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

Preterism in my eyes is (a form of) idolatry, a serious mistake, that has lead to unspeakable misery (also the holocaust).

Preterists make of Jesus an "abomination of desolation", the idol in the midst of their "holy (66 book) bible".

Those are some pretty crazy assertions sylvius. And they don't stand under scrutiny at all.

There is nothing idolatrous about Preterism. It simply accepts what the Bible plainly states.

And the "66 book" canon has nothing to do with Preterism per se. There are Catholic Preterists with their 72 book canon, and there are Preterists who doubt that some of the NT book belong in the canon. Your assertions are entirely without warrant.

And it is curious that you didn't respond to the proof I gave. Why is that? What do you think about the parallels between Daniel and Revelation on the question of why a prophetic book is or is not sealed? Did you understand my logic at all?

Daniel 12:9 is about the letter "mem", as last letter of "keits hayamim" = end of the days.

וַיֹּאמֶר לֵךְ דָּנִיֵּאל כִּי-סְתֻמִים וַחֲתֻמִים הַדְּבָרִים עַד-עֵת קֵץ
"vayomer leich Daniel ki s'tumim vachatumim had'varim ad-et keits"
And He said , "Go Daniel, for closed and sealed are these things till the time of the end"

In Ashuri-script it is written as a closed square

Final-"mem" is called "mem-s'tumah" = closed "mem"


Daniel 12:13 is written with a final-"nun" at the end, instead of final "mem":

וְאַתָּה לֵךְ לַקֵּץ וְתָנוּחַ וְתַעֲמֹד לְגֹרָלְךָ לְקֵץ הַיָּמִין
"v'atta leich lakeits v'chanuach v'ta'amod l'goralcha l'keits hayamin".
"and you go towards the end and rest and stand up after your lot at the end of the days"

Final-"nun" in Ashuri script is written with a long downward straight leg, called "nun-p'shutah"= outstretched "nun"

This is the secret of the book Daniel, also the secret of "the writing on the wall" , which also ends with "nun-p'shutah".
( I learned from Rabbi Munk)

Rembrandt knew:
Attachment 517

What's your point? I've known about mem and nun for decades. Those letters don't prove anything about Preterism vs. Futurism.

( I just wanted to ask RAM "what do you think of preterism?", since Mrs. Warren of theologyweb did provoke me, and I began to answer her commentary on Matthew 24: http://www.preteristsite.com/plain/warrenend.html )

I've written hundreds of posts stating my position on Preterism. I think it's the "best fit" to the Biblical data and that Futurism is an impossible theory that directly contradicts Scripture on countless points. But don't get me wrong - I understand that there are problems with Preterism. This is why I have concluded that Biblical eschatology is logically incoherent.

[sylvius]

There is nothing idolatrous about Preterism.

They have the Romans under the leadership of Jesus (or God) destruct Jerusalem and the Temple and murder the Jews who didn't deserve any better.

It simply accepts what the Bible plainly states.

Which is FALSE WITNESS against Jesus

Matthew 26:59-61

59 Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death ; 60 But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came , yet found they none . At the last came two false witnesses, 61 And said , This fellow said , I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days

And the "66 book" canon has nothing to do with Preterism per se.

That was my sneakiness, to make it illustrative. It is right in the center of it, the axis of your wheel.

And it is curious that you didn't respond to the proof I gave.

What nonsense, it is no proof at all.
Revelation doesn't foretell anything, that alone is a misconception. It is "revelation".
The not-sealing refers to Daniel's secret, the closed "mem" that turns out to be outstretched "nun"

[Richard Amiel McGough]

They have the Romans under the leadership of Jesus (or God) destruct Jerusalem and the Temple and murder the Jews who didn't deserve any better.

And that's exactly what the OT says God did with the Babylonians when he used them to destroy the Temple in 586 BC. Therefore, we have direct proof that God used a pagan nation to destroy his Temple, and so we see that the Preterist position is founded upon the Bible.

This fact is also supported by Josephus who said that God destroyed the Temple because of the abominations committed by the priests and zealots who filled the Temple with dead bodies.

It simply accepts what the Bible plainly states.

Which is FALSE WITNESS against Jesus

Matthew 26:59-61

59 Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death ; 60 But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came , yet found they none . At the last came two false witnesses, 61 And said , This fellow said , I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days

So again you reject the NT. Nothing new here! Do you believe any of it?

And the "66 book" canon has nothing to do with Preterism per se.

That was my sneakiness, to make it illustrative. It is right in the center of it, the axis of your wheel.

The Bible Wheel has nothing to do with Preterism! I didn't even know anything about Preterism when I discovered it.

And it is curious that you didn't respond to the proof I gave.

What nonsense, it is no proof at all.
Revelation doesn't foretell anything, that alone is a misconception. It is "revelation".
The not-sealing refers to Daniel's secret, the closed "mem" that turns out to be outstretched "nun"

It always makes me giggle when ignorant people reject things they don't understand.

If you want to say it is "nonsense" and "no proof at all" you need to deal with the proof. As it is, you haven't said a word that touches the evidence presented.

[sylvius]

Revelation 22:10,

Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near.

"prophecy" translates Greek προφητεία, which does'nt mean so much "foretelling", but: "(intelligible) preaching".

Like also Prophets are not so much "foretellers" -

Hebrew "n'vuah" , Greek is προφητεία is just translation
"Navi", prophet , It "comes" him, he doesn't speak his own words/ thoughts.

"because the time is near" - that was also "hard core" of Jesus's preaching:

Mark 1:15,

"The time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God has drawn near"

Which is eternal Gospel: The Kingdom of God is always near.

Also after Deuteronomy 30:14,

[this] thing is very close to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfill it.

[sylvius]

And that's exactly what the OT says God did with the Babylonians when he used them to destroy the Temple in 586 BC. Therefore, we have direct proof that God used a pagan nation to destroy his Temple, and so we see that the Preterist position is founded upon the Bible.

I thought that was the reason why you rejected the bible and Christian belief ..

So again you reject the NT.

It is what Matthew wrote.

You might even think further. Matthew was written years after the year 70.
So with the false witnesses he brings to stage he declares himself to be anti-preterist.

The Bible Wheel has nothing to do with Preterism! I didn't even know anything about Preterism when I discovered it

It was for illustration.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I thought that was the reason why you rejected the bible and Christian belief ..

My rejection of Christianity has nothing to do with the truth or falsehood of my statements about what the Bible says. I don't believe in the Quran, but I can state that it says Muhammad is a prophet of Allah.

You would do well to try to be a little more logical.

It is what Matthew wrote.

You totally misapplied what Matthew wrote.

You might even think further. Matthew was written years after the year 70.
So with the false witnesses he brings to stage he declares himself to be anti-preterist.

First, the dating of Matthew is unknown. If the Temple had been destroyed at the time he wrote, there is no explanation for why he didn't mention it as a done fact.

Second, Matthew did not "declare himself to be anti-preterist." You just made that up.

It was for illustration.

An illustration based on you ignorance of the facts.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Revelation 22:10,

Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near.

"prophecy" translates Greek προφητεία, which does'nt mean so much "foretelling", but: "(intelligible) preaching".

Like also Prophets are not so much "foretellers" -

Hebrew "n'vuah" , Greek is προφητεία is just translation
"Navi", prophet , It "comes" him, he doesn't speak his own words/ thoughts.

Sorry, but your opinion has no basis in fact and directly contradicts the text. Revelation is perfectly clear it was predicting events that were going to happen "soon" relative to the time it was written.

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.

It looks like you should add "reading comprehension" along with a refresher course in logic.

"because the time is near" - that was also "hard core" of Jesus's preaching:

Mark 1:15,

"The time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God has drawn near"

Which is eternal Gospel: The Kingdom of God is always near.

Also after Deuteronomy 30:14,

[this] thing is very close to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfill it.

If he wanted to talk about the "eternal Gospel" he would not have spoken about the "things which must shortly come to pass ... for the time is at hand."

[sylvius]

My rejection of Christianity has nothing to do with the truth or falsehood of my statements about what the Bible says. I don't believe in the Quran, but I can state that it says Muhammad is a prophet of Allah.

You would do well to try to be a little more logical.

When some bad thing happens to me, an accident, I might experience it as kind of punishment. To be honest I must say I didn't deserve any better, or even worse.

But if something bad happens to someone else I cannot say "you didn't deserve any better".

That's the difference.

Also Jews see the destruction of the Temple as kind of punishment. They were punished,

Not so the Preterists. They were not punished, but God (Jesus) took revenge on the Jews who didn't want to accept Jesus as their king, etc. until the present day.

You totally misapplied what Matthew wrote.

Mark has it too, Mark 14 57-58:
57 καί τινες ἀναστάντες ἐψευδομαρτύρουν κατ' αὐτοῦ λέγοντες 58 ὅτι Ἡμεῖς ἠκούσαμεν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος ὅτι Ἐγὼ καταλύσω τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον τὸν χειροποίητον καὶ διὰ τριῶν ἡμερῶν ἄλλον ἀχειροποίητον οἰκοδομήσω:

From which might be concluded that also Mark was written after the year 70 ..

First, the dating of Matthew is unknown. If the Temple had been destroyed at the time he wrote, there is no explanation for why he didn't mention it as a done fact.

Why he should?
He writes about a time that the Temple still stood.
And more: The Gospels don't intend to be history books.

Second, Matthew did not "declare himself to be anti-preterist." You just made that up.

That is a fair conclusiion, since by then already there must have been some who saw the destrusction of the Temple as a punishment for not having accepted Jesus as King or Messiah.

An illustration based on you ignorance of the facts.

Exodus 14:25,

And He removed the wheels of their chariots, and He led them with heaviness, and the Egyptians said, Let me run away from the Israelites because the Lord is fighting for them against the Egyptians

[sylvius]

Sorry, but your opinion has no basis in fact and directly contradicts the text. Revelation is perfectly clear it was predicting events that were going to happen "soon" relative to the time it was written.

You misinterpret the "soon" and the "near"

soon, ἐν τάχει , is Hebrew "b'karov"
near, ἐγγύς, is Hebrew "karov".

"karov" to be found in Deuteronmy 30:14,

כִּי-קָרוֹב אֵלֶיךָ הַדָּבָר מְאֹד
"ki-karov eileicha hadavar m'od"
For very near to you is the word

"karov" from "karav" = to draw near., like also "korban" -- Jesus making himself "korban" - Mark 11:1-2,
Καὶ ὅτε ἐγγίζουσιν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα εἰς Βηθφαγὴ καὶ Βηθανίαν πρὸς τὸ Ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν, ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν κώμην τὴν κατέναντι ὑμῶν, καὶ εὐθὺς εἰσπορευόμενοι εἰς αὐτὴν εὑρήσετε πῶλον δεδεμένον ἐφ' ὃν οὐδεὶς οὔπω ἀνθρώπων ἐκάθισεν: λύσατε αὐτὸν καὶ φέρετε

(The colt able to carry the hundredfold yield of the seed that falls on the good earth)

If he wanted to talk about the "eternal Gospel" he would not have spoken about the "things which must shortly come to pass ... for the time is at hand."

Always at hand. It is the next moment, into which the eternal now flows further.

[sylvius]

The "soon" and the "near" are the characteristics of the almond.

The almond being the "eighth fruit" (after the seven mentioned in Deuternomy 8:8), the kernel being eatable (unlike the kernel of the olive, fruit of the sixth day).

Almond Hebrew "shakeid" is (used as) a wordplay with "shakad", to be alert, wakeful, keep watch.
Jeremiah 1:11-12,

וַיְהִי דְבַר-יְהוָה אֵלַי לֵאמֹר מָה-אַתָּה רֹאֶה יִרְמְיָהוּ וָאֹמַר, מַקֵּל שָׁקֵד אֲנִי רֹאֶה

וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֵלַי הֵיטַבְתָּ לִרְאוֹת כִּי-שֹׁקֵד אֲנִי עַל-דְּבָרִי לַעֲשֹׂתוֹ

"shakad"= Greek "grègorein"

Conclusion of "the Olivet discourse",
Mark 13:37

ὃ δὲ ὑμῖν λέγω, πᾶσιν λέγω, γρηγορεῖτε.

"What I say to you I say to all: WAKE"