Question: When Was Revelation Written?

[didymus]

There are two time periods that is suggested for the writing of Revelation. Some say, about 96AD. We preterists think it was written about 66 o67 AD.

The number 666 is said to refer to Nero. That appears to be true. So, my question: Why would John write about Nero almost 30 years after Nero died. According to history, Nero died in 68. By 95 or 96, Nero was not a threat of any kind, so write about him as if he was? That makes absolutely no sense. Revelation had to be written during the time of Nero, before he died.

[Morris]

The thing about the number 666 is that it can be applied to a myriad of possibilities. I've even seen it work out to reference Barney (that purple dinosaur character). The 'evidence' for it referring to Nero is no greater than any other interpretation that I've seen (in my very humble opinion, of course).

Here's another very important thing to remember, establishing an interpretation of scripture (or date for it, as the case may be), based on the interpretation of another scripture is not good practice; I leave that for the dispensationalists.

Nice to see you back, by the way!

[Allyn]

In 2Thess 2 Paul discusses the Man of Lawlessness and the Day of the Lord. Paul refers to the "Antichrist" as the man of sin or the man of Lawlessness. This man of sin would be the one who captures the Temple and is worshiped there:
1 For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain. 2 But even after we had suffered before and were spitefully treated at Philippi, as you know, we were bold in our God to speak to you the gospel of God in much conflict. 3 For our exhortation did not come from error or uncleanness, nor was it in deceit.
4 But as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, even so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who tests our hearts. (2 Thess. 2:1-4)

I believe Titus was that man and who was also that little horn of Daniel.

[didymus]

Morris, wouldn't you agree that whoever 666 refers to had to be present in the time when Revelation was written?

[stephenpatrick]

Mar 11, 2010 13:29:40 GMT -5 Allyn said:

In 2Thess 2 Paul discusses the Man of Lawlessness and the Day of the Lord. Paul refers to the "Antichrist" as the man of sin or the man of Lawlessness. This man of sin would be the one who captures the Temple and is worshiped there:
1 For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain. 2 But even after we had suffered before and were spitefully treated at Philippi, as you know, we were bold in our God to speak to you the gospel of God in much conflict. 3 For our exhortation did not come from error or uncleanness, nor was it in deceit.
4 But as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, even so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who tests our hearts. (2 Thess. 2:1-4)

I believe Titus was that man and who was also that little horn of Daniel.

Hi Allyn.

Matthew 8:9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."

While Titus may have been the one to do the conquering, he was under the authority of the Roman emperor, or Rome. He was just following the orders of his emperor. The war with Jerusalem was started under Nero. He died in 68, then Vespasian was the next emperor. If I was going to choose I think one of these 2 guys might be the one.

[Allyn]

Mar 11, 2010 14:03:02 GMT -5 stephenpatrick said:

Mar 11, 2010 13:29:40 GMT -5 Allyn said:

In 2Thess 2 Paul discusses the Man of Lawlessness and the Day of the Lord. Paul refers to the "Antichrist" as the man of sin or the man of Lawlessness. This man of sin would be the one who captures the Temple and is worshiped there:
1 For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain. 2 But even after we had suffered before and were spitefully treated at Philippi, as you know, we were bold in our God to speak to you the gospel of God in much conflict. 3 For our exhortation did not come from error or uncleanness, nor was it in deceit.
4 But as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, even so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who tests our hearts. (2 Thess. 2:1-4)

I believe Titus was that man and who was also that little horn of Daniel.

Hi Allyn.

Matthew 8:9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."

While Titus may have been the one to do the conquering, he was under the authority of the Roman emperor, or Rome. He was just following the orders of his emperor. The war with Jerusalem was started under Nero. He died in 68, then Vespasian was the next emperor. If I was going to choose I think one of these 2 guys might be the one.

Hi Steve,
My reasoning is based on who the little horn may be with regard to the broken off 3 horns before him.

Daniel 7:7-8 equals the eight rulers of Revelation 17:9-11. These rulers are as follows
1) Julius Caesar (49-44 BC)
2) Augustus (31 BC - AD14)
3) Tiberius (AD14-37)
4) Gaius (Caligula) (AD37-41)
5) Nero (AD54-68)
Galba (AD68-69) -------->
Otho (AD 69) -------------> 3 Horns pulled out (Dan. 7:8)
Vitellius (AD 69)---------->
7) Vespasian (AD69-79)
8) Titus (a general in AD70) (The little horn not yet a Caesar)

The conservative preterist position says that the harlot of Revelation represents 1st century Jerusalem (Rev. 17-18) so the interpretation fits pretty well that it was Titus, who destroyed Jerusalem, (Dan 9:26-27) if the harlot refers to Jerusalem, then it follows that Titus should be the eighth king of Revelation 17 (maybe)

[Morris]

Mar 11, 2010 14:39:14 GMT -5 Allyn said:

Hi Steve,
My reasoning is based on who the little horn may be with regard to the broken off 3 horns before him.

Daniel 7:7-8 equals the eight rulers of Revelation 17:9-11. These rulers are as follows
1) Julius Caesar (49-44 BC)
2) Augustus (31 BC - AD14)
3) Tiberius (AD14-37)
4) Gaius (Caligula) (AD37-41)
5) Nero (AD54-68)
Galba (AD68-69) -------->
Otho (AD 69) -------------> 3 Horns pulled out (Dan. 7:8)
Vitellius (AD 69)---------->
7) Vespasian (AD69-79)
8) Titus (a general in AD70) (The little horn not yet a Caesar)

I think my biggest struggle with this is that the 3 horns being plucked out seems to suggest more than 'they don't count'.

The conservative preterist position says that the harlot of Revelation represents 1st century Jerusalem (Rev. 17-18) so the interpretation fits pretty well that it was Titus, who destroyed Jerusalem, (Dan 9:26-27) if the harlot refers to Jerusalem, then it follows that Titus should be the eighth king of Revelation 17 (maybe)

Doesn't Rev 17:10 say that five have fallen? I may be seeing this wrong but that then suggests that Nero had already past and it was then Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian that "is".

I think I may have just confused myself; are you saying it was Titus that was the antichrist? Sorry... *where's my embarrassed emoticon*

[Allyn]

Mar 11, 2010 15:38:24 GMT -5 Morris said:

Mar 11, 2010 14:39:14 GMT -5 Allyn said:

Hi Steve,
My reasoning is based on who the little horn may be with regard to the broken off 3 horns before him.

Daniel 7:7-8 equals the eight rulers of Revelation 17:9-11. These rulers are as follows
1) Julius Caesar (49-44 BC)
2) Augustus (31 BC - AD14)
3) Tiberius (AD14-37)
4) Gaius (Caligula) (AD37-41)
5) Nero (AD54-68)
Galba (AD68-69) -------->
Otho (AD 69) -------------> 3 Horns pulled out (Dan. 7:8)
Vitellius (AD 69)---------->
7) Vespasian (AD69-79)
8) Titus (a general in AD70) (The little horn not yet a Caesar)

I think my biggest struggle with this is that the 3 horns being plucked out seems to suggest more than 'they don't count'.

The conservative preterist position says that the harlot of Revelation represents 1st century Jerusalem (Rev. 17-18) so the interpretation fits pretty well that it was Titus, who destroyed Jerusalem, (Dan 9:26-27) if the harlot refers to Jerusalem, then it follows that Titus should be the eighth king of Revelation 17 (maybe)

Doesn't Rev 17:10 say that five have fallen? I may be seeing this wrong but that then suggests that Nero had already past and it was then Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian that "is".

I think I may have just confused myself; are you saying it was Titus that was the antichrist? Sorry... *where's my embarrassed emoticon*

Your being silly makes me smile. I like sincerity in all its forms.

I will try and put together a little something this evening to show where I am coming from. Should I start a thread of its own or is this about the timing of the written Revelation ok?

[Morris]

Mar 11, 2010 15:49:09 GMT -5 Allyn said:

Your being silly makes me smile. I like sincerity in all its forms.

I will try and put together a little something this evening to show where I am coming from. Should I start a thread of its own or is this about the timing of the written Revelation ok?

Thanks so much, Allyn! I always prefer to make people smile rather than frown!

Maybe a separate thread might be a good idea.

(PS. Don't mind my questioning or challenging things; I'm only a person with personal opinions no weightier than anybody else's. )

[Allyn]

Mar 11, 2010 16:53:34 GMT -5 Morris said:

Mar 11, 2010 15:49:09 GMT -5 Allyn said:

Your being silly makes me smile. I like sincerity in all its forms.

I will try and put together a little something this evening to show where I am coming from. Should I start a thread of its own or is this about the timing of the written Revelation ok?

Thanks so much, Allyn! I always prefer to make people smile rather than frown!

Maybe a separate thread might be a good idea.

(PS. Don't mind my questioning or challenging things; I'm only a person with personal opinions no weightier than anybody else's. )

I never have a problem with questions. I don't have all the answers, of course, but I do like the challenge.
I will start a new thread. I won't commit to it tonight, like I thought I could, but certainly in a day or so.

[Once4all]

Mar 11, 2010 16:53:34 GMT -5 Morris said:

I'm only a person with personal opinions no weightier than anybody else's.

Morris, can I quote that line, perhaps in my signature? If so, how would you like it attributed? Just "Morris" or something fuller?

(People have called you Morris and Sheldon and I'm not sure which is your first name....)

Bev

[Theophilus]

I think Kenneth L. Gentry Jr. makes a convincing case that 666 refers to Nero. The 6th king, who was king when Revelation was written, is Nero, and the seventh who would only be king a short time is Galba.

I believe the great apostasy and the man of lawlessness of 2 Thess. 2:3 is what Jesus refers to in Matt. 24:9-12. The problem with identifying the man of lawlessness is that there are so many scoundrels of that time that fit the bill! In my final four, I would include Nero, Simon Ben Giora, Gessius Florus, & John of Gischala. I'm leaning towards Nero.

The little horn of Daniel 7 has me stuck. Certain parts seem to clearly identify him as Titus. Other parts seem to clearly speak of Nero. But I don't find anything in the passage to indicate the horn represents two different kings.

The little horn appears to be the eleventh horn, although the text does not say it is the eleventh. The kings were:

1 Julius Caesar
2 Augustus
3 Tiberius
4 Caligula
5 Claudius
6 Nero
>7 Galba
>8 Otho
>9 Vitellius
10 Vespasian
11 Titus

The 3 horns uprooted seems to be referring to Galba, Otho, & Vitellius. The first 6 kings composed the first dynasty. Then you have 3 kings, each of which was only king for a short time, and were not able to establish a dynasty. In what way does Titus uproot these 3 kings? Titus would become king after his father, thus establishing the second dynasty.

However, Daniel 7:21 says the little horn will wage war with the saints. Titus didn't persecute Christianity, and the non-Christian Jews of that time period cannot be considered saints. Of the first 11 kings, only Nero declares war upon Christianity. Dan. 7:25 says his war on the saints lasts 3&1/2 years, which is about how long Nero's persecution lasted, until he died.

I don't know how to resolve this.

[didymus]

Maybe this will help.

Encyclopedia Entries - #

666, 616

In the Book of the Apocalypse, a reference is made to the number "666" (six hundred and sixty-six), the "number of the beast." Some early manuscripts list the number as "616" (six hundred and sixteen), which is a common textual variant. This infamous number is said to be the "number of a man" and the "number of his name" (Rev 13:17-18), which in St. John's day refered to the Jewish practice of "gematria"--the assigning of numeric values to the Hebrew letters of a person's name. Since each Hebrew letter of the alphabet has a numerical value, any person can be identified by a number using gematria.

In the Revelation 13 passage, the apostle instructs the members of the Asia Minor churches to use their wisdom to identify this man (13:18), who is marked for destruction according to the prophecy. Using their number-name system of gematria, the original recipients of the letter would have quickly noted that the numbers matched their imperial persecutor, the emperor-god Nero. Nero's title in Hebrew appears as "NRWN QSR," meaning "Nero Caesar." Taking the value of the Hebrew letters, they calculate as follows:

N=50
R=200
W=6
N=50
Q=100
S=60
R=200
=====
Total 666

When Nero's title is transliterated into Hebrew from a common Latin variant, the calculation becomes 616 (six hundred and sixteen), as noted here:

N=50
R=200
W=6
Q=100
S=60
R=200
=====
Total 616

It was common among the early Christians to associate Nero with the Beast or "antichrist," as his persecution of the apostles and their followers was especially cruel--even claiming the lives of the two most eminent apostles, Sts. Peter and Paul. The first-century Roman historian Tacitus remarks: "[Nero] inflicted unheard-of punishments on those who...were vulgarly called Christians" (Tacitus, Annals 15:44). Many scholars suggest that St. John gives the identity of this man-beast using the gematria numbers so as to allow the Asia Minor churches to identify the emperor-god Nero Caesar without danger of repercussions. Such would be a wise protection for the early Christians, who were living under heavy persecution at the hand of imperial rulers like Nero, who had blamed the Christians for the burning of Rome. In short, the number served as a way of speaking in code concerning then-contemporary figures about whom it would have been politically dangerous to criticize openly.

The following historical quotes, which associate Nero with the apocalyptic endtimes scenario, reinforce the perspective that Nero is referenced in the image of the apocalyptic beast:

"What means the declaration, that the mystery of iniquity already works?...Some suppose this to be spoken of the Roman emperor, and therefore Paul did not speak in plain words, because he would not incur the charge of calumny for having spoken evil of the Roman emperor: although he always expected that what he had said would be understood as applying to Nero." (St. Augustine; quoted by Moses Stuart in Apocalypse)

"As for the Antichrist, there is no question but what he is going to fight against the holy covenant...these events were typically prefigured under Antiochus Epiphanes, so that this abominable king who persecuted God's people foreshadows the Antichrist, who is to persecute the people of Christ. And so there are many of our viewpoint who think that Domitius Nero was the Antichrist because of his outstanding savagery and depravity." (St. Jerome - Commentary on Daniel; notes on Daniel 11:27-30, -- Baker Book House Grand Rapids, Michigan 1958)

"We have still to add to our chronology the following, -- I mean the days which Daniel indicates from the desolation of Jerusalem, the seven years and seven months of the reign of Vespasian. For the two years are added to the seventeen months and eighteen days of Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius; and the result is three years and six months, which is "the half of the week," as Daniel the prophet said. For he said that there were two thousand three hundred days from the time that the abomination of Nero stood in the holy city, till its destruction. For thus the declaration, which is subjoined, shows: "How long shall be the vision, the sacrifice taken away, the abomination of desolation, which is given, and the power and the holy place shall be trodden under foot? And he said to him, Till the evening and morning, two thousand three hundred days, and the holy place shall be taken away. These two thousand three hundred days, then, make six years four months, during the half of which Nero held sway, and it was half a week; and for a half, Vespasian with Otho, Galba, and Vitellius reigned. And on this account Daniel says, "Blessed is he that cometh to the thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." For up to these days was war, and after them it ceased. And this number is demonstrated from a subsequent chapter, which is as follows: "And from the time of the change of continuation, and of the giving of the abomination of desolation, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." (Clement of Alexandria; The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, p. 334)

F.W. Farrar (1882) states that "all the earliest Christian writers on the Apocalypse, from Irenaeus down to Victorious of Pettau and Commodian in the fourth, and Andreas in the fifth, and St. Beatus in the eighth century, connect Nero, or some Roman emperor, with the Apocalyptic Beast." The theologian adds that "the clue is preserved for us, not only by Jewish Talmudists, and Pagan historians and authors, such as Tacitus, Suetonius, Dion Cassius, and Dion Chrysostom; but also by Christian fathers like St. Irenaeus, Lactantius, St. Victorinus, Sulpicius Severus, and the Sibylline books, and even by St. Jerome, and by St. Augustine." Farrar adds that "nothing can prove more decisively than these references that for four centuries many Christians identified Nero with the Beast." He concludes:

"Beyond all shadow of doubt or uncertainty, the Wild Beast from the sea is meant as a symbol of the emperor Nero. Here, at any rate, St. John has neglected no single means by which he could make his meaning clear without deadly peril to himself and the Christian Church. He describes this Wild Beast by no less than sixteen distinctive marks, and then all but tells us in so many words the name of the person whom it is intended to symbolize." (Farrar; Early Days of Christianity, 5.28.5)

-from Pteteristvision.org

[Morris]

Mar 11, 2010 17:54:37 GMT -5 Once4all said:

Mar 11, 2010 16:53:34 GMT -5 Morris said:

I'm only a person with personal opinions no weightier than anybody else's.

Morris, can I quote that line, perhaps in my signature? If so, how would you like it attributed? Just "Morris" or something fuller?

(People have called you Morris and Sheldon and I'm not sure which is your first name....)

Bev

By all means, quote away!

My last name is Morris but feel free to use one or the other or both as you see fit.

[stormcrow]

There are two time periods that is suggested for the writing of Revelation. Some say, about 96AD. We preterists think it was written about 66 o67 AD.

Read more: livebytr.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=prophecy&action=display&thread=448#ixzz1VHHnsyfD

I think the better key for dating Revelation actually comes from what was being written to the seven churches.

For example:

{14} ~'But I have a few things against you, because you have there some who hold the teaching of Balaam, who kept teaching Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit acts of immorality. Revelation 2:14 (NASB)

Recognize this problem - eating meat offered to idols - from any other letters in the NT?

{19} "Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, {20} but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. {21} "For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath." Acts 15:19-21 (NASB)

Eating meat offered to idols was anathema to Jewish believers because Christ told them that not one smallest stroke or letter of the Law would pass away UNTIL heaven and earth passed away. (Matthew 5:18). Seeing Gentile believers eating meat offered to idols caused many of them to stumble in their own faith and was causing divisions between Gentile and Jewish believers in the early church.

Paul dealt with this issue, too, with the Romans (Romans 14) and Corinthians (I Corinthians 8 and 10).

Now, we know that the Law was completely fulfilled in 70 AD when "heaven and earth" (the Old Covenant kingdom of Israel and the Temple that represented it) passed away, thus freeing all from the Law. So the issue of eating meat offered to idols would not have been an issue in 96 AD, as the Law was gone and a kingdom of "righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14:17) replaced it.

But this is not the only issue John was writing to the churches about. He was also dealing with other issues, just as Paul was:

The problems of false apostleship (Rev. 2:2, 2 Cor. 11:13),
Backsliding churches (Rev. 2:4-5, 1 Cor. 10, Gal. 1:6)
Tribulation of the Church (Rev. 2:10, Acts 14:21-22, Rom.5:3-4, 12:12, 1 Thess. 1:6)

Here's how I summarized the issue in an e-book I'm writing on Revelation:

By just this one example, we see that the issue of eating meat offered to idols was something the apostles were addressing throughout the middle of the first century. In other words, the problem of eating meat offered to idols was not unique to Pergamum. It was, however, a problem unique to the period in which it was addressed, which further attests to the immediacy of Christ’s words for them, not us. It’s inconceivable that the issue of eating meat offered to idols would arise in any mainline Christian denomination today, thus rendering Christ’s words through John relevant only to the people in the time at which John penned them.

Hope this helps.

[stormcrow]

"Better key" was poor choice of words in my last post, as the number of the beast (666 or 616) actually nails the date spot on within a year or two.

What the letters to the churches establish is that John was addressing many of the same issues Paul was, and we simply see no evidence that these issues (especially eating meat offered to idols) persisted after the destruction of Jerusalem.

For what it's worth.

[stormcrow]

Paul refers to the "Antichrist" as the man of sin or the man of Lawlessness. This man of sin would be the one who captures the Temple and is worshiped there:

Read more: livebytr.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=prophecy&action=display&thread=448#ixzz1oRD0v3qE

I believe that "man of lawlessness" was none other than John of Gischala. Josephus writes quite a bit about him.

It was John, the son of a certain man whose name was Levi, that drew them into this rebellion, and encouraged them in it. He was a cunning knave, and of a temper that could put on various shapes; very rash in expecting great things, and very sagacious in bringing about what he hoped for. It was known to every body that he was fond of war, in order to thrust himself into authority; and the seditious part of the people of Gischala were under his management, by whose means the populace, who seemed ready to send ambassadors in order to a surrender, waited for the coming of the Romans in battle-array.

Flavius Josephus, The Works of Flavius Josephus, trans. William Whiston (Hartford, CN: S. S. Scranton, 1905), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 763.

When things didn't go so well for the otherwise peaceful people of the small town of Gischala, John fled to Jerusalem, where he resumed his rebellious leadership:

Now, in the night time, when John saw that there was no Roman guard about the city, he seized the opportunity directly, and, taking with him not only the armed men that where about him, but a considerable number of those that had little to do, together with their families, he fled to Jerusalem.

Now upon John's entry into Jerusalem, the whole body of the people were in an uproar, and ten thousand of them crowded about every one of the fugitives that were come to them, and inquired of them what miseries had happened abroad, when their breath was so short, and hot, and quick, that of itself it declared the great distress they were in; yet did they talk big under their misfortunes, and pretended to say that they had not fled away from the Romans, but came thither in order to fight them with less hazard...

But for John, he was very little concerned for those whom he had left behind him, but went about among all the people, and persuaded them to go to war, by the hopes he gave them. He affirmed that the affairs of the Romans were in a weak condition, and extolled his own power. He also jested upon the ignorance of the unskillful, as if those Romans, although they should take to themselves wings, could never fly over the wall of Jerusalem, who found such great difficulties in taking the villages of Galilee, and had broken their engines of war against their walls.
2. These harangues of John's corrupted a great part of the young men, and puffed them up for the war;

Flavius Josephus, The Works of Flavius Josephus, trans. William Whiston (Hartford, CN: S. S. Scranton, 1905), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 765.


Later on, Josephus would recount how the thugs John led would seize the Temple grounds and wantonly kill those who would pass by. He would then put on a "royal cloak" and sit on the Holy of Holies itself!

Now it was John who, as we told you, ran away from Gischala, and was the occasion of all these being destroyed. He was a man of great craft, and bore about him in his soul a strong passion after tyranny...

Flavius Josephus, The Works of Flavius Josephus, trans. William Whiston (Hartford, CN: S. S. Scranton, 1905), WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 770.

It was John who invited the Idumeans (Edomites) into the city to aid the Jews in fighting off the Romans, but when Ananus, the high priest, forbid them to enter, John's men - at his command - let the Idumeans into the city, where they set upon the people and started killing them, including Ananus and Jesus, whose bodies laid unburied in the streets of Jerusalem for 3 days (sound familiar?)

By this time John was beginning to tyrannize, and thought it beneath him to accept of barely the same honors that others had; and joining to himself by degrees a party of the wickedest of them all, he broke off from the rest of the faction. This was brought about by his still disagreeing with the opinions of others, and giving out injunctions of his own, in a very imperious manner; so that it was evident he was setting up a monarchical power. Now some submitted to him out of their fear of him, and others out of their good-will to him; for he was a shrewd man to entice men to him, both by deluding them and putting cheats upon them.

But John held the temple, and the parts thereto adjoining...

Much more to write, but time and space are short. Will add more later as time permits.

[Allyn]

I'm not positively sure except that it was before the date usually attributed to its writing. It may have been before the apostle Paul said that all the Asian churches had departed from the faith because the letters to the seven churces were to Asian churches and Jesus warned them he would take away their lampstand. But as to dates, I don't know.

[stormcrow]

Mar 7, 2012 15:03:55 GMT -5 Allyn said:

I'm not positively sure except that it was before the date usually attributed to its writing. It may have been before the apostle Paul said that all the Asian churches had departed from the faith because the letters to the seven churces were to Asian churches and Jesus warned them he would take away their lampstand. But as to dates, I don't know.

I'm doing a study on Revelation 1, Allyn...would love to have you take a peek at it. Here's the link:

www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=40550

I also further address the dating of the book by contemporaneous events here (same thread just farther down):

www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=40550&p=613156&viewfull=1#post613156

Later.

[stormcrow]

"After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. "While I was contemplating the horns, behold, another horn, a little one, came up among them, and three of the first horns were pulled out by the roots before it; and behold, this horn possessed eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth uttering great boasts. Daniel 7:7-8 (NASB)

This "little horn" would've been Vespasian, not Titus.

[stormcrow]

Here's something I posted on another site adding more evidence to the idea that Revelation was written before 70 AD...

"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:

~'Because you say, "I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing," and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see. Revelation 3:14,17-18 (NASB)

Now for the meaning behind this passage, as revealed in history:

Laodicea was a great center of banking and finance (Rev. 3:14-21). It was one of the wealthiest cities of the ancient world! When Laodicea was destroyed by an earthquake in 60 A.D., they refused aid from the Roman empire and rebuilt the city from their own wealth. "One of the most famous cities of Asia, Laodicea, was in the same year overthrown by an earthquake and without any relief from us recovered itself by its own resources" (Tacitus, Annals, 14:27).

"The city was at the crossroads of north-south traffic between Sardis and Perga and east-west from the Euphrates to Ephesus. Laodicea quickly became a rich city, rich enough to be able to rebuild itself without outside help after the destructive earthquake of 60 A.D. In common with many of the Hellenistic cities there was a prosperous Jewish colony established there well before the Christian era. The city's reputation was for its money transactions and the good quality of raven-black wool grown in the area." (Blake and Edmonds, Biblical Sites in Turkey, p. 139-140).

www.padfield.com/2005/laodicea.html

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. Tacitus, Annals, Book 14, chapter 27.

The earthquake in 60 AD, from which the city of Laodicea rebuilt itself, also gives us a clue as to the dating of the book of Revelation. It seems clear that the references to Laodicea's great wealth and "need of nothing" refer to this period of time when Laodicea - taking great pride in its wealth - was refusing offers to help rebuild from the quake's devastation. This is our first real clue as to the dating of the book, which appears, at least, to have been written during this time of reconstruction, sometime after 60 AD.

There are other clues we will find along the way that refine the dating of the book even further.

The point here is that the book of Revelation cannot be separated from the time and people during which and for whom it was clearly written. To superimpose a futuristic meaning on text which refers to historical events does a great disservice both to the book and today's church.

[Allyn]

I believe it must remain in the 1st century context.