Posted on 09/01/2006 5:32:18 AM PDT by xzins
I pinged you all because you all seem to be involved in this particular (sub) topic. It interests me that the date of the Book of Revelation is so controversial, as to be -10 years or +20 years of 70 AD.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't John exiled to the island of Patmos by a Roman emperor of unknown name? It appears that it was either Nero, in 62 AD who banished John, or Domitian in 96 AD.
My main question is, are there simply no historical records of that period that can answer this question conclusively? I suppose given the age of such records, it's not all that surprising, but knowing all we do know about Church history, I find it remarkable that we don't know this very crucial fact.
Deut 8:3
God lets us go our way, to humble us and to prove us, to see whether we will keep His commandments or not. God knows the answer, but we learn about ourselves this way. He is a very gracious God, long-suffering. He already knows what we have to discover.
Are you suggesting that there is something that God does not know?
(By the way, you are off track from the topic of this thread.)
And what would those be? The fact is that all of these "interpretative differences" (aka the traditions of the rabbis) were invented as a result of God destroying the Jewish temple in AD70 and putting and end to the old covenant sacrificial system once and for all.
But we have another problem. When you say "those who are most biblical (OT)" what does that really mean? After all, what was the purpose of the Old Testament? Was it not to point men to Jesus Christ?
"And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." (Luke 24:27)
"We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." (John 1:45)
How do Paul's words of warning apply to modern Judaism, "Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you: 'Behold, you despisers, Marvel and perish! For I work a work in your days, A work which you will by no means believe, Though one were to declare it to you.' " (Acts 13:40,41)?
Are we not told that the law and prophets (the Old Testament) was merely a schoolmaster to drive us to Christ?
This being the case, how can anyone claim to be faithful to the Old Testament who does not recognize the very focus of all the OT, namely Jesus Christ? In there hardness of heart Israel invented the traditions of the rabbis. Some, a minority, of modern Jews still cling to those traditions. But they are not Old Testament traditions. What you see today is the result of the foundation rotting out of Judaism 2000 years ago when they rejected their Messiah.
Anyone who truly wants to the faithful to the Old Testament will fall on their face before the triune God of the universe, the Lord and King, Jesus Christ.
Go here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1693927/posts
Read the thread: It is settled and has been for some time.
It was written in the 90's AD.
So you agree that God knows everything without exception.
Do you agree that He would know, then, who would be saved and who would be lost?
I asked you which is the correct Christian denomination. You side-stepped it. I ask again, WHICH is the most correct Christian denomination?
No, because now you are trying to make a difference without a distinction.
It's like coming around a corner and having a deer jump in front of my car. Technically I'm in control but I cannot avoid the unintended accident. I don't find that in the Bible either.
So why don't you just save us all time and give us some verses on "foreknow" and show us how they support your theory.
It might be well to consider the prophecy that Jacob said about Levi, (Genesis 49:5-6), knowing now that the Talmud comes from Babylon, that Jesus said to beware the doctrine of the pharisees, which they still preach, by the way. And their house was left unto them desolate. And still there are some that don't believe you should evangelize them?
I understand yes, God can tell a sheep from a goat, a wheat from a tare, though He feeds the former and brings the rain and the sun on the latter.
Start a thread on the subject, and I will. I don't feel like diverting this thread.
Therefore, when did God NOT KNOW who would be saved and who would be lost.
I think TC54 is going to start a thread on this subject. I'll hold off on more comment on this subject until we get over there.
I don't want to divert this thread.
How is he diverting the thread? Looks to me he is getting at the very heart of the issue, the leaven of the priests.
I don't understand your question, since He made the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tare, then He always knew what they would become, from seed to fruit
The bottom line then is that none of these so-called "interpretative differences" match up with what we read in the Bible. There is really no form of modern Judaism that does justice to what God revealed in His infallible Holy Word. It doesn't much matter if one is secularist or hasidic.
You side-stepped it.
You were trying to avoid the obviously painful implications of the question exposing your presuppositions about modern Judaism.
Jesus said, "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven." Christianity and Christians are defined by that standard. You do not want to judge Jews by that standard because of the obvious impact it has on the question of "who is Israel" in the futurist reading of Romans 11.
It's a discussion of classic calvinist predeterminism.
We've had any number of threads on it in the past, and it isn't the topic of this thread.
I think that I don't know enough about modern Judaism to make a guess as to which is the closest to the beliefs of OT Judaism.
For another thread.
Let's see if topcat54 posts it.
Their goal is to rebuild the temple, kill sheep and cows and goats (in which God has said He has no delight) and wait for a messiah. Now how believing Christians can support and encourage this is something I just don't get.
It is God's will.
That being said, all the extrinsic and empirical evidence points to the book being written during the reign of Domitian. Irenaeus places the book at the end of the reign of Domitian. He got this information directly from Polycarp, who was a personal disciple of John the Apostle. There is no eyewitness or even hearsay witness evidence to the book being penned during the reign of Nero. Admittedly Irenaeus' testimony in this matter is hearsay, but then so are the Books of Luke and Mark.
There is no reason to question Irenaeus' account of the book being penned towards the end of the reign of Domitian. His is the closest source to the author and there is no valid reason to impeach his testimony. He ought to know and we ought to accept it.
IOW we DO know this crucial fact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.