Babylon

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
11,966
3,747
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This was all completed by 70 AD.
Reformed preterist 70AD fulfillment is "False", the "three items" below are future and unfulfilled

Preterism is looked at through the window of Matthew chapter 24 and the Olivet discourse, in relationship to the three items below

(Partial Preterist) believe 1 or 2 of the events below have been fulfilled

(Full Preterist) believe all of the 3 events below have been fulfilled

(Futurist) believe none of the 3 events below have been fulfilled

1.) Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD
2.) Matthew 24:21 The Great Tribulation
3.) Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming

Wikipedia: Preterism
A Christian eschatological view, interprets some (partial preterism) or all (full preterism) prophecies of the Bible as events which have already happened. This school of thought interprets the Book of Daniel as referring to events that happened from the 7th century BC until the first century AD, while seeing the prophecies of the Book of Revelation as events that happened in the first century AD. Preterism holds that Ancient Israel finds its continuation or fulfillment in the Christian church at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, which is a prefix denoting that something is "past" or "beyond".[1] Adherents of preterism are known as preterists. Preterism teaches that either all (full preterism) or a majority (partial preterism) of the Olivet discourse had come to pass by AD 70.

Historically, preterists and non-preterists have generally agreed that the Jesuit Luis de Alcasar (1554–1613) wrote the first systematic preterist exposition of prophecy Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi (published in 1614) during the Counter-Reformation.

In the preterist view, the Tribulation took place in the past when Roman legions destroyed Jerusalem and its temple in AD 70 during the end stages of the First Jewish–Roman War, and it affected only the Jewish people rather than all mankind.

Christian preterists believe that the Tribulation was a divine judgment visited upon the Jews for their sins, including rejection of Jesus as the promised Messiah. It occurred entirely in the past, around 70 AD when the armed forces of the Roman Empire destroyed Jerusalem and its temple.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
11,966
3,747
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This was all completed by 70 AD.

Preterist Claims In 66-70AD Fulfillment Falls, As The Book Of Revelation Was Written In 96AD​


When Was the Book of Revelation Written?
By Wayne Jackson

Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96. Some writers, however, have advanced the preterist (from a Latin word meaning “that which is past”) view, contending that the Apocalypse was penned around A.D. 68 or 69, and thus the thrust of the book is supposed to relate to the impending destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70).

A few prominent names have been associated with this position (e.g., Stuart, Schaff, Lightfoot, Foy E. Wallace Jr.), and for a brief time it was popular with certain scholars. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.D. 96 (1939, 2584). In fact, the evidence for the later date is extremely strong.

In view of some of the bizarre theories that have surfaced in recent times (e.g., the notion that all end-time prophecies were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70), which are dependent upon the preterist interpretation, we offer the following.

External Evidence
The external evidence for the late dating of Revelation is of the highest quality.

Irenaeus
Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30). The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

Even Moses Stuart, America’s most prominent preterist, admitted that the “tyrant here meant is probably Domitian.” Within this narrative, Clement further speaks of John as an “old man.” If Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, it would scarcely seem appropriate to refer to John as an old man, since he would only have been in his early sixties at this time.

Victorinus
Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).

Jerome
Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,

In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).

To all of this may be added the comment of Eusebius, who contends that the historical tradition of his time (A.D. 324) placed the writing of the Apocalypse at the close of Domitian’s reign (III.18). McClintock and Strong, in contending for the later date, declare that “there is no mention in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place” (1969, 1064). Upon the basis of external evidence, therefore, there is little contest between the earlier and later dates.

Internal Evidence
The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.

The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.

The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).

Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.

Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).

Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.

The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.

Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).
 

Davy

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2018
13,407
2,784
113
Southeastern U.S.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just more of men's philosophy using un-Biblical disectomy, false claims that Babylon for the end represents anything... other than how Bible Scripture defines it...

Rev 17:18
18 And t
he woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
KJV

Rev 11:8
8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of
the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
KJV

Where was Lord Jesus crucified? JERUSALEM!

The end time Babylon Harlot represents JERUSALEM at the end of this world.
 

Jerry Huerta

Member
Feb 24, 2025
106
12
18
Tucson
historicist.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Obviously you don't comprehend what "Jesus quoted" means.

So just leave it for those who do. :laughing:
"My doctrine".

Trademark of a cult. :laughing:

Obviously, you don’t grasp the grammar of the phrase "in the days of these kings." We can’t trust the mental gymnastics of those who try and interpret them as 10 consecutive emperors or the strengths and weaknesses of the Roman Empire.

And obviously we can’t trust the mental gymnastics of those who try and interpret Babylon as the first century Jews who in no logical sense fornicated with the kings of the earth or made the merchants of the earth rich.

And obviously we can’t trust the mental gymnastics of those who try and gaslight us that in this age Christ is seated on David’s throne by misrepresenting the kingdom of God. The Old and NT reveal the kingdom of God as the scattering of Israel and Christ’s kingdom as their gathering (Jeremiah 23, 31; Ezekiel 34; Hosea 2; Zechariah 10).

And most of all we can’t trust the metal gymnastics of those who try and gaslight us Christ returned in 70 AD, secretly, when they fail to grasp Christ cloaked his distant return in the imminent event in which one stone wouldn’t be left upon another at the destruction of the Herod’s temple, just as Daniel cloaked the distant event of Christ’s first advent in the imminence, within a generation, of “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.”

I'm simply not going to accept the preterist "doctrines" with all their mental gymnastics. sml
 
Last edited:

Jerry Huerta

Member
Feb 24, 2025
106
12
18
Tucson
historicist.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Both preterists and futurists are wrong about Babylon, but so are historicists. The idealist view gets forgotten and overlooked, but it is the correct one. Babylon does not represent any particular earthly entity, but rather represents the spiritual opposite of the heavenly new Jerusalem. It is the mother of harlots, of which the Papacy and RCC is only one. Your view of Babylon is too narrow. Its scope is well beyond just the Papacy and RCC. Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Secular Humanists, etc. are all citizens of Babylon and none of those have anything to do with the Papacy and RCC. Babylon is the mother of all harlots, including the Papacy, while the heavenly Jerusalem is the mother of all believers (Galatians 4:26).


Luther is not a trustworthy source for doctrine. He believed in total depravity and had some other views similar to John Calvin's false beliefs in relation to salvation, also.


Wrong. Of all the things you can criticize preterism about, this is not one of them. Do you not believe that you are in Christ's kingdom now? The kingdom that He said does not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36).

Colossians 1:12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Do you not believe that you have been delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the kingdom of the Father's dear Son Jesus Christ? Do you think Paul didn't know what he was talking about here?


Agree.



Notice at that point it says "the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father". Why is it called "the kingdom of their Father"? Because Jesus will have delivered the kingdom He rules over now to the Father at that point.

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
No, I don't believe Christ is seated on David's throne at this time because the scriptures don't prove any such thing any more than they affirm Idealism. Matthew 19:28, 24:46-47; Luke 12:35-44, 19:11-27; John 14:2-3; and Revelation 2:25-26, 3:21 all affirm Christ returns to rule in all power and authority, which means we don’t enter the eternal state when he returns. That comes later when he puts “down all rule and all authority and power,” according to 1 Corinthians 15.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
10,696
4,414
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, I don't believe Christ is seated on David's throne at this time because the scriptures don't prove any such thing any more than they affirm Idealism.
Have you never read this passage:

Acts 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

In this passage Peter indicated that Jesus was spiritually seated on David's throne by way of His resurrection which made Him "both Lord and Christ". Do you not accept what Peter taught?

Matthew 19:28, 24:46-47; Luke 12:35-44, 19:11-27; John 14:2-3; and Revelation 2:25-26, 3:21 all affirm Christ returns to rule in all power and authority, which means we don’t enter the eternal state when he returns.
Those passages affirm no such thing. What they affirm is that He is the Judge and will judge all people when He returns while giving His followers some role in that, as passages like Matthew 25:31-46 also indicate, but they say absolutely nothing about Him ruling on the earth for a long period of time.

That comes later when he puts “down all rule and all authority and power,” according to 1 Corinthians 15.
That happens at His second coming, according to 1 Corinthians 15:22-24. You insert a thousand years into the passage where it doesn't belong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
10,696
4,414
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just more of men's philosophy using un-Biblical disectomy, false claims that Babylon for the end represents anything... other than how Bible Scripture defines it...

Rev 17:18
18 And t
he woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
KJV

Rev 11:8
8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of
the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
KJV

Where was Lord Jesus crucified? JERUSALEM!

The end time Babylon Harlot represents JERUSALEM at the end of this world.
No, Jesus was not crucified in Jerusalem. Which you will accept if you truly accept what scripture teaches. I have a feeling that you will not accept what these scriptures teach, though, because you typically believe what you want to believe regardless of what scripture teaches.

John 19:20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Hebrews 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
 
Last edited:

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,372
2,701
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Obviously, you don’t grasp the grammar of the phrase "in the days of these kings."
Obviously you don't grasp that Tiberius ruled "in the days of these kings" when Christ set up the Kingdom of God.
We can’t trust the mental gymnastics of those who try and interpret them as 10 consecutive emperors or the strengths and weaknesses of the Roman Empire.
Who does that? Not I.
And obviously we can’t trust the mental gymnastics of those who try and gaslight us that in this age Christ is seated on David’s throne by misrepresenting the kingdom of God. The Old and NT reveal the kingdom of God as the scattering of Israel and Christ’s kingdom as their gathering (Jeremiah 23, 31; Ezekiel 34; Hosea 2; Zechariah 10).
I see you've omitted Zechariah 13:7, so obviously you now agree that Jesus Himself exegeted that verse (Matthew 26:31; Mark 14:27), which makes no mention of the Kingdom of God.

You've also ignored Daniel 2:44, which points directly to the NT verses I've reposted below, confirming and affirming Jesus' establishment of the Kingdom of God.

If you consider them to be "preterist" verses, then you obviously consider Jesus to be a preterist, since He fulfilled them all at His first coming, long before 70 AD. :laughing:

Mark 1
14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Luke 8
1 And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him,

Luke 11
20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.

Luke 12
32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.

Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
 

CTK

Active Member
Aug 13, 2024
962
168
43
71
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
For what it is worth... here is a cut / paste from the commetary from chapter 7. This ties to the reference in chapter 2:44, "In the days of these kings." I do understand how this comes across from today's accepted interpretations, and it is even more cryptic when such a very different interpretation is presented on it's own. There is so muchg more to this interpretation in the commentary to support this identity of the 10 toes / horns / kings / saints of the most high.... they represent God's 10 commandments that transition from within the Jewish nation (toes under Roman rule) to horns outside of pagan Rome after the cross, to kings now sitting atop the 4th beast of papal Rome and then as "Saints of the Most High" - the final symbol which will return to God at the end of time. This method of teaching / revealing of the 10 commandments as they transition through the kingdoms is widely used by God - He does the same thing for the 4 kingdoms from chapters 2-7-8.

Daniel 7:24

24The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom. And another shall rise after them; He shall be different from the first ones, and shall subdue three kings.

Verse 24a-the ten horns shall arise from this kingdom

Daniel 7:24a marks an important shift in the understanding of the ten horns. Up until this point, Daniel has seen these horns growing from the fourth beast, but now, Gabriel clarifies their identity: they are ten kings. This is the first time these ten horns are explicitly called kings, and this new designation raises a critical question—why are they now being recognized as kings, and what does this reveal about God’s plan?

To fully grasp their significance, we must return to Chapter 2 and Nebuchadnezzar’s metal-man image, where God first described the fourth kingdom—Pagan Rome—as a kingdom of iron. This kingdom, unlike its predecessors, would not simply rise and fall. Instead, it would undergo a unique transformation. The iron feet of Rome, which represented its rule over both the Jewish nation and the Gentile world, contained ten toes and clay—symbolizing both Roman dominion and the presence of God’s people under that rule.

In Daniel 2:34, the Stone (Messiah) strikes the feet of the image, breaking apart the iron and the clay – within the feet. However, it does not directly strike the toes. This distinction is crucial.

The clay represented God’s people, who had been under Roman rule.

The Stone’s impact symbolized the crucifixion of Jesus, which would bring about a great separation within the Jewish people.

Those who accepted Jesus as their Messiah were identified as “pottery clay”, moldable in the hands of the Potter (Jeremiah 18:6).

Those who rejected Him were identified as “ceramic clay”, hardened and unable to be shaped.

After the crucifixion, those who accepted the Messiah would go out into the world, preaching the Good News. The Ten Commandments, once entrusted to the Jewish nation, would now be proclaimed to the Gentiles—just as the ten toes were now symbolically free from Roman captivity.

When we move from Daniel 2 to Daniel 7, God reveals something new about these ten toes—they do not remain toes, but instead become ten horns (Daniel 7:7-8). This transformation is not accidental. In Chapter 2, the ten toes symbolized God’s law within the Jewish nation. But now, in Chapter 7, these same ten elements are described as “horns” or “powers”, indicating authority. And now, in Daniel 7:24, Gabriel further clarifies their status:

“The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom.”​

The Ten Commandments, which were God’s moral law, have transitioned to the top of the 4th beast, and would be redefined by the little horn. They are no longer just a guiding force—they have been elevated to the status of kings. Like kings, they must be obeyed—but not according to God’s original intent. Instead, the little horn (Papal Rome) would ensure that the commandments were worshipped in the way he determined.

When Pagan Rome fell in 476 AD, the Christian Church, which had already gained immense power, stepped into the void. The Bishop of Rome—soon to be the Pope—claimed authority over both religious and secular matters, thus marking the full transition from Pagan Rome to Papal Rome. As Papal Rome grew in influence, it did not stand alone. Alongside it, the Ten Commandments themselves were altered, reshaped to fit the doctrines of the Church. The original moral law—once a guiding light for salvation—was now transformed into a system of enforced worship dictated by religious authority.

Later in verse 25, Daniel will reveal the final transformation of these ten toes, horns, and kings. Eventually, God will reclaim them, and they will identified the ten saints of the Most High.

But for now, in Daniel 7:24a, these ten horns have become kings under Papal Rome’s rule, enforcing laws that have been twisted from their original divine purpose. This transformation is significant because it reveals that Papal Rome’s power was not just political—it was spiritual. Just as a king demands obedience, so too did the little horn enforce its own version of God’s commandments upon the world. Over time, the little horn would:

Replace biblical truth with human traditions.

Elevate the power of the Church above the Word of God.

Persecute those who refused to conform.

Thus, the ten horns becoming ten kings symbolizes how the teachings of God were distorted under the influence of Papal Rome. Rather than being God’s moral law, they were now used as instruments of control—and those who challenged the little horn’s authority would suffer the consequences.

Although Daniel would not have the ability to understand the meaning of this symbolism, this was still a deeply troubling revelation. This is why Daniel 7:24a marks a turning point—it confirms that the fourth beast’s final phase would be a kingdom unlike any before it, one that would redefine worship, authority, and obedience in ways never before seen in history.

Verse 24b-Another shall arise after them and be different

Although these ten horns (kings) are not the head of the fourth beast, their power and authority would be appropriated and assumed by the little horn. The little horn would successfully wield their power and manipulate their followers for their own agenda: total power, control, and worship by all.

Gabriel would never refer to the little horn as a ‘king.’ The four great beasts, which would arise out of the earth, will be identified as four kings (17), and Gabriel will tell Daniel that the ten horns, which shall arise out of this kingdom (fourth kingdom of pagan Rome), are also ten kings (24a). Although some have interpreted that the little horn is also a king (24b), this is not the case. When Gabriel writes, "And another,” he is indeed referring to another horn and not another king.

The rise of the little horn and its appropriation of authority of the ten horns within the fourth beast of Papal Rome is reminiscent of the biblical narrative of Lucifer's fall from grace.

Just as Lucifer's rebellion originated from within God's heavenly kingdom, the emergence of the little horn occurs from within one of the four earthly kingdoms (pagan Rome) called out by God. But God did not call out the kingdom of Papal Rome, or the little horn as king. This parallel underscores the spiritual significance of the little horn's actions and its claim to divine authority, mirroring the deceptive tactics employed by Lucifer in the Garden of Eden.

As he was contemplating the ten horns, he saw another horn—a little horn—arise among them (Daniel 7:8). This little horn, which is different from the ten, would emerge later and have a distinct role in the prophetic narrative. It is abundantly clear that the little horn is connected to or aligned with the ten horns; he seems to be quite invested in the ten horns and is aware of their power. After the cross, the fourth kingdom begins to divide, and the Jews who accept Jesus as their Messiah start preaching the Good News to both fellow Jews and Gentiles throughout the pagan Roman Empire. The early Christian church began to develop its own hierarchical structure during the first three centuries after the cross, and Rome was the city where the bishops would concentrate their power.

In every organization, there is only one head or ruler. In the fourth beast or kingdom, that ruler was the little horn, and the fourth beast or kingdom would be known as Papal Rome. Daniel mentions this new characteristic not found in verses 7 or 8: it will have an appearance greater than his fellows.
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,372
2,701
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The Old and NT reveal the kingdom of God as the scattering of Israel and Christ’s kingdom as their gathering (Jeremiah 23, 31; Ezekiel 34; Hosea 2; Zechariah 10).
You claim to be historicist, so what recognized Reformation historicists agree with your claim about the Kingdom of God?

Evidence, please. Names, sources, verbatim quotes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Brakelite

APAK

Well-Known Member
Feb 4, 2018
10,356
10,827
113
Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States

Preterist Claims In 66-70AD Fulfillment Falls, As The Book Of Revelation Was Written In 96AD​


When Was the Book of Revelation Written?
By Wayne Jackson

Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96. Some writers, however, have advanced the preterist (from a Latin word meaning “that which is past”) view, contending that the Apocalypse was penned around A.D. 68 or 69, and thus the thrust of the book is supposed to relate to the impending destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70).

A few prominent names have been associated with this position (e.g., Stuart, Schaff, Lightfoot, Foy E. Wallace Jr.), and for a brief time it was popular with certain scholars. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.D. 96 (1939, 2584). In fact, the evidence for the later date is extremely strong.

In view of some of the bizarre theories that have surfaced in recent times (e.g., the notion that all end-time prophecies were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70), which are dependent upon the preterist interpretation, we offer the following.

External Evidence
The external evidence for the late dating of Revelation is of the highest quality.

Irenaeus
Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30). The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

Even Moses Stuart, America’s most prominent preterist, admitted that the “tyrant here meant is probably Domitian.” Within this narrative, Clement further speaks of John as an “old man.” If Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, it would scarcely seem appropriate to refer to John as an old man, since he would only have been in his early sixties at this time.

Victorinus
Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).

Jerome
Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,

In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).

To all of this may be added the comment of Eusebius, who contends that the historical tradition of his time (A.D. 324) placed the writing of the Apocalypse at the close of Domitian’s reign (III.18). McClintock and Strong, in contending for the later date, declare that “there is no mention in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place” (1969, 1064). Upon the basis of external evidence, therefore, there is little contest between the earlier and later dates.

Internal Evidence
The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.

The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.

The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).

Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.

Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).

Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.

The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.

Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).

'As The Book Of Revelation Was Written In 96AD' ..NOT! Your support is easily refuted, seriously.

 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
7,294
1,452
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States

'As The Book Of Revelation Was Written In 96AD' ..NOT! Your support is easily refuted, seriously.



Silence doesn't refute anything, even if in ALL CAPS.
 

Jay Ross

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2011
7,926
2,971
113
QLD
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
@Jerry Huerta,

It seems that you have not read all of the prophecies concerning the Land of Babylon and the fact that it was to become devastated and desolated for a period of some 2,000 or so year, which occurred some 60 years before the Roman Empire had dominion over nations and countries from about the year 60 BC in the area of the Land of Canaan. This means that the third segment of the Daniel 2 Statue prophecy which had dominion over the land of Babylon up to around 120 BC when they devasted and desolate the Land of Babylon, was the Grecian Seleucid Empire.

Neither have you understood that the Land of Babylon was remembered once more before God to begin receiving the cup of God's wrath in 1926 AD and the Nation that was given dominion over the Land of Babylon was Iraq. (Revelation 16:17ff)

As such the nation that is the fourth segment of the Daniel 2 Statue prophecy is Iraq and not the Roman Empire as you have suggested in other posts.

Holding onto the commentaries from the Reformation Period as being a solid reference source is fraught with dangers that leaves one face covered with brown stuff.

The above can be confirmed from recent historical records.
 
Last edited:

APAK

Well-Known Member
Feb 4, 2018
10,356
10,827
113
Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Silence doesn't refute anything, even if in ALL CAPS.
You've got that right. You did notice I responded in kind to a poster that had these words bolded and in caps right? I guess you do pay attention...
 

Davy

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2018
13,407
2,784
113
Southeastern U.S.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, Jesus was not crucified in Jerusalem.

That above of course folks, IS A LIE.

Lord Jesus Christ was CRUCIFIED IN THE CITY OF JERUSALEM which the Revelation 11:8 verse CLEARLY STATES!


Rev 11:8
8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of
the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
KJV

In Christ's Book of Revelation, JERUSALEM is called "the great city" ten times. NINE of the ten times it is referring to JERUSALEM as the "great city" UNDER FALSE WORSHIP. Only with the 10th time is JERUSALEM referred to as the "great city" UNDER GOD AND HIS SON.

Revelation 11:8 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" under control by the beast.
Rev.14:8 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" having just 'fallen'.
Rev.16:19 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" falling at the sound of the 7th Trumpet.
Rev.17:18 - Jerusalem defined by Christ as the BABYLON HARLOT WOMAN as the "great city".
Rev.18:10 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" viewed falling by the kings of the earth.
Rev.18:16 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" viewed falling by the merchants.
Rev.18:18 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" viewed burning by the merchants.
Rev.18:19 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" with the merchants casting dust upon their heads as they view Jerusalem fallen.
Rev.18:21 - Jerusalem as the BABYLON HARLOT "great city" falling by the great millstone cast upon it by the angel, and it is no more.
Rev.21:10 - NEW JERUSALEM as the "great city" "descending out of heaven from God."


Therefore, JERUSALEM of this present world... is ORDAINED TO DESTRUCTION by GOD, and will be REPLACED WITH GOD'S NEW JERUSALEM DESCENDING FROM HEAVEN.


Gal 4:24-26
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to
Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26
But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
KJV
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
10,696
4,414
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That above of course folks, IS A LIE.

Lord Jesus Christ was CRUCIFIED IN THE CITY OF JERUSALEM which the Revelation 11:8 verse CLEARLY STATES!
No matter how much you childishly use caps, it doesn't make what you say true.

So, you apparently didn't even read the verses I used to support my claim. They explicitly state that Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem, so you are the one telling a lie.

John 19:20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Hebrews 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

Are these verses in your Bible or not? How can you claim that I'm lying when what I'm saying is based on explicit scripture? You're just another one who cherry picks scripture and doesn't accept all of it.
 

CTK

Active Member
Aug 13, 2024
962
168
43
71
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No matter how much you childishly use caps, it doesn't make what you say true.

So, you apparently didn't even read the verses I used to support my claim. They explicitly state that Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem, so you are the one telling a lie.

John 19:20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Hebrews 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

Are these verses in your Bible or not? How can you claim that I'm lying when what I'm saying is based on explicit scripture? You're just another one who cherry picks scripture and doesn't accept all of it. Jesus was crucified outside the city gates of Jerusalem. The Gospels indicate that He was crucified at a place called Golgotha, which means "Place of the Skull" (Matthew 27:33, Mark 15:22, Luke 23:33, John 19:17). The location was outside the city walls, in accordance with Jewish law, which required executions and burials to take place outside the city (Leviticus 24:14, Numbers 15:35-36).

For what it is worth....

Jesus was crucified outside the city gates of Jerusalem. The Gospels indicate that He was crucified at a place called Golgotha, which means "Place of the Skull" (Matthew 27:33, Mark 15:22, Luke 23:33, John 19:17). The location was outside the city walls, in accordance with Jewish law, which required executions and burials to take place outside the city (Leviticus 24:14, Numbers 15:35-36).

Additionally, Hebrews 13:12 confirms this, stating:
"And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood."

This was significant symbolically because Jesus, as the ultimate sacrificial lamb, was crucified outside the city just as sin offerings were burned outside the camp in the Old Testament (Leviticus 16:27).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiritual Israelite

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
10,696
4,414
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
For what it is worth....

Jesus was crucified outside the city gates of Jerusalem. The Gospels indicate that He was crucified at a place called Golgotha, which means "Place of the Skull" (Matthew 27:33, Mark 15:22, Luke 23:33, John 19:17). The location was outside the city walls, in accordance with Jewish law, which required executions and burials to take place outside the city (Leviticus 24:14, Numbers 15:35-36).

Additionally, Hebrews 13:12 confirms this, stating:
"And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood."

This was significant symbolically because Jesus, as the ultimate sacrificial lamb, was crucified outside the city just as sin offerings were burned outside the camp in the Old Testament (Leviticus 16:27).
Yep. But, I get someone calling me a liar for something explicitly taught in scripture, which is that Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem. It's unbelievable.

To support your point about Hebrews 13:12...

Hebrews 13:10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle. 11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. 12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

If someone denies that Jesus was crucified without (outside) Jerusalem, then, to be consistent, they'd have to also argue that the sin offerings (animal sacrifices) were not burned without (outside) the camp, but I doubt anyone would try to argue that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CTK

Jerry Huerta

Member
Feb 24, 2025
106
12
18
Tucson
historicist.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Have you never read this passage:

Acts 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

In this passage Peter indicated that Jesus was spiritually seated on David's throne by way of His resurrection which made Him "both Lord and Christ". Do you not accept what Peter taught?

Have you never read this passage,

Daniel 2
44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Daniel 2:44 states, “in the days of these kings,” meaning more than one; the kings of the iron legs ruled sequentially, not simultaneously. The passage in Daniel requires “kings that rule simultaneously,” so it can’t mean in the time of the Roman Empire. Furthermore, verse 41 states “the kingdom shall be divided,” which pertains to the Roman Empire, the legs of iron. The feet of the image represent when the Roman Empire was divided at its fall, not during the time when the Empire was at its height at Christ’s first advent.

Furthermore, Christ was raised to sit at his Father’s throne, not David’s (Revelation 3:21). He returns to sit on his throne,

Matthew 25
31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. ESV

Do you accept what Christ said to Matthew?

Those passages affirm no such thing. What they affirm is that He is the Judge and will judge all people when He returns while giving His followers some role in that, as passages like Matthew 25:31-46 also indicate, but they say absolutely nothing about Him ruling on the earth for a long period of time.


That happens at His second coming, according to 1 Corinthians 15:22-24. You insert a thousand years into the passage where it doesn't belong.

Your argument from silence is a fallacy. There is nothing to suggest the rule, authority or power Christ rewards the overcomes with at his return is transitory. Your assertion that the passages I cite “say absolutely nothing about Him ruling on the earth for a long period of time” is erroneous, poor exegesis. The point of the passages that I cite is that Christ returns to “establish” rule, power and authority when he returns, not end it. First Corinthians 15:24 affirms the end (the eternal state) comes when Christ puts “down all rule and all authority and power,” which has to be some time after he returns, because he returns to “establish” rule and all authority and power. That time must be the 1000 years revealed in Revelation 20. As Revelation 5:9-10 in the EVS states, Christ “ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation,” and “made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth." Amill has no place for the saints to rule as priest and kings to God.
 
Last edited:

Jerry Huerta

Member
Feb 24, 2025
106
12
18
Tucson
historicist.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Obviously you don't grasp that Tiberius ruled "in the days of these kings" when Christ set up the Kingdom of God.

Obviously, preterists pay no attention to grammar and syntax. Daniel 2:44 states, “in the days of these kings,” meaning more than one; Tiberius was “one” king of the iron legs, so it can’t mean in the time of Tiberius. The kings of the iron legs ruled sequentially, not simultaneously. The passage in Daniel requires “kings that rule simultaneously,” so it can’t mean in the time of the Roman Empire. Furthermore, verse 41 states “the kingdom shall be divided,” which pertains to the Roman Empire, the legs of iron. The feet of the image represent when the Roman Empire is divided at its fall, not during the time of Tiberius, when it’s at its height.

I see you've omitted Zechariah 13:7, so obviously you now agree that Jesus Himself exegeted that verse (Matthew 26:31; Mark 14:27), which makes no mention of the Kingdom of God.

You've also ignored Daniel 2:44, which points directly to the NT verses I've reposted below, confirming and affirming Jesus' establishment of the Kingdom of God.

If you consider them to be "preterist" verses, then you obviously consider Jesus to be a preterist, since He fulfilled them all at His first coming, long before 70 AD. :laughing:

Mark 1
14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Luke 8
1 And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him,

Luke 11
20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.

Luke 12
32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.

Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

I see you continue to omit that the prophets foretold the kingdom of God,

Jeremiah 31
27 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.
28 And it shall come to pass, that like as I have watched over them, to pluck up, and to break down, and to throw down, and to destroy, and to afflict; so will I watch over them, to build, and to plant, saith the LORD…
31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Of course, this passage is but one of the sources of Christ’s parable of the wheat and the tares,

Matthew 13
24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way…
36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

The law foreshadowed the harvest season (Hebrews 10:1), which is illustrated in Christ’s parables of planting and harvesting in Matthew 13 and the other gospels. The harvest or gathering of the wheat into God’s barn wasn’t ordained for the close of the Old Covenant but the close of Christ's mediation of the New Covenant at the end of this age. Christ unveiled the harvest as the gathering all things that offend “the righteous” and cast them into the furnace, but the tares grew alongside the wheat until that time,

Mathew 13:
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Of course, this fits perfectly with the evidence that Christ cloaked his distant return in the imminent event in which one stone wouldn’t be left upon another at the destruction of the Herod’s temple, just as Daniel cloaked the distant event of Christ’s first advent in the imminence, within a generation, of “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.”

And I see you continue to omit we can’t trust the mental gymnastics of those who try and interpret Babylon as the first century Jews who in no sense fornicated with the kings of the earth or made the merchants of the earth rich.

You claim to be historicist, so what recognized Reformation historicists agree with your claim about the Kingdom of God?

Evidence, please. Names, sources, verbatim quotes.

I guess that my evidence on the kingdom of God is getting to you. sml My response is that not all preterists agree on the seven kings in Revelation 17, so why would I have to agree with what every Historicists has written. I only have to agree with the foundation through the hermeneutics, that the little horn rises out of the fallen Roman Empire, and that in specific apocalyptic prophecy a day-stands-for-a-year.
 
Last edited: