.”11) Indeed Lightfoot, Westcott, Hort, and a host of others held strongly to an early dating of the book12, so much so that one author in Lightfoot’s day agreed this date to be.”13 Tommy offers no contrary scholarship to the pre-A. 70 date except to say that most scholars agree with him.
This is the fifth installment of my response to Tommy Ice’s article “Answers and Clarifications for Gary De Mar.” You can reference the other four posts here, here, here, and here. 95, the question for De Mar is “What does the hour of testing refer to? There are many scholars who believe that Revelation was written before A.
Tommy brings up the dating issue of when Revelation was written. Here’s how Tommy presents the issue: De Mar believes this time-period refers to “the conflagration leading up to the destruction of A. 70, the tribulation period.” However, his view presupposes that Revelation was written around A. 65, which Mark Hitchcock1 and most scholars throughout church history have demonstrated is impossible.
He takes the position that Revelation was written around A. 95 while I and many others believe with good exegetical and historical reasons that it was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.
Ragan Ewing in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Theology degree at Dallas Theological Seminary, a bastion of dispensational thinking.
Dispensationalist writers John Ankerberg and John Weldon write, “[I]ndeed, it is becoming an increasingly persuasive argument that all the New Testament books were written before 70 A. — within a single generation of the death of Christ.2 Josh Mc Dowell takes a similar approach to dating the New Testament books: Most liberal scholars are being forced to consider earlier dates for the New Testament. Consider the following from “The Identification of Babylon the Harlot in the Book of Revelation” written by D.
dissertation that was later published in book form as . His research has led to his conviction that the whole of the New Testament was written before the fall of Jerusalem in A. 70 (Robinson, RNT).3 As Gentry and others have pointed out and Ice fails to acknowledge, the pre-A. 70 date of composition for Revelation has a long and distinguished history. Robinson, no conservative himself, comes to some startling conclusions in his groundbreaking book . The problem for Tommy is that there are lots of scholars that don’t agree with him, and the list is growing every year.It would be remiss of any serious student of Revelation not to at least do a cursory examination of the historical context to which Revelation is back-dropped. If Revelation was written in 95AD, what event happened within months or few years of its publication that could be seen as fulfilling the great sense of imminence contained within its pages? But if Revelation was written around 64AD the question is easily answered by pointing to the great persecution which commenced in 64AD and the campaign against Jerusalem which began in 68AD.The first point of reference would have to be to determine when Revelation was written. It is therefore my thesis that Revelation 1-19 concerns events which were all fulfilled by 70AD when Jerusalem was destroyed. Revelation 20 then introduces a greater time period- "1,000" years, which I believe simply means .Most scholars regard there being only two possible dates. Leon Morris explores this adequately in his Tyndale Commentary series volume on Revelation, and I recommend that this widely available commentary be read. I believe this parallels Matthew 25 where we find several long-time references (the Bridegroom was "delayed", vs. At the end of Revelation 20 a fire appears from heaven which delivers the godly.