Revelation Was Written Before A.D 70.

3. Condition of the Churches in Revelation Paul, and others, established churches early in their missionary journeys recorded in Acts. Paul"s letters to the churches had many warnings of apostasy and false teachers already in place. A church can deteriorate fast. It only takes one influential person with unsound doctrine to corrupt many. A longer time frame is more feasible. To assume all the churches mentioned deteriorated so quickly is much more unlikely than simply one or two. All deteriorated quickly according to Pro’s assertion in spite of the strong influence and guidance of Paul and others. Laodicea "One of the famous cities of Asia, Laodicea, was that same year overthrown by an earthquake, and, without any relief from us, recovered itself by its own resources." [2] It still took 25 years to rebuild, as sourced earlier. This would have been a huge drain on resources. Showing they refused resources from other entities does not show they were rich. 4. Prophecy of Revelation Again, Con fails to realize audience relevancy as relating to the 1st century. The Beast coming out of the sea (Rev. 13:1) is the emergence of the fourth kingdom " Rome, per Daniel 2:44 and 7:7, 23-27. Apocalyptic language is very figurative. Nero was the first emperor to make war with the saints (Revelation 13:7). His persecution of the saints lasted 42 months from A.D. 64 to A.D. 68. Nero Caesar"s image was erected on pagan temples. Men were forced to worship him by the local authorities. The mark of the beast is opposite to the mark of God. It is those who serve Rome and Nero, thus belong to that empire/kingdom. Rev 13: refers to the Antichrist coming out of the ‘sea’ of nations. The “fourth kingdom of Rome” is an assertion based on a preterist position. Considering the other evidence I have submitted, I do not feel this interpretation is valid. Revelation 13: 16-17 states very clearly the mark of the beast will be on the right hand or forehead in order to buy or sell. This was a very specific statement, and it does not support Pro’s position of ‘those who serve Rome’ as the ‘mark of the beast’. Nero wanted to be worshipped, but he does not fit an orthodox interpretation of the Antichrist. Nero did not have a sidekick (false prophet), and he was not slain and resurrected, for example. 5. Language in Revelation Con speaks of "The Lord"s Day" and "The angel of the church" as terminology foreign to an early date as well as the wording of Rev 2:9 and Rev 3:9 pointing to a separation of church and synagogue. He claims it is not common until after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. These are assertions that Con states without a lick of evidence. These were 'Jews' after the flesh, not after the Spirit. They were of their father, the devil. Judgment was about to fall on them. It could also reference the existing temple, a synagogue of Satan. I apologize, sir. You are correct. Here is the source I used for this information under “Internal evidence”. [11] Con: futurist is a person who puts Revelation in the far future, usually at the end of time. The Bible does not address 'the end of time.' (corrected) It addresses the time of the end, signifying the end of the Old Covenant Age. This is an assertion that goes against Church tradition. I would be very interested in seeing a source for this. Con: "The Bible does contain audience relevant passages. This is not an argument for or against either of our positions here." This is not an argument specific to Pro’s case, as I have used an audience specific rebuttal to refute Pro’s earlier argument about “why was there no mention of the temple destruction in Revelation” earlier. This argument is null. Con alludes to me taking Matthew 24:29-34 out of context. This is non-sense. Matthew 24:30 as well as Revelation 1:7 refer to OT Israel. If Con checks the source of this prophecy he will see this. The people guilty of piercing Jesus was the OT tribes of the land. The disciples asked three questions to Jesus after He described the impending destruction of the temple. When will this happen? What will be the signs of your coming? When will be the end of the age? Matthew 24:30 was the beginning of the answer: What will be the sign of your coming? Matthew 24:36 Jesus answers the question: When will be the end of the age? I do feel you have taken these verses out of context. "10 "I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn. 11 In that day there will be great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the plain of Megiddo...." " Zechariah 12:10-11 That day of great mourning was A.D. 70. 70 AD was the culmination of years of mourning, but it was not ‘the day’ Zechariah was referring to. This is an assertion based on presupposed beliefs. Zechariah was referring to the messiah, and aspects of his death. Jesus death was an injury to God as well. “Perhaps the best way to understand this is that the people have killed a historical figure, who was the Lord’s representative, and in doing so they have pierced the Lord himself.” [12] Con refers to the lesson of the fig tree (Matthew 24:32-34) I have responded to this is in my explanation of the disciples questions to Jesus above. I asked Con how God defined a generation. He said there were various meanings for the word generation and the term for generation used in Matthew 24:34 refers to those who will be alive at that time. This did not answer the question. God is specific addressing 'this generation' of Matthew 24:34. Jesus was referring to the generation who will “see these signs”, not to the particular generation he was talking to. Pro uses a tenuous assumption based on a single passage to define 40 years as a Biblical understanding for “generation”. I cannot agree. "John did not mention the destruction of the temple because he was commanded by Jesus to write what he saw in relation to the prophecy..." And, "Secondly, Revelation was audience specific to Gentile believers in Asia Minor in AD 95. [9] The temple would not have been relevant to his audience."I already gave a list of verses in Revelation that speak specifically about OT Israel and the city of Jerusalem, not Gentile believers. Nero was the first emperor to make war with the saints (Revelation 13:7). His persecution of the saints lasted 42 months from A.D. 64 to A.D. 68. Pro has not responded to the first part of my rebuttal about disobeying Jesus’ command. Also, as I stated earlier, John audience was far removed from the temple “ethnically, geographically, and historically.” [9] Con"s new argument "Practical Implications for the current age" fails to take into account that there are primarily only two ages mentioned in the NT, the current age of the OT law and the age to come. I do not believe this responds to my argument at all. Will your expound your thoughts a bit more for me? Argument # 5 " 70 Weeks Decreed to Daniel"s People Would you mind clarifying your argument for me? I am not clear why this is an argument for Revelation being written before 70AD. Last argument- the Second Coming of Jesus If the second coming of Christ has already happened, why is there no mention of this in the Bible? This would be much more significant than the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. If the temple destruction was fulfillment of Revelation and defeat of Satan, why would God not compel a celebratory addition to the books of the Bible? A victory should be claimed, instead of allowing mankind to live ignorant of the amazing event!On to the conclusion, I will see you there, sir! [11]http://www.preteristarchive.com... [12] http://carm.org...