Biblical Proof that Revelation was fulfilled in the first century

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Scripture declares that a prophetic book or vision is "sealed' or "unsealed" depending on the time of its fulfillment relative to the time of its writing. We have three mutually confirming passages that define the two possibilities:

Daniel 8:26 "And the vision of the evenings and mornings Which was told is true; Therefore seal up the vision, For it refers to many days in the future."

Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

Futurists and Preterists agree that the end-time prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are fulfilled at the same time. If that time were still future, then it would have been necessary for both Daniel and Revelation to have been sealed because the fulfillment of both books would not happen for thousands of years after their composition.

Thus, the Futurist position directly contradicts the plain teaching of Scripture established by three clear and unambiguous witnesses.

The Preterist position, on the other hand, is strongly confirmed as the only interpretation that is consistent with the Biblical facts.

I would be very interested if anyone can find any refutation of this proof.

Thanks!

Richard

[joel]

Richard,

When does the prince of covenant (Daniel 11:22) come forth?

Joel

[Codger]

Scripture declares that a prophetic book or vision is "sealed' or "unsealed" depending on the time of its fulfillment relative to the time of its writing. We have three mutually confirming passages that define the two possibilities:

Daniel 8:26 "And the vision of the evenings and mornings Which was told is true; Therefore seal up the vision, For it refers to many days in the future."

Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

Futurists and Preterists agree that the end-time prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are fulfilled at the same time. If that time were still future, then it would have been necessary for both Daniel and Revelation to have been sealed because the fulfillment of both books would not happen for thousands of years after their composition.

Thus, the Futurist position directly contradicts the plain teaching of Scripture established by three clear and unambiguous witnesses.

The Preterist position, on the other hand, is strongly confirmed as the only interpretation that is consistent with the Biblical facts.

I would be very interested if anyone can find any refutation of this proof.

Thanks!

Richard

Good point - Never noticed that - I'll keep this one.

[joel]

Daniel is a sealed book.

Revelation is not.

And this proves.....what?

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Daniel is a sealed book.

Revelation is not.

And this proves.....what?

Joel

It proves that Revelation was fulfilled shortly after it was written. Did you not read the proof in the opening post? Here is the paragraph that stated the necessary implication:

Futurists and Preterists agree that the end-time prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are fulfilled at the same time. If that time were still future, then it would have been necessary for both Daniel and Revelation to have been sealed because the fulfillment of both books would not happen for thousands of years after their composition.

Therefore, the fact that Revelation was not sealed proves that it was fulfilled shortly after it was written. And it is interesting that this implication is confirmed in the first few lines of that book:

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. 3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Thus we see that the actual text of Revelation coheres perfectly with the implications derived from the three mutually confirming verses stated in my opening post. This is an example of the Synergy of Truth. Everything confirms everything else!

Is it not amazing in it's simplicity and powerful in its clarity?

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Daniel is a sealed book.

Revelation is not.

And this proves.....what?

Joel

Your statement has an ambiguity that could lead to confusion. Revelation is not merely a "book that was not sealed." That statement could be applied to every book of the NT because those books did not mention whether or not they were sealed.

Revelation is different. It explicitly says "Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand" (Rev 22:10 NKJV). It explains why this book was not sealed, just as Daniel explained why his book was sealed.

Therefore, the proper way to describe the relation between these two books would be as follows:

Scripture declares Daniel was sealed because it spoke of events in the distant future (relative to the time it was written).

Scripture declares Revelation was not sealed because it spoke of events in the near future (relative to the time it was written)

[Elect Lady]

Your statement has an ambiguity that could lead to confusion. Revelation is not merely a "book that was not sealed." That statement could be applied to every book of the NT because those books did not mention whether or not they were sealed.

Revelation is different. It explicitly says "Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand" (Rev 22:10 NKJV). It explains why this book was not sealed, just as Daniel explained why his book was sealed.

Therefore, the proper way to describe the relation between these two books would be as follows:

Scripture declares Daniel was sealed because it spoke of events in the distant future (relative to the time it was written).

Scripture declares Revelation was not sealed because it spoke of events in the near future (relative to the time it was written)

Excellent revelation!

Elect Lady

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Excellent revelation!

Elect Lady

Thanks!



It amazes me too!

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Thanks!



It amazes me too!

Again, what does this tell us then about some of Ireneous' writings? How can Tertullian, Africanus, Clement and others indicate that the 70 weeks of Daniel are fulfilled while being ignored in comparison to Ireneous' writings.? Were Ireneous' errors intentional? Beware the yeast of the Pharisees.!!

The Historicist have the only angle that can attempt to answer your logic, but I think they divide Revelation and Daniel as being partly addressing the events of the end of the mosaic covenant and partly progressive futurist.

If we can continue to connect Deut 32 with the end and judgment upon the Mosaic covenant from 27-73 AD, then the connection with Daniel with that end is further solidified by the association of Deut 31:29 and Daniel 10:14.

Deut 31:29 For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt [yourselves], and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.

Dan 10:14 Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision [is] for [many] days.

[Screaming Eagle]

So, where is the 144,000 in history? And where is Rev 11-21 in history?

Are you regarding the entire book of Revelation (as well as other prophetic books) as history books? What about Ezekiel's temple?