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!

[CWH]

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)

Does that means that the prophesies of Daniel are still on-going since it has been sealed till now? If not when was it opened as stated in the Bible?

The main reason why Revelation was unsealed was because the events about the letters to the 7 churches and the 7 seals were about to happen or were already starting. The letters to the 7 churches which accounts of what the churches throughout the centuries which were started in the 1st century were going to face and that the start of the first seal was the start of Christianity spreading throughout the world. That is why in Revelation it started with the 1st letter to the church (Revelation 2) :
"I am coming soon"
and ends in Revelation 22 with :
"I am coming soon.... Come Lord Jesus".

The 1st to the 7th seals are on-going (especially 1st to the 2nd seals), the 3rd seal and the rest have yet to come.

Many Blessings.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The 1st to the 7th seals are on-going (especially 1st to the 2nd seals), the 3rd seal and the rest have yet to come.

Upon what Scriptures do you establish this assertion? Or did you just make it up?

If "the 1st to the 7th seals are on-going" then that means the means that the 6th Seal is also "on-going" -

Revelation 6:12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; [Has this been ongoing for 2000 years?] 13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. [Has this been ongoing for 2000 years?] 14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. [Has this been ongoing for 2000 years?] 15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand? [Has this been ongoing for 2000 years?]

I am mystified by why you feel free to make up this stuff. Why don't you establish your beliefs upon what the Bible actually states?

Many blessings,

Richard

PS: I wrote the answer above and then re-read your statement. Now I see that you must have made a mistake because you said that "1st to the 7th seals are on-going ... the 3rd seal and the rest have yet to come." That sentence doesn't make any sense, so I guess you wrote it too fast.