Thank you both very much. Your kind words are appreciated.

I stumbled on some more evidence for the late dating, (after 70 AD), of the Revelation you might be interested in.

John never addressed Jerusalem. The only references to Jerusalem he ever made in Revelation was to the "New Jerusalem". I wonder why. Could it be that the old Jerusalem didn't exist anymore?

__________________
"My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him." 1 John 3:18-19

The church of Christ at Granby

I still going to date the Revelation Letter at about AD 77-79. I truly believe that John was prophesying about the coming events during the reign of Domitian. Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70 by Vespatian/Titus and both became Caesars of Rome shortly thereafter, so......

__________________
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Tim 2:5 (U-NASB)

I'm with you.

I believe the letter was written during the reign of Vespasian per chapter 17.

__________________
"My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him." 1 John 3:18-19

The church of Christ at Granby

Agree!

Me Too!!!!!

__________________
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Tim 2:5 (U-NASB)

I have a Vespasian coin from this period.

That is 'cool'. Does it have a likeness stamped on it?
It was common practice to mint coins in the likeness of the current ruler or Caesar. It was part of the emperor worship that was usually required of the populace. Domatian was the worst along with Nero, in that he declared himself a god. Of course, after he was killed, all of his likenesses were removed or destroyed. Needless to say, he was not a very popular ruler.

__________________
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Tim 2:5 (U-NASB)

Yes it does.

For the intrepid ... here is a paper I wrote on the date of writing of the book of Revelation while working on my Masters at Southern Christian... (sorry, some of the margins are off on my charts due to font differences when I copied and pasted)

CHAPTER I
REVELATION: THE “KINGS LIST”

The exact date John wrote the Book of Revelation is not known. Determining the approximate date it of writing bears greatly upon the interpretation of the prophecies contained therein. Before receiving the visions, John was instructed to record “what must very soon take place.” He was told to encourage the reader, hearer and ones who heed the book, because “the time is near.” At the conclusion of the visions, the angel told John that God sent him to show “what must happen soon.” Finally, John was instructed not to “seal” the prophecy, “for the time is near.” “However you understand the book you must take into account” these four statements. In scripture, only prophecy that is soon to be fulfilled is left unsealed. Conversely, Daniel was instructed to “seal up” his prophecy that would not be fulfilled until the distant future. The approximate date of writing, therefore, provides a benchmark for the prophecy fulfillment timeline, and is a tremendous aid to the interpreter of Revelation.

The Old Testament Example
In the Old Testament, both books of history and books of prophecy used “kings lists” to give historical perspective to their writings. For historical perspective, the pattern of the historical books of the Old Testament, such as I and II Kings and I and II Chronicles, was to record information on the kings of both the northern kingdom and the southern kingdom. In this manner the completed record of both Israel and Judah would have historical perspective. For
example, the student of the Old Testament reads that “In the thirty-ninth year of Azariah king of Judah, Menahem son of Gadi became king over Israel and reigned ten years in Samaria.” Likewise, “The word of the Lord which came to Hosea the son of Beeri, during the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and during the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel.”

The Book of Revelation Example
Revelation provides a “kings list” of similar purpose to give historical perspective and assist in dating this enigmatic writing. In context, John is “astonished” by a vision he has seen of a beast with “seven heads and ten horns”, with one head that “seemed to have been mortally wounded, but the mortal wound had healed”. To help John and reassure him, the angel enlightens him to the identity of the beast, thus providing the interpreter with a “kings list”. “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss”. Next, the angel tells John that “there are seven kings, five have fallen, one is, the other is yet to come, and when he comes he must remain a little while. And the beast that was and is not, even himself is an eighth, and is of the seven, and he goes to destruction.” The task at hand is to determine the five kings who have fallen and the one king currently reigning when John wrote Revelation.

The Roman Rulers
The Roman Republic did not become the Roman Empire until some point in time between the first century B. C. and the first century A. D. Historians differ on the identity of the first emperor of the Roman Empire (see table 1). Each of the three likely dating theories selects a different “king” as a staring point for the counting, but all those who seek to establish the date of writing must reconcile this passage with their theory. Any interpretation of Revelation must be consistent throughout in order to maintain validity.

Table 1. Leaders of the Roman Republic / Empire (63 BC – AD 117)

Dates of Reign Name(s) of Leader(s) Notes
___________________________________________________________________________ __________
63 BC – 47 BC Pompey
47 BC – 44 BC Julius Caesar
44 BC – 43 BC Brutus / elitists No “Caesar”
43 BC – 27 BC Octavian, Marc Antony, Lepidus Triumvirate rulers
27 BC – AD 14 Augustus (Octavian)
AD 14 – AD 37 Tiberius
AD 37 – AD 41 Caligula (Gaius)
AD 41 – AD 54 Claudius
AD 54 – AD 68 Nero
AD 68 Galba } Galba, Otho and Vitellius ruled for
AD 68 – AD 69 Otho } a combined total of 1 ½ years -
AD 69 Vitellius } mostly fighting for survival
AD 69 – AD 79 Vespasian
AD 79 – AD 81 Titus
AD 81 – AD 96 Domitian
AD 96 – AD 98 Nerva
AD 98 – AD 117 Trajan
___________________________________________________________________________ __________
Sources: Dr. Bruce Stewart, Revelation: A Vision of Victory and www.historychannel.com






CHAPTER II
REVELATION: THE PROPOSED DATES OF WRITING

Three theories for establishing the approximate date John wrote the Book of Revelation appear valid. The “Early Date Theory” (circa A. D. 64-69) and the “Late Date Theory” (circa A. D. 95-96) have historically been the most prevalent. A closer examination of the “kings list”, however, has led to the development of the “Middle Date Theory” (circa A. D. 76-79). The date of writing is especially significant to those who believe in an early fulfillment of the prophecies since the “kings list” also reveals the identity of “the beast” of Revelation that “goes to destruction.” Interpreters must first examine the rulers of Rome (see table 1) and then identify the “five” rulers that have fallen. This will reveal the identity of the “one” that “is”; i.e. the ruler at the time John saw the visions and wrote the Book of Revelation. In turn, we can determine the identity of the “other” (seventh) ruler “yet to come” who will rule for only “a little while.” Finally, an analysis of the “kings list” will reveal the “eighth” who “goes to destruction”.

The Early Date Theory
Since there is no mention of the A. D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation, many interpreters believe there must be a significant reason. “(T)his demands that we explain on the premise that this prophecy was written before that event”. Many advocates of the A. D. 64-67 date believe Nero was the ruler (see table 1) at the time John wrote Revelation. Others allow that Nero was possibly dead at the time John wrote, with the date being circa A. D. 69. Both factions point to the continuing Jewish persecution of Christians and the Roman persecution that followed the establishment of the “cult of emperor worship”. The theory holds that Revelation is fulfilled in the coming of Christ in judgement “upon the generation of those Jews who killed him” (i.e., Jerusalem). Arethas, writing in the sixth century interpreted the sixth seal (Rv. 6:12) as being fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70. In his opinion, “the Apocalypse was written before that event.”
Although Julius Caesar was not legally an emperor, the Roman historian Suetonius counts Julius as the first emperor in fact. Identifying the “kings” of Rome as those claiming the title “Caesar”, the five fallen kings under this theory are Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, Tiberius Caesar, Gaius Caesar, and Claudius Caesar. Following the suicide of Nero, Galba ruled for “a little while”, specifically, seven months. The shortcoming of this theory appears in the failure to address “the eighth” king who is “the beast”. The early date advocates primarily identify Nero as “the beast”, but is difficult to reconcile Nero as “the beast” and “the eighth”. Most attempting this version of interpretive gymnastics rely on the “Nero Redivivus Myth” which has Domitian (see table 1) as the “resurrected” Nero. This theory is based upon the head that “seemed to have been mortally wounded” (Nero’s suicide), “but the mortal wound had been healed” (Domitian).

The Middle Date Theory
“Many scholars argue that the line of the emperors of Rome officially began with Augustus”. This theory identifies Augustus Caesar as the first “king” and uses Old Testament prophecy to assist in the interpretation of New Testament prophecy (see table 2). A legitimate hermeneutical method is to allow scripture to interpret scripture. This is especially true in light of the tremendous number of allusions to the Old Testament in the Book of Revelation. As such, we can seek clarification and guidance from Daniel’s prophecy of the four world powers, the last of which is Rome. Daniel’s fourth “beast” is the same “beast” John saw rising up out of the sea. In Daniel’s vision, an eleventh king will “subdue” three kings (Galba, Otho and Vitellius). The reconciliation (see table 2) between Daniel’s prophecy and John’s prophecy is completed by the statement that the beast “you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss”.


Table 2. Comparison of Daniel 7:20, 24 and Revelation 17:10-11

Daniel Revelation Ruler Passage Reference
___________________________________________________________________________ __________
1st 1st Augustus }
2nd 2nd Tiberius }
3rd 3rd Caligula }“Five have fallen” (17:10)
4th 4th Claudius }
5th 5th Nero }
6th *Galba
7th *Otho
8th *Vitellius
9th 6th Vespasian “one is” (17:10)
10th 7th Titus “a short time” (17:10)
11th 8th Domitian “the eighth” (17:11)

Source: Stewart, 24.
The insignificance of Galba, Otho and Vitellius is highlighted by their lack of persecution of the enemies of the state due to civil wars. John provides both a generic personification of the beast and a specific, individual personification. “The generic identity of the Beast is the ancient Roman Empire of the first century” A. D. The specific, individual identified as “the beast” is Domitian. The three rulers Galba, Otho and Vitellius are excluded from John’s accounting because the beast (generic) that “was” (persecution under Nero) appeared to have “been mortally wounded” and at the time of John’s writing “is not” currently persecuting Christians. Simply put, the persecution stopped as Galba, Otho and Vitellius fought for survival during civil war in the empire (see table 1). Many that advocate the early date do not object to removing the three brief reigning emperors of the Roman Civil War – Galba, Otho, (and) Vitellius”.
In this theory, the five kings who have fallen at the time John wrote were Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero. The king who “is” at the time John wrote would be Vespasian who ruled from A. D. 69-79. The basic timeframe for the writing of the Book of Revelation, then would be this period between A. D. 69 and A. D. 79. In this interpretation, the seventh king who would rule for “a little while” was Titus, who ruled for only two years, two months and twenty days. The eighth is, therefore, Domitian (see table 2), The “beast of Revelation”.

The Late Date Theory
The scholarship of the last century or so has wavered between a date of around 96 A. D., in the reign of Domitian and an earlier date of around 69 A. D.” The primary evidence offered by the advocates of the later date is a statement by Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, written circa 180-190 A. D. His statement is given weight because he claims to have been acquainted with Polycarp, a contemporary of the Apostle John. Irenaeus is commenting on the mystery of the number “666”, which he assumes to be “a” man called the “Antichrist”. He writes, “We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.” This quotation is ambiguous, given that it could mean the vision “was seen” or that the writing of John (Revelation) “was seen”, or that John “was seen”.
The other external evidence for the late date is church tradition that Domitian banished John to Patmos. Origen states the “King of the Romans, as tradition teaches, condemned John”, but nowhere does he specifically identify the “King” as Domitian. Clement wrote that John left Patmos “after the death of the tyrant”, but he, like Origen, fails to specify Domitian as the tyrant, or Nerva (see table 1) as the successor who freed him. Even so, Clement is cited as a “chief authority” for the A. D. 96 date. Aside from the external evidence in support of the late date theory, some proponents offer internal evidence. The “number of indications that emperor-worship was practiced” and to have “become widespread in Domitian’s day”, for example. The apparent “time of persecution” when Revelation was written, and the condition of the seven churches in Asia, are additionally cited as internal evidence of the later date. Unfortunately for this theory, there is ample evidence that emperor worship commenced before Domitian and that the intense persecution of Christians began under Nero.
This theory also encounters difficulties with the “kings list”. With Domitian as the king that “is” (i.e., the sixth), the five that have fallen are either, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian and Titus, or (by eliminating the three “subdued” kings) Gaius, Claudius, Nero, Vespasian and Titus. Neither Galba nor Gaius (Caligula) meets the qualification of the first emperor or “king” of Rome. Also, consider the seventh king who would rule “a little while” under this theory. Nerva (see table 1) ruled for only two years and would qualify, but this would leave Trajan as the “beast of Revelation”. Inexplicably, the proponents of the A. D. 96 date who believe in the immediate fulfillment identify Domitian as “the beast”.

CHAPTER III
REVELATION: CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the imminent fulfillment of the prophecies in The Book of Revelation is strong. Epistles, or letters, were an “occasional documents” that arise “out of and are intended for a specific occasion”. The interpreter of Revelation must assume urgency because the message was sent to specific people for a specific purpose. Four clear statements are given expressing urgency. The two in the opening chapter state that God intended to show John “what must very soon take place” and that the prophecies were important because “the time was near.” Likewise, the two statements in the concluding chapter of the book reveal the same urgency. The angel says he was sent to tell John “what must happen soon.” Then he tells John not to seal the prophecies because “the time is near.”
A sound and consistent hermeneutical method for interpreting Revelation must recognize the emphasis God placed upon the urgency of this message for the original recipients. This same hermeneutical method would seek to interpret the prophecies as being fulfilled within a short time after the date they were written. Those who interpret Revelation as having fulfillment in the future and those who believe it is an unfolding fulfillment over time, have an inherent inconsistency in their interpretive method. In continuing their inconsistency, they perceive that they are “freed” from incorporating the “kings list” fully and harmoniously into their interpretation. The “kings list” found in Revelation 17 is an essential component of the interpretive process, since it is the key to the approximate date John wrote the letter to the churches of Asia. The manner in which an interpreter confronts the date of writing determines the harmony and consistency of his overall interpretation.
The only interpretation of the “kings list” that fully harmonizes the “kings list” with all of Revelation and all of scripture is the “Middle Date Theory”. I conclude, therefore, that the Apostle John wrote the Book of Revelation on the island of Patmos during the reign of Vespasian. Only this timeframe, A. D. 69 – A. D. 79 harmonizes with the historical understanding of the identity of the first emperor, Augustus Caesar, the historical events of the first century under Domitian, and the relevant prophecies of Daniel concerning this time in history. Additionally, this timeframe is consistent with the imminent fulfillment statements contained in John’s letter.
Interestingly, there is one possibility that harmonizes all three dating theories with church tradition that holds that Domitian banished John and Nerva released him. In 69-71 A. D., Domitian served as de facto emperor while his father Vespasian was in Egypt, and his older brother, Titus, was battling the rebellion in Judea. The youngest member of the imperial family at eighteen, Domitian “took over the royal residence and ruled in his own name” until Vespasian replaced him with Nerva in 71 A. D. Therefore, it is possible that Domitian banished John to Patmos during the reign of Vespasian, the “sixth king”. Consequently, John could have written Revelation before the fall of Jerusalem in A. D. 70, yet during the “reign” of Domitian. In this theory made possible by a remarkable coincidence of history, it still would have been Nerva that released John, although not during his “official” reign from A. D. 96 – 98.

WORKS CITED


Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on Revelation. Abilene, TX: A. C. U. Press, 1979.


Fee, Gordon D. and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, Second Edition.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.


Gentry, Dr. Kenneth L., Jr. The Beast Of Revelation. Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian
Economics, 1989.


Gregg, Steve. Revelation: Four Views, A Parallel Commentary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1997.


Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset and David Brown. A Commentary on the Old and New
Testament. Vol. 3. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.


McGuiggan, Jim. The Book of Revelation. Lubbock, TX: International Biblical Resources, 1976.


Morris, Leon. The Revelation of St. John. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1969.


Stewart, Bruce. Revelation: A Vision of Victory. Mobile, AL: Discovering the Word
Productions, 1986.


Swete, H. B. The Apocalypse of St. John. New York: Macmillan Publishing House, 1960.


Wallace, Foy E., Jr. The Book of Revelation. Forth Worth, TX: Foy E. Wallace Jr. Publications,
1966.