Revelation: You are here...

Hope this helps.

Nazaroo

 

The first thing we will do is use well-known public historical facts, which are for the most part agreed upon by most historians, including skeptics:


This next diagram shows the more important events in the first 200 years of the Christian era.

Most people date the Book of Revelation as having been composed in the reign of Emperor Nero (because of its apparent ignorance of the destruction of the temple), or in the reign of Emperor Domitian (because the book seems to know too much of the subsequent Roman/Jewish Wars.

Only a handful of conspiracy theorists (such as "MountainMan" in Australia from Internet Infidels) think that the book was composed after that (e.g. in the reign of Constantine, c. 300-340 A.D.), because there are no complete copies of the book older than Codex Alexandrinus (c. late 4th cent./early 5th), and Codex Sinaiticus (dubiously dated at about 350 A.D., but probably 50 years newer, i.e., 390-420 A.D.).

 

Thanks for your response: Here's mine:

I think that if we look at various stages in previous history, we can see that in times when not much was happening, and people had little knowledge, that the book of Revelation remained largely closed. It was in the same situation as the book of Daniel, where even Daniel was told, "Go your way, Daniel, for the [message] is sealed until the time of the end..." etc.

It is no real surprise therefore, that interpreters, even Godly and studied men in the 19th century could not open the seals of the book. They could not foresee such events as the Great Apostacy of Western Protestantism (although a few saw some signs), or the two Great World Wars, or the Atom Bomb.

The things shortly coming to pass would have sounded like fantasy or witchcraft to Rationalists and anti-supernatural materialists of the 1800s. Think of not only the Atom Bomb, but radio, manned flight, the steam engine, electronics, moving pictures, color photographs and audio recordings.

Anyone prophesying these things would have seemed a raving lunatic. Never mind the advent of such "thinkers" as Aleister Crowley, Gurdieff, Adolf Hitler, etc.

 

Well, lets not get ahead of ourselves.

Since I haven't expounded my position fully or in detail,
you're jumping the gun to pronounce me in 'error'.

The last diagram was pretty straightforward,
and only meant to put the time and place of the book in context.

For out purposes, it doesn't actually matter whether the book was written in Nero's time, or written or modified in Domitian's time (i.e. during the Roman/Jewish Wars). Even if the book were a forgery, written in the 4th century, or re-edited then, it is still all the same for us:

The book purports to be written at a certain time, and claims to be a prophetic book. That is, it wishes to be taken as a prophecy about events coming upon the earth. The author identifies himself specifically as "a seer", an O.T. label for prophet.

When we turn to the contents of the book, we can say that yes, there were some bursts of serious persecution during the times of Nero, Domitian, and even later (c. 300 A.D.). But all students of the Gospels are aware for instance that the burning of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple are only a partial fulfillment of these things, even if we only consider passages like the Markan Apocalypse (Mark 13:5-37 etc.).

In other words, we are in basic agreement I think on two points:

(1) Revelation was meant to be taken as a prophecy about future earthly events when it was written, and

(2) Its contents were not fully fulfilled in the 1st century or even by the 4th century A.D., leaving some of its prophecies still pointing to future events.

This is the basis upon which I would like to begin looking at it.

 

I don't really think there is a problem here.
I don't think the period that this verse speaks of has come to pass at all.
So I think we are on the same page there, I hope.
This seems self-evident, so why would you assume I disagreed,
and why would I even have to give an opinion on such a self-evident fact?

Your language appears extreme, over the top, and bordering on rude (see highlighting/bold/underline above).

What is the reason for the anger?
I really do think this is unnecessary.

To recap: the period where the lion and lambs hang out together has not arrived.

Perhaps where we differ is that somehow you associate this with the 1,000 year reign.

Can you show me why you think these two time periods are one and the same?

Maybe toning it down a bit, and searching out and addressing the points of difference you seem to imagine would be more helpful.

sincerely,
Nazazroo

 

Revelation for Dummies (2)


The Roman/Jewish Wars (68 - 135 A.D.) were a rapid and colossal disaster for the Jewish people, because the full might of the Roman Empire was brought to bear upon them.
In 69 A.D. the Galilean Rebellion was squashed;
In 70 A.D. Jerusalem was burned, and the Temple destroyed, and possibly millions of Jews were killed or enslaved.
In 73 A.D. the Zealots at Masada were sieged and destroyed.
The final rebellion of Bar Kochba (120-132 A.D.) was also quashed.

But Christianity, although frequently persecuted, continued to spread throughout the Roman Empire, even heavily infecting the Roman Armies.

Here is the next diagram in the analysis:

The single most important event in the first 500 years of Christianity has to be the conversion of the Emperor Constantine, and the legalization of the Christian Religion. Around 300 A.D., Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity, which was formerly and underground and illegal religion, often persecuted by Roman authorities.

For our purposes, it matters little whether or not Constantine was truly or completely converted, or if instead he was simply a shrewd leader, realizing that by 300 A.D. a large number of Roman soldiers and citizens were Christian converts.

The fact is, Constantine legalized Christianity, and to prove the point, began to tear down and loot pagan temples, and use the wealth to build Christian cathedrals all over the Empire. Constantine also held Ecumenical councils, allowing Christian leaders (at least those willing to cooperate with the Empire) some participation and power in organizing and defining mainstream Christianity.

The second thing Constantine did was to abandon Rome entirely, and rebuild his new Capital and Headquarters in Greece, at Byzantium (Constantinople, now called Istanbul). The Empire was now ruled from the East (Greece), and the Latin West was left abandoned, and quickly succumbed to local barbarian invasions, beginning around 420 A.D.

The West sank into the Dark Ages, while the East flourished, enjoying one of the greatest eras of Christian literary and intellectual activity.

The Latins, perhaps in ironic poetic justice for their most recent and violent persecution of the Christians, fell to the barbarians again and again, their economy, security and lives destroyed by sacking and pillaging.

If the book of Revelation had failed to at all mention what was the most important development in Christian history, while at the same time being a prophecy focussed on the Christian future, it would have to be called a prophetic failure.

To get an idea of how drastic the changeover was, take a look at these BEFORE and AFTER maps:

BEFORE: ROMAN EMPIRE c. 200 A.D.
AFTER: Animated GIF! Click to Enlarge
Nazaroo

 

You are confusing the Eastern Greek Empire (The Christian Enlightenment) with the Western Latin (Roman) Empire (Dark Ages).

Everything you mention as the Dark Ages happened in Western, LATIN Europe. Eastern Europe was the center of true Christianity until it was overrun by the Turks, c. 1453.

Then the Greeks fled West into Latin Europe, bringing with them Greek scholarship and Greek manuscripts, and setting the stage for the Reformation, which brought the West out of the Dark Ages, by many long and violent stages.

Thank the Romans for the Dark Ages; the Greeks were busy being literate and brilliant engineers.

Try looking at the MAPS I posted. That should clarify things for you.

 

Please show scripture references if you are arguing for certain key features during the Millenium, or 1000-year reign.

Each historical period has features outlined by Holy Scripture.

You can make any claim you want, but if you want to convince anyone you should back it up with scripture.

peace
Nazaroo