Featured Papias Quote and Early Date of Revelation

Because you have to have political power to kill someone?

 

'Those of us alive now still have to enter into the full richness of this promise'

And how do we do this? Are you 'Kingdom Theology'?

'I take the thousand years, BTW, as not being that actual length'

How many years does a thousand years equal? Scriptural references?

 

I'm pretty sure I'm on Tom's ignore list now. Alas. He called it a "vicious smear" in Post #12 when I suggested that a Church of Christ preacher (pastored 9 of their churches) might believe in baptismal regeneration.

And of course he never answered my points about his quotes from said preacher, who mixed up actual quotes from Papias (which didn't exist) with quotes from men who hundreds of years later said Papias said something.

I'm not going to miss any sleep worrying that Tom will answer, or even apologize for accusing me of lying. Nope, guess I am the bad guy here, and I'm content with that. Y'all have a fun thread.

 

Classic academic-type of opinion divorced from the crooked timber of real life.
You don't always need "political power" to kill.

 

Now, that one's a beaut. Let's read it carefully:

"There are no Scriptural references for the LENGTH of the 'THOUSAND YEARS'".

There is just nothing anyone can do at this point except quit. I quit.

 

'There are no Scriptural references for the length of the "thousand years"'

Well then, I would say a thousand years in scripture is a thousand years then.

'but there is the indication at the beginning of Revelation that this book conveys truths through symbols'

An indication? No thanks sir, I will stick with the scriptures as my indicator.

'the Kingdom of Christ is now'

Where is Christ reigning now on earth other than in the hearts of men? Has Christ already set his feet on the Mount of Olives and come back secretly to rule the world (Zech 14:4) KJV?

'We do this by dying. Then we will see clearly'

That I can agree on.

 

Not that I would like to debate you, but to show that perhaps someone has the wrong information.

According to Irenaeus, our earliest witness, Papias was "a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp, a man of primitive times," who wrote a volume in "five books" (haer. 5.33.4; quoted by Eusebius Hist. Eccl. 3.39.1). Eusebius already doubted the reality of a connection between Papias and the apostle John on the grounds that Papias himself in the preface to his book distinguished the apostle John from John the presbyter and seems to have had significant contact only with John the presbyter and a certain Aristion (Hist. Eccl. 3.39.3-7). Eusebius' skepticism was no doubt prompted by his distaste - perhaps a recently acquired distaste (Grant 1974) - for Papias' chiliasm and his feeling that such a theology qualified Papias for the distinction of being "a man of exceedingly small intelligence" (Hist. Eccl. 3.39.13). Nevertheless Eusebius' analysis of the preface is probably correct; and his further point that Papias' chiliasm put him to the same camp as the Revelation of John is surely relevant. It is notable that Eusebius, in spite of his desire to discredit Papias, still places him as early as the reign of Trajan (A.D. 98-117); and although later dates (e.g., A.D. 130-140) have often been suggested by modern scholars, Bartlet's date for Papias' literary activity of about A.D. 100 has recently gained support (Schoedel 1967: 91-92; Kortner 1983: 89-94, 167-72, 225-26).
taken from: Fragments of Papias​

 

I posted the above so that others may see that the premise of the OP may not be factually based.

 

I used that which is well documented to show your timing is off, and therefore your premise becomes frail.

The Jews did not kill the apostle John. Though he suffered as a martyr, he was not killed but died of being old.

 

The dating of the Revelation is not questionable.

According to the oldest tradition [in Iren., Adv. Haer. 5.30.3] Rev was written toward the end of the reign of Domitian (81-96). The book's own testimony indicates that it originated in the province of Asia in a time of severe oppression of Christians, which is most readily conceivable under Domitian. In the letters included in Rev, persecutions by the officials are expected (2:10), the blood of the martyrs has already flowed (2:13; 6:9), the whole of Christianity is threatened with a fearful danger (3:10): the immediate prospect is for the outbreak of a general persecution of Christians throughout the Roman Empire. In 17:6 John sees the harlot who is Babylon-Rome drunk on the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses of Jesus (cf. 6:10; 16:6; 18:24; 19:2). In 20:4 participation in the thousand-year reign is promised to the martyrs who have been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and for the word of God, and who have not worshiped the beast and his image and have not accepted his sign on their forehead and in their hand, i.e., those who have refused divine honors to the emperor (13:4, 12 ff; 14:9, 11; 16:2; 19:20). Christianity has collided with the state and with the state religion, the Christ cult with the imperial cult. In the interest of faith, Rev raises passionate objections to Rome and the imperial cult. That corresponds to the situation under Domitian.

Also favoring the end of the first century as the time of origin of Rev is the fact that according to 2:8-11, the church of Smyrna has been persevering for a long time, while according to Polycarp (Phil 11:3), at the time of Paul it did not even exist; and 3:17 describes the community of Laodicea as rich, while this city had been almost completely destroyed by an earthquake in A.D. 60/61.

taken from: The Book of Revelation​

 

The Scriptural reference for a thousand years is, a thousand years. No honest person believes the entire book of Revelation is symbols.

 

In other words, you can't think of a good response so you either ignore the posts or ignore the argument.

 

Which war with Rome are you thinking of?