel doesn't understand prophecy. Pretty arrogant, if you ask me. I have studied prophecy for over 40 years and was very interested in Amillennialism in the 90s. After much proof texting for several decades, I came to the conclusion, that a prewrath premill position had the least contradictions to it. Peter Goeman currently has a series for a later date, if your interested. Peter Goeman points out two very strong points for later dating. That Paul make no mention of John at in his leadership at Ephesus in the letters. Also, it is solidly supported of the destruction of Leodicea in 60 AD. There are no cities back then that show any rebuilding of city within 6 years and typically would to take at best a minimum of 10 years. A third supporting argument is that church leaders are strangely silent of Revelation's fulfillment if it was an early date. This would be a very important declaration for them in their writings to keep their audience aware of such matters. Paul stresses strongly to the members that it hasn't taken place to the assembly in Thessaloniki so I would think it would be very important that later leaders would clarify such matters. There is no statement of fulfillment until the 4th century later for some strange reason. The fourth supporting arguments are the death of Christian martyrs in every century. The millennial period indicates of the victorious reign of martyrs with Christ not a constant one. In Hebrews, the author states to remember those in chains as in bonds with them. As you can see that the Scripture then become bifurcated and confusing, with the Amillennial perspective, it might lead one to think no position is correct and perhaps Christianity is crazy and default into shipwrecking the faith. That's dangerous and something to seriously think about. The prewrath premill preserves the idea that persecution and suffering will persist and the hope of the resurrection is ahead of us and keeps us looking forward to it.
@graysonbr Do not know why Joel Richardson ought to be insulted. But the point is to consider the historical grammatical interpretation of the text.
@@BibleAnswerMan premillennialist actually do and moreso than those with a realized eschatological perspective.
Hmm, you are not convincing. Why do you not use writings of the early Church fathers to strengthen your case? Jesus spoke of Antipas. Antipas was martyred by Emperor Domitian in 92 A.D. Please do not mislead people.
@lezelroos9241 Well, the early church fathers, particularly the Apostolic Fathers of the second century, help us gain useful information that assists us in understanding the Scriptures and the truth of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ and Son of God who died and rose again. See www.equip.org/articles/jesus-as-god-in-the-second-century/ Little is known about Antipas. The martyrdom by Domitian you allude to is a legend. R.C.H. Lenski notes, “That he was the bishop of the church and was burned alive in a heated metal image of a bull during the days of Domitian is a legend that appeared in the tenth century” (R.C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. John’s Revelation [Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1943], 105).
Before. Period.
Assuming that John wrote Revelation prior to 70AD, there is no mention of 70 AD in Revelation of the destruction of the (city and temple ). If he wrote Revelation post 70AD there is no mention of it either simply because it was in the past and John is writing about prophecies re:the future not historical events which are in the past. In our century no one prophesied about 911, but someone could write about it in terms of HISTORY.
There is however a PROPHECY regarding Jerusalem (the great city in Rev. 11:8, Rev. 17, Rev. 18) about a future destruction where the temple is not mentioned, which will be found in Rev. 17:15 to 18, since the great city is equated with the HARLOT in Rev. 18, who rides the scarlet first beast of Rev. 13:1-10.
@bernardmichaud1099 - of course John would not mention the destruction of the temple if the even had not yet occurred. But if the temple had already fallen, it is beyond delusion to think John would pass on mentioning or hinting at it, and it is more intelligible to take vision in Revelation 11 as a reference to the still standing and fully operational temple in Jerusalem. Plus all the references to the destruction of Jerusalem are more intelligently understood to be from a composition before the fall in AD 70 rather than afterwards, especially if there is nary any hint that the city has already fell.
Since the Jewish Age ended in AD 70, ushering in the Times of the Gentiles by Christ's Coming in Judgement to Jerusalem just as He predicted in Matt 24 and Lk. 21, wouldn't God provide this last divine Word of His to the Apostle John prior to this very important event?
@@AgeDeo2009Mathew, Mark, Luke and John wrote about this event (70AD, destruction of the city and temple), in their Gospels as a warning to Christians living in their time to escape the tragic event, ... which they did. John writes post 70AD so why would he even mention an event which has already happened in the past? Is there something I'm not understanding here?
@@bernardmichaud1099 When we objectively read and study the Book of Revelation, taking into consideration the context, its literary style, and its direct recipients, we can see - even feel the urgency of the warnings. It has many allusions to the temple which, if was already destroyed many years before (25 years ago) as many believe, the images used by John would not have been that vivid to its recipients anymore. Since the end of the Judaic Age was on AD 70 (where the times of the Gentiles began as recorded in Lk. 21), it is but logical for God to give it before 70 AD to indicate that the Old Covenant has ended and a New Covenant has begun as the prophet Daniel prophesied.
reconsider: true temple discussed in Hebrews...tabernacle symbol of the true and, by extension, also modeled in the physical temple
Yup! A lot of Revelation already happened.
@rogerkreil3314 Very true.
I certainly agree with the video. Good information.
Amen.
Revelation was written in the mid 90s A.D. while the Apostle John was exiled under Emperor Domitian and this is how we know:
**Look at the early century writers.
The earliest writings that attest to a later date are Hegesippus (120AD-190AD) and Irenaes. Irenaes stated in 180 A.D. (Adv Haer V. 30, 3) that it was under Domitian's reign. NO early century witnesses questioned Irenaeus until 1,600 years later by Johann Wettstein in 1752. That means they all knew it was under Emperor Domitian in the 90s, so nobody contested it.
Early church writer Tertullian (150 AD-212 AD) mentions the liberation of those who were banished by Emperor Domitian in "Apology 5" in 197 A.D. Nero was not known for banishing Christians. Nero killed them just like he did Peter and Paul and made flaming lamp posts out of others. Domitian was the first one to banish left and right. He exiled his own family because they refused to bow down and worship him. They weren't Christian. They were atheist. Domitian is also the first emperor to demand to be recognized as a deity while alive. All the obelisks calling him a god were torn down after he was assassinated in 96 A.D. That's when John was released from Patmos and went to Ephesus since Peter and Paul were dead.
**An early date of Revelation conflicts with several of the letters in Revelation chapter 2 and 3.
Jesus' letter to the Church of Laodicea couldn't have been written in the 60s A.D. because the city was destroyed by a massive earthquake in 60 A.D. Historical records document it took them 25-years to rebuild it, which would put the church operational in the 80s A.D. Roman historian, Tacticus, wrote that Rome offered to pay for the rebuild of the church but the people refused aid because they were wealthy enough to do it alone. And they did. It took 25-years. Laodicea didn't exist in the 60s AD.
Jesus' letter to the church of Pergamum mentions his faithful martyr, Antipas. Antipas was martyred by Emperor Domitian in 92 A.D. The Apostle John appointed Antipas as Bishop to the church of Pergamum in 83 A.D. That's after the 60s. The death of Antipas under Domitian is documented by early century writer Simeon Metaphrastes.
Jesus' letter to the church of Ephesus conflicts with Paul's sentiment for the church in his letters to Timothy in the books 1st and 2nd Timothy. Jesus rebuked them and Paul alluded they were doing fine. No instructions to Timothy on how to deal with the "problems" with the church because there weren't any problems until years later that Christ addressed.
Similar evidence is found for writings of the rapture of the church. Paul taught it and wrote about it and so did an endless list of early church fathers. But false teachers don't want you to research that either. What did Jesus say first about the signs of the last days? He said "take heed no man deceive you." Jesus uses the word "deceive" 4-times in Matthew 24 in regards to signs of the his coming. Deception is rampant now on every level.
If Revelation was written before 70AD, then who was the Antichrist? Why isn't Jesus ruling and reigning in Jerusalem? When did 1/4 of the world population die according to Revelation 6:8? When did an additional 1/3 of the world die according to Revelation 9:15 & 18? What was the mark of the beast globally that stopped people from buying and selling? There's no historical literature written since 70 AD answering these questions. That's because Revelation 4-22 haven't happened yet, but they're about to.
If you don't know Jesus Christ as your personal savior, pray to him today. Don't get left behind after the rapture of the church to try and survive the 7-year Tribulation. Because odds are if you wait until then to reach out to Christ, it will cost you your life (Revelation 20:4)
Good point. There is lots of dependance upon the testimonial of Irenaeus. It is possible that the interpreters of Irenaeus miss the point, and error then begat error. So. Irenaeus was wanting to say John was last seen on Patmos as opposed to saying John saw the vision on Patmos. This is explained in "The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says about the End Times and Why It Matters Today" on Amazon: amzn.to/3c10P8j
Also check out Kenneth Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell (Victorious Hope Publishing).
For more further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/, www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/, and www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-coming-on-clouds-a-reference-to-christs-second-coming/
These people do not want facts. In any form
No one is going to buy your stupid book.
@@WhiteDove73-888 You’re absolutely right. You can lay it all out and they reject it. I read tonight “Ecclesiastical History” by
Eusebius of Caesarea written in the 2nd century, Book III point 20, says the Apostle Paul was banished by Emperor Domitian. That’s an account by someone during that time. None of the early church fathers disputed that Apostle John wrote the book of Revelation under the rule of Emperor Domitian, which ran from 80AD until his assassination in 96AD. So Revelation didn’t happen in 70AD. It’s future events to take place from chapter 4-22. Satan doesn’t want people to know the season we’re in and be looking for Jesus and it’s worked! Amillennialism is the predominant view in the majority of our churches now & it’s creating these apostate churches the book of Jude warns us about. Well I’m rapture ready bc I don’t follow the majority.
I follow the One 🎺☁️
Do we have any examples of the early church interpreting 70 AD as the fulfillment of prophecies in the book of Revelation?
@joshuas1834 John Chrysostom’s Homily LXXV, which concerns Matthew 24, interprets the Olivet Discourse as pertaining to the Fall of Jerusalem. Ambrosiaster took the 70 weeks of Daniel to go from Darius to the Christ and completed with Vespasian (127 Questions on the Old and New Testament, 44:14). Please consult Gary Demar and Francis X Gumerlock, The Early Church and the End of the World (Powder Springs, GA, 2006).
@@BibleAnswerMan thank you so much. That's a difficult thing to get Google to return appropriate search results about. I've tried to do my own research but the information I'm looking for just gets drowned in a bunch of dispensationalist stuff.
A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness.
{Proverbs 12:23}
What call you foolishness
@@JamesBongo
This!
@@larrybedouin2921 so it is simply because you claim it is
TO ALL PRETERISTS:
Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away 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.
PRETERISTS take away from the words of the book of prophecy.
REPENT, while you can
@qwerty-so6ml Can you explain how preterists are taking away from the words of the Book of Prophecy?
Are not dispensationalist in danger of adding to God's Word when they read into the Bible the pretribulation rapture story, God is going to remove the Church from the Earth before the start of a future seven-year Great Tribulation that ends with Jesus' Second Coming and the start of the Millennium?
@@BibleAnswerMan
Around 70AD the second temple destroyed.
Around 95AD, John received the book of Revelation.
Yet, he was told that he would be coming back at the end.
Revelation 10:11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.
The angel of the Church of Philadelphia has been given Daniel's sealed scroll, unsealed.
That revelation (given within the past 20 years):
Only one Gospel:
The Gospel of Reconciliation.
Jesus Christ came into THEIR kingdom
to reconcile fallen angels unto Himself.
We are the fallen angels (ELOHIM) kept in DNA chains of darkness.
If you do not confess being a fallen angel in Lucifer's kingdom, then you are an unbeliever.
Unbeliever = those that claim to be made in the image of ELOHIM(gods).
REPENT FALLEN ANGELS.
@@BibleAnswerMan
YT blocks comments.
Around 70AD the second temple destroyed.
Around 95AD, John received the book of Revelation.
Yet, he was told that he would be coming back at the end.
Revelation 10:11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.
@@BibleAnswerMan
YT blocks comments, cont.
The angel of the Church of Philadelphia has been given Daniel's sealed scroll, unsealed.
That revelation (given within the past 20 years):
Only one Gospel:
The Gospel of Reconciliation.
Jesus Christ came into THEIR kingdom
to reconcile fallen angels unto Himself.
We are the fallen angels (ELOHIM) kept in DNA chains of darkness.
If you do not confess being a fallen angel in Lucifer's kingdom, then you are an unbeliever.
Unbeliever = those that claim to be made in the image of ELOHIM(gods).
REPENT FALLEN ANGELS.
The modern imitation church swears they are to take the gospel to the world,ignoring like usual that the great commission was given to the apostles and true church in Jesus day. Colossians 1:2 Be not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you have and which has been preached to the whole world. Romans 10:17-18 So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. But I say,have they not heard? Yes, their sound has went out into all the earth. Sure enough ,the imitation church also ignores the fact that Jesus death did a million times more than they give him credit. Jesus came to put away sin. Hebrews 9:24-26. God sending His son in the likeness of sinful flesh ,and for sin,condemned sin in the flesh Romans 8:3-4. Now the imitation church will have you think that sin was to be forever when their book says Jesus ended it upon the cross. Seeing that the law is gone,and we were never under it anyway,it looks as though they would believe Romans 4:15. Where there is no law there is no sin. Romans 5:13-14....sin is not imputed when there is no law. 1John 3:4-Sin was the transgression of the law. They do not,will not believe the very book they swear by. Mere religion. The most important chapter in the Bible for us today ,they refuse also. 1Corinthians 15. This chapter explains what happened when Jesus finished His work on earth. It clearly says that Jesus returned to heaven and subjected himself to God. In the original Greek subjected means he actually became subservient. He having all things placed under his feet for a short time by God,all authority and power granted him to do his work,placed all,all things back under the feet of God. He delivered the kingdom once held by Satan back to God and became subject to God. It also says at this time that God was now all and in all. ALL and in ALL. He is in all mankind now. We know good from evil. We have God consciousness whether we fight it or not or like it or not. He is all and in all. Sin being the trespass of the law was of the law and the flesh and is why Jesus became flesh for those under the law and his flesh died. Jesus put away sin. Evil which was before the the law is of the heart and we know the difference between evil and good. After Jesus turned all back over to God ,God reigned again and always will,Jesus work complete. God through Jesus reconciled the world back to Himself. Why do the imitation church not want that? God reigns and we are to flee evil and do good. God and He alone should be worshipped. God alone should be trusted to work in mankinds heart giving them revelation and the ability to know they are the sons and daughters of God. He has revealed all in the past and has not stopped.Thecworld has been reconciled whether the imitation church wants to believe it or not. Our relationship is to be with God now through no mediator. He reigns. He is to be All and in All and no other.
@gwayne11000 Thanks for sharing your thoughts. We still proclaim the gospel to nations? Evangelize? Invite others to Church? Encourage others to evangelize?
I think the obvious answer is revealed as we let the prophecy speak for itself. The teaching of a gap theory in the 70 weeks is a ploy of the devil to deny Jesus Christ: His Crown.
This guy is not 100% correct in his theology, either. Nor am I.
@nickkimball9419 Thanks for the take on the gap theory.
WHY DOES HE NOT DISCUSS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE:
The book is a revelation:
"...What thou seest, WRITE it in a book..." (1:11) (Jesus, Alpha&Omega, first & last)
"WRITE the things which thou have seen, and the things which are, and the things which are to come (1:19) (Jesus, he that liveth and was dead... alive evermore and have the keys of hell and of death)
John admonishes us to be equally obedient!
"For I testify to every man that heareth the words of the PROPHECY of this book, If any man shall ADD unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book" (22:18). (John)
The prophet of God reveals ONLY what God shows/tells him/her.🙏
I go by the church fathers. Until the Catholic Church changed that doctrine
So where exactly is Jesus right now my broseph???
Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, numbered the Roman Caesars in his writings. The first for Josephus was Julius Caesar. Suetonius the first century Roman historian wrote a book on the Roman Caesars and the first he said was Julius Caesar. Rev. 17 is easy if you count the kings as those in the first century did, "five have fallen" (Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius); "one is" (Nero). Revelation had to have been written between 64 to 68 AD. The Christian persecution began in 64, but Nero was forced by the Roman Senate to commit suicide in 68. As Rev. 1:1-4 states, these events would immediately begin in those times, meaning the first century, after all the audience for Revelation was the seven churches in Asia, according to the command that Jesus gave to John to deliver His message to them.
🙏
When did all Israel repent when they saw Yeshua returning on the clouds. That never happened
Thank you
Also if John wrote Revelation in AD 95 he would have been about 93-94 years old.
Ancient writings have been found that state that John when he had reached that age he had to be carried into Church bec he was bed ridden. And he never said anything to anyone other than may the Lord Bless you.
I would image his eyesight would just about be gone also.
🙏
Age has nothing to do with how good your eye site is I have know people in mid nineties age and did not need glasses
@@delilahrichardson6716 Well I believe old age does have bearing on how good ones eyesight is. As we get older nothing gets better as my doctor once told me. But the point is when John had hit the age of 90 he was bedridden or chair ridden. John was carried into church and he never
@@delilahrichardson6716 said anything to anyone other than God bless you according to what people who knew John have recorded in their writings.
So he would not have been in a fit State to record Revelation in AD 95.
R C Sproul a Reformed Theologian has a Vid out called " The Book of Revelation" on U tube were he explains how the Erroneous belief that Revelation was written about AD 95 came about.
Worth viewing and only 28 minutes long.
Many Scholars who study these things believe that all the books of the N T were all written before AD 70
You last sentence you made the mention of his site I was only point out that age don't determine site I work in nursing homes and seen elderly people who didn't need glasses
I once saw a university paper b my grandson who argued that the apostle John could no have written it either in ad 90 or ad loo either because he would have been too old.
@brianmarshall1637 Good point.
What a poor comment, he was commanded by the Master himself to write down "Write in a scroll what you see..." Would the age of John hinder God? Besides, an old man can write...right? And this dude says...good point???
So then what now? We're just ticking through history until Jesus shows up? Seems to be the only prophecy left?
@poseidon3032 The future time when Jesus appears a second time to judge the living and the dead is hardly anticlimactic. It is the blessed hope. When the Lord returns, the dead will be resurrected, the righteous to everlasting life, the unrighteous to everlasting condemnation, the cosmos will be renewed, there will be a new heaven and new earth where indwells righteousness, and the New Jerusalem will descend as a bride beautifully adorned for her husband. Something to look forward too!
He doesn't mention a future destruction of the temple either.
🙏 In the Book of Revelation that is. Neither John nor Jesus says anything about the Jerusalem temple having already been destroyed. This makes it more intelligible to take the composition of Revelation before AD 70 rather than afterwards, say AD 90 or AD 120.
@BibleAnswerMan Jesus predicts the temple will be destroyed but John doesn't. It makes more sense to me because it had already been destroyed when John wrote revelation. And its likely that he doesn't mention that it had previously been destroyed because the vision was focused on the future and not something that happened 25 years previously.
Revelation isn't a history book. So no; it's not implausible that it didn't mention a particular historical event.
Truth!
👍
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him (Jesus) to show His servant things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he (John) saw. This was not John's Revelation to us, It was Jesus revealing this prophecy of future things that are coming. John wrote what he saw, he was the secretary taking notes of what to write and what not to write (Revelation 10:3-4).
About 10 years ago I was given a book by Gary Demar or something like that, read about 2 chapters and throw the book away. As I look in to who these people were I learn that they were into selling books that was it. And also learn for the first time the word "preterits". Everything happened in 70AD including the second coming of Jesus. I guess you will have to go and buy another book so they can explain that one to you. Save your money and pray for these people including Hank.
@@loyal-warrior What did you read that caused you to throw the book away? I would think that you would have so much confidence in you knowledge of the Bible that you would show scriptural evidence of what you felt that Gary was saying that was wrong. Your problem is, you couldn't. Like Hank, you belly up to your creeds. When I read comments like yours, it reminds me of this quote from Anthony Rogers: "Many ground their confidence on human authority, which is more fragile than a spider's web." Creeds are non-inspired words of men. Scripture is “God-breathed.” the inspired Word of God. (2 Timothy 3:16)
Oh no 1895 is far too late. Who the heck quoted 1895, I have never ever heard that ever.
uhm...transcription error...AD 90 sounds like 1890 to voice recognition software
Before
@timothykring4772 Amen. 👍
Your logic is similar to Rome’s logic for Mary
Arguments from silence aren’t strong arguments.
Also: “Almost all New Testament scholars now take the view that Revelation was written during the reign of Domitian, sometime around 95-96 CE.”
@Spainkiller The later date of AD95-96 is popular among modern scholars, but this is not a popularity contest.
Most who date Revelation to AD 95-96 rely on a difficult to interpret statement from Irenaeus. Whether John saw the vision on Patmos or John was last seen on Patmos is unclear.
The silence on AD 70 is deafening. John would have been very familiar with Jesus’ prediction of the destruction of the temple, had the fulfillment of that prediction been hindsight, it is incredible that John would never mention it.
Positively, it is more intelligible to take the vision about measuring the temple in Revelation 11 to be in reference to a still standing Jerusalem temple.
See Before Jerusalem Fell by Kenneth Gentry
@@BibleAnswerMan The silence isn't as deafening as you claim, IMHO, considering the context of Revelation as being written for christians/the church *and* it being a book of prophecy. Why would a book that is written to non-Jews and Jews alike (and is looking forwards in time) mention something that is relevant only to the Jews and has happened in the past?
I will admit that the temple being mentioned in Revelation 11 is a very strong argument, though. Then again, John is already seeing visions of the future in that chapter, so it could very well be the THIRD temple he's describing there.
I haven't chosen an eschatological position, by the way: I'm merely testing both sides' arguments. As convincing as Hank's interpretation is, there are a lot of problems with it (like 666 supposedly being Nero's number... but that only works if you include both Nero's name AND title).
I hope we can ever find true proof of when Revelation was written. It would forever change the world of christendom.
After all: truth matters.
Thank you.
@@BibleAnswerManJohn was told to write down what he saw, given by the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Jesus. He wasn't giving his own opinions or his conclusions. I'm 'on the fence' in relation to date of Revelation's writing. Cheers
After. See the seven letters to the seven churches.
Then what of Revelation has not been fulfilled?
@jodybotha The consummation of the new heaven and new earth with the New Jerusalem descending from above as a bride beautifully adorned for her husband. Hank explains this in Apocalypse When? Why Most End-time Teaching Is Dead Wrong www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/
@@BibleAnswerMan thanks... I'm struggling to open that link... Will keep trying.
@@jodybotha You asked a perfect question. Hank does not quite understand when Christ said "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." With that Hank says that he is expecting the literal consummation of a new heaven and new earth. It blows my mind that he has no idea what this heaven and earth is referring to.
Heaven and earth a metaphor for the old and new covenant
• God calls Judah and Jerusalem heaven and earth (Isaiah 1:1-2), (Isaiah 51:15-16)
• And He built His sanctuary like the heavens, like the earth which He has established till the end of the age. (Psalms 78:69)
• Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. (Revelation 21: 1, 22)
• In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:13) cannot be shaken(Heb 12:27)
• “This is the covenant that I will make with them after that day, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,” 17 “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” (Hebrews 10:16-17) The heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22-23)
• “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men.” (Revelation 21:3)
o No scripture in the entire Bible that says the world (cosmos) will end.
o Only the ones that say the world will never end. (Eccl 1:4) (Psalms 119:90( (Ephesians 3:21)
o Compare the word world in (John 3:16) (cosmos) and the word world in (Matt 24:3) (eon) age.
@@BibleAnswerMan The problem though is that the gates to the city are already opened, Rex 21-22. Hence, if the gates of the New Jerusalem are already opened, that points to the city as already having come down. The exhortation is to COME drink of that river the gates are opened!!!
Also, it appears that when it does come down, there remain unbelievers and evil doers in some sort of proximity to the New Jerusalem. Hence, what kind of New Heaven and New Earth are we to expect? IMO, the NJ and the NHNE have arrived as Spurgeon Edwards and John Lightfoot many others have said.
@@BibleAnswerMan The consummation of the new heaven and the new earth is the new covenant. Of all people, how could you not know that? Quote from Anthony Rogers: "Many ground their confidence on human authority, which is more fragile than a spider's web."
HEY EINSTEIN...... IT WASNT A HISTORY BOOK
@JOEY30021 The point being...?
The first argument he gives is really the weakest one I have heard.
To say that just because Revelation does not mention the destruction of Jerusalem it must have been written before it’s destruction is to entirely miss the purpose of the book.
And he obviously doesn’t understand the purpose because he compares it to a history book. 🤦🏼♂️
Let me ask you this. If the book of Revelation was written around 95AD why would John bother mentioning the destruction of the temple that happened 25 years prior.
The entire Roman world would’ve known about it. What would be the purpose of mentioning it, why does it matter whether he mentions it or not. It wouldn’t.
This is the worst argument for the book of Revelation being written before the destruction of the temple. Stop using it. It’s ignorant.
@onehappydawg But since Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple in Matthew 24, it is far more intelligible to take John wrote the Apocalypse before rather than after the temple’s destruction, given the measuring of the temple in Revelation 11 gives the impression that the building still stands. That John would never mention the prediction of Jesus having been fulfilled is astounding. For further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/ and www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/
@@BibleAnswerMan If the book of Revelation was written around 95 AD, 25 years after the destruction of the temple, there would be zero reason for John to mention it in the book.
First reason why, is because Revelation is a book of prophecy, not a history book.
In the video he says if someone wrote the history of New York and did not mention the destruction of the twin towers that would be absurd. True.
But Revelation does not claim to be a history of Israel or Jerusalem.
It claims to be a prophetic book.
So to compare the writing of a history book to a book of prophecy is not understanding what the book of Revelation is. And that argument stands whether it was written in 65AD or 95AD.
Second, let’s talk about Revelation 11, John is on the island of Patmos having a vision. When he is told to measure the temple there is not a necessity for there to be an actual temple still standing. It’s a vision. He isn’t actually measuring the real physical temple. If John had stopped there maybe you would have a stronger argument, but he doesn’t.
He talks about two witnesses, he says they are killed by the best that rises up from the bottomless pit, they are left in the street 3 1/2 days, there is a resurrection and a great earthquake in which not only a 10th of the city falls but 7,000 people are killed.
Where is this recorded in history prior to 70AD? Nothing from the Jews or Rome that I am aware of. I haven’t heard of it in Josephus’ history.
Your argument is based off of one mention of the temple in a vision out of the whole book of Revelation.
Like I said before, it’s a very weak argument. It uses bad reasoning and comparisons of books that are not alike, historical and prophetic, and then just one mention of the temple in chpt11 to say it must have been written before 70 AD.
@@BibleAnswerMan
Revelation 11 is symbolism of the time of the Gentiles.
"And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, [67-70 A.D.]
then know that the desolation (Dan 9:27) thereof is nigh.
Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written [Dan 9:26-27] may be fulfilled.
But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,
👉until the Times Of The Gentiles be fulfilled.”
{Luke 21:20-24}
But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot
👉forty and two months.
Same time dispensation as,
And I will give power unto my *TWO WITNESSES* and they shall prophesy
👉a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
{Revelation 11:2-3}
Same time dispensation as,
And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another ["little horn" Dan 7:8] shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until 👉a time and times and the dividing of time.
{Daniel 7:24-25}
--Time of the Gentiles:
A time = 360
Times = 720
The dividing of time (an half Dan 12:7) =180.
= 1,260 prophetic days = 1,260 years.
forty and two months = 1,260 days or a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
--From 538 - 1798 A.D. ("the time of the end") when this beast received a deadly wound, but the deadly wound was healed in 1929 when this false church's secular sword was restored unto her, although her spiritual sword she never lost, for she boast that she is the mother church.
And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and 👉all the world wondered after the beast.
{Revelation 13:3}
The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth 👉shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
{Revelation 17:8}
*Historicism* (prophetic continuance) principle:
And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: 👉I have appointed thee each day for a year.
{Ezekiel 4:6}
After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days,
👉each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.
{Numbers 14:34}
@@larrybedouin2921Larry. Yes, the time periods given regarding the 'time of the Gentiles' of '1260 days', '42 months' and 'time, times and half a time', are all descriptions of the same event and time period.
I also like your comment regarding the use of symbolism, which was the description of John's measuring the temple. It wasn't the real temple at Jerusalem, obviously.
The real meaning of the 'seven' or in this case half of seven, which is the period of three and a half, is that, throughout scripture, the number seven represents 'complete/completion/whole'. Wherever the number seven is found in scripture, it is related to completion; of an event or the a description of a whole. Seven days make a complete week. The seven churches in Rev 1, represent the complete/whole church. The seven heads of the beast 'out of the sea' in Rev 13:1 represent the complete or whole beast throughout history; the complete, chronological line of Gentile kingdoms, which were prophecied to come through Daniel, to unite the world in rebellion (apostasia) to God.
The symbolic meaning of the 'three and a half', which all of the references of 1260 days, 42 months and time, times and half a time, make up, is meaning; a time that does not complete or run its full course; a time which ends unexpectantly, as with the coming 'day of the Lord'. I don't see it having anything to do with prostitute, Babylon 538 to 1798, as many claim. The prostitute, Babylon, is an entirely different entity to 'the beast she rides' Rev 17:7 and who is Christendom, the progeny of the Roman whore. The time scale of the ten kings and the little horn which grows up, is inclusive of the whole beast, because that 'little horn' is symbolic of the Gentile kingdom to which the whole beast belongs - 'is an eighth king/kingdom which belongs to the seven' Rev 17:11.
This 'little horn' is the resurrected kingdom which was Babel and why it is denominated with the symbolic eighth numbet - eighth king.
It is the kingdom 'which once was, now is not, but will come' - it was before John's vision, wasnit at Johb's writing of the vision, but was to be resurrected in the last days.
It is the kingdom 'which was wounded by the sword, but lived' by the Word of God, when God went down and 'wounded' mankind's attempt to unify as one where God said, 'if they be unified like this (one world kingdom) nothing would be impossible for them.
This is the resurrected kingdom og man of the last days where the whole world is united in revellion (apostasia - rebel or revolt) to God, becoming his own lord and madter of his own destiny. His measure of success is; peace of earth. If I was to make an assumption, it would be the UN, the united kingdom of mankind with his symbol; the wreath, the olive branch. Cheers
@@robertcain3426
The U N is a store front for the club of Rome.
Oh but its not just rev ...none of the other books supposedly written after 70 mention it either 😂
👍
Tel Megiddo
this liar can’t answer the simplest question. Where is Jesus? He is missing? No! He is Not!
And??
🤷♂️
Titus 1: 10.. ( Titus destroyed the temple) Peter and Paul separated gospel due to circumcision.. Galatians 2 : 7-8.. / Acts 21: 21/ Galatians 5: 2-3.. give to Cesar what is Caesar.. phillipians 4: 22... ( in this case Washington/ Acts 22: 27-28.
John 7: 23/Luke 2: 21/ Acts 7: 8
Peter is apostle to gentiles .. Acts 15: 7
Peter was misled. 2 Peter 3: 16../ Galatians 1...
Matthias was elected 12 apostles in Acts 1: 26./ Only 12.. Revelation 21: 14
WHAT??! 😂😂😂😂
@@tuconexionlocal7516your mom should be circumcised.. that's my point..
👊😇TRUTH!!💣
Amen to that!
Thank u brother
John is given a rod and told to measure the temple... and he doesn't. John is given a rod to measure the altar... and he doesn't. John is given a rod to measure the people... and he doesn't. John is not in Jerusalem. John never gives us the purpose for measuring or results of the measuring. It has nothing to do with the temple that was "forty and six years" in building at the time of Christ.
The book of Revelation was written by the Apostle John on Patmos and it was completed in 96 C.E.
@sunnyjohnson992 The late date (96 CE) is dealt with in the video. For further related reading, see www.equip.org/bible_answers/was-revelation-written-before-or-after-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-ad-70-/ www.equip.org/articles/apocalypse-when/ and www.equip.org/article/left-behind-from-root-to-ripened-fruit/
How does it feel to know you have turned your back on the essence of prophecy? Hank, Good luck in your new denomination.....
What if he didn't? What if current eschatology is actually the new version that was unheard of for the first 1700 years of the church and just so happened to coincide with the materialist Enlightenment?
So typical of dispensationalists, so dug in to their eschatology that they will attack folks who dare question it, kinda like the alphabet cult...
Maybe John wasn’t aware of the current events during that time due to isolation at Patmos.
And God didn't know either when he revealed the writing to John?
@@maisoonafaneh7831 why would God “reveal” something he had already revealed would happen?
@Zechariah46 - where is the evidence for that “never got the bad news” tradition?
@@BibleAnswerMan where is the evidence that John was kept up to date with current events. Also, it’s a possibility that the destruction of the temple had occurred long before revelations was written, making it “old news” and not necessary to mention.
After
Wowew such insight you have
Absence is not evidence.
@robbracken1758 - explain?
@@BibleAnswerMan Sir, I learn a lot from you. And there are many teachers that I admire. Yet many have outside influences that conflict with the Word of God.
In this case, no one can teach what is not in the text righteously. One of the principles of the Bible is ‘not to add to what is written’. Absence is not evidence of anything. Not mentioning something implies nothing.
John lived in Asia Minor, writing to Christians who had no need for any Temple. Sacrificing to God required a temple with Levitical priests in Judaism, but not Christianity. The book of Hebrews teaches that now Jesus is the High Priest (5:19-20), Prophet (3:1), and Mediator (8:6). We now go directly to God thru Him (10:19-20).
Hebrews 10 tells us about the old system of repeated sacrifices, but now Jesus has made those who follow Him acceptable in the eyes of the LORD (Hebrews 10:14). And when sins are forgiven, there’s no need for more sacrifices (10:18).
Now that the Christian oneself is the temple (1 Corinthians 6:19). So the importance of a temple of Judaism is not relevant any longer. There’s no longer any need to focus on the destruction of an old Temple either.
To the principle, Galatians 2:11-14 tells us that Paul confronted Peter. Yet the text does not indicate any outcome or response. Therefore, the only thing we DO know is that we don’t know.
I pray that you can learn from others as others learn from you.
And when did we see all the birds of Heaven eating the dead of 200 million men? Immediately after the tribulation of those days you will see the signs of the Son of man coming in the clouds? When did that happen... Nowhere in Scripture is Rome ever mentioned in endtime prophecy Hank... Nowhere... You are assuming the fourth beast was Rome Hank, and it's not. The Bible plainly tells us the Anti-Christ will come out of Assyria and not Rome...
Coming on the clouds is not a mode of transportation. It's a Biblical metaphor for judgment on a nation. Also, Hank specifically said that not all of Revelation has been fulfilled yet.
@@Maetryx yes it is... It's also referring to the Battle at Armageddon, the battle of judgement. It won't be metaphorical 100lbs blocks of ice coming down destroying everything in their path will it? Because that's a lot of metaphorical blood. Didn't the angels tell the disciples that he was going to return the same way he left? Are you saying that he didn't go up into the clouds? That's not a metaphor, because he went up into the clouds literally... And why does ALL of the Old Testament prophets tell us the Anti-Christ will be Assyrian? Is that a metaphor for Rome? Y'all know you don't understand endtime prophecy, because y'all have to twist scripture and make every other words a metaphor because you can't explain it...
@robertputt7794 See www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-coming-on-clouds-a-reference-to-christs-second-coming/
@@BibleAnswerMan I've been listening to you for over 30 years Hank (if this is you), and quote you on many things, and I always give you credit for those things, but not on this. The reason no one has figured out the Book of Revelation is, no one could before God unsealed the Book of Daniel. That is the key to unlocking the Book of Revelation. God told Daniel that it would be sealed until the time of the end (Dan 12:9)... But, He has unsealed it... Obey the Word of God where it says, test the spirits, and see if they be of God? That is a command, so test me... And see if I know...
The birds did gather around the dead bodies of millions of Jews. It symbolizes the Roman army, which God used to judge Jerusalem as Jesus Christ predicted. The eagle is Rome's symbol placed on their flags or banners. This was also an abomination to the Jews.
Was Moses a Jew? You shouldn't be teaching anyone a thing about scripture..
Moses wasn't a Jew.
🤷♂️
@@robrussell6213 Clearly you are not familiar with the actual Biblical narrative.. 👎 Are all Hebrew Israelites Jews?
Exodus 2:1 And there went 👉a man of the house of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi.👈 2 And the woman conceived, and bare a son: and when she saw him that he was a goodly child, she hid him three months.
1:What was the faith of Abraham Isaac and Jacob Israel, was it Judaism, were they "Jewish"?
2: Where in the "Hebrew Scriptures" are the "Jews" called God's chosen people?
3: What does the word Jew actually mean?
4: Was Paul of the tribe of Judah?
5: Which of Jacob Israel's sons received the "Fruitful" blessings promised to Abraham's descendants? You know, to "become a multitude of nations", "as numerous as the stars of heaven", as "the sands of the sea", "in thee shall Israel bless", was it Judah?
Whatever a Jew is, Its got nothing to do with the flesh according to the Apostle Paul in Romans 2:28-29. So if you go by Paul's definition, Moses certainly could be called Jewish, cause it does not have anything to do with the flesh... Just saying...
@@robertputt7794 We are in 100% agreement that the "election" in the New Covenant has nothing to do with Fleshly Israel.. But no, absolutely not he could never in any way be accurately described as "Jewish" or as a Jew.. Babylonian Talmud, Kabbalah, ,Zohar etc etc, these are "Jewish".. The Hebrew Scriptures are about the Hebrew Faith of the "Hebrew Israelites", period end of story.. You need to answer the below questions from scripture for yourself, because you are missing 3/4 of the actual Biblical narrative, and half the OT prophecies of the latter days are still highly relevant to "Fleshly Israel".. Believing otherwise is to deny crystal clear scripture..
1:What was the faith of Abraham Isaac and Jacob Israel, was it Judaism, were they "Jewish"?
2: Where in the "Hebrew Scriptures" are the "Jews" called God's chosen people?
3: What does the word Jew actually mean?
4: Was Paul of the tribe of Judah?
5: Which of Jacob Israel's sons received the "Fruitful" blessings promised to Abraham's descendants? You know, to "become a multitude of nations", "as numerous as the stars of heaven", as "the sands of the sea", "in thee shall Israel bless", was it Judah?