>> Irenaeus tells us John wrote Revelation in the mid 90sAD which totally destroys the view of those that say all prophecy was fulfilled by 70AD<<
My statement was >b>those that say all prophecy was fulfilled</b>. I didn’t designate full, partial or anything else. I do understand the differences between full Preterist and those who are not full Preterist and even the disagreements between the two groups which get rather convoluted.
I do realize that there are other arguments for the later date but the Irenaeus statement leaves no wiggle room that is believable. The late date does unravel the foundation of most Preterists.
INDEED.
I do realize that there are other arguments for the later date but the Irenaeus statement leaves no wiggle room that is believable. The late date does unravel the foundation of most Preterists.
Irenaeus statement is weak and there are better - witness the ready response you got from tomcat54. The counter argument against Irenaeus is not something one waves off - the Greek there really does offer some contest to what was the subject of the verb "was seen", and one must read into it one view or the other - though the majority of evangelical scholars go with the later date.
Here is where your Dispensationalism keeps you from having a good argument - I have three fairly sound arguments for a late date based on internal evidence, but, alas, your Futurism prevents you from using them.