The pre-A.D. 70 Date of Revelation's Composition (continued)
Below is the fourth of multiple excerpts of commentary on the Book of Revelation from The Parousia, the late 19th-century masterpiece on the Second Coming by James Stuart Russell.
[In this excerpt, Russell continues his enumeration of internal evidence that the Book of Revelation was written before A.D. 70, when Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed by the Romans.]
"2. After the fullest consideration of the remarkable [Greek] expression te kuriake hemera (the Lord’s day), in Rev. i. 10 [Rev. 1:10], we are satisfied that it cannot refer to the first day of the week, but that those interpreters are right who understand it to refer to the period called elsewhere ‘the [great judgment] day of the Lord.’ There is no example in the New Testament of the first day of the week (Sunday) being called ‘the Lord’s day,’ or ‘the day of the Lord;’ but the latter phrase is appropriated and restricted by usage to the great judicial period which is constantly represented in Scripture as associated with the Parousia [Second Coming]. ...[Thus, the expression] ‘I was in spirit in the day of the Lord' [means]...the Parousia [i.e., the impending 1st-century judgment of Old Covenant Israel] is the stand-point of the Seer in the Apocalypse [Book of Revelation]: a fact which is amply borne out by the contents.
"3. In Rev. iii. 10 [Rev. 3:10] we are informed that a season of severe trial was then imminent, viz. [that is] a bitter persecution of those who bore the Christian name, extending over the whole world ([Greek]: oikoumene [civilized world]---or the Roman Empire). Now the first general persecution of Christians was that which took place under Nero, A.D. 64. We infer that this was the persecution then impending, and therefore that the Apocalypse was written prior to that date.
"4. That the book was written before the destruction of Jerusalem appears from the fact that the city and temple are spoken of as still in existence. (See [Rev.] chap. xi. 1, 2, 8 [Rev. 11:1, 2, 8].) It is scarcely probable that if Jerusalem had been a heap of ruins the apostle [John] would have received a command to measure the temple; [that he] should represent the [supposedly already destroyed] Holy City as about to be trodden down by the Gentiles; or that he should see the witnesses lie unburied in its streets [Rev. 11:1-13].
"5. But, in truth, the Apocalypse [Revelation] itself is the great argument for its having been written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. ...A true interpretation speaks for itself; and as the right key fits the lock, ...so a true interpretation will prove its correctness by satisfactorily showing the correspondence between the historical fact [of Jerusalem's and the Temple's destruction in A.D. 70] and the [book's] prophetical symbol [character]."
[For further reading on the subject of Revelation's date of composition, see Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament by Jonathan Bernier (2022), Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. (1989), and Redating the New Testament by John A.T. Robinson (1976).]
Comments
Post a Comment