Steven, how in the world can the scholars miss that Babylon was Jerusalem? The parallels from Revelation 18 and Matthew 23-24 are quite numerous! Also Rev 11 and many other places make it abundantly clear.

I hold to the late date, but I'm glad you shared this. My pastor for a while was Dr. Mark Hitchcock who debated Hank Hannegraff on this topic (you can find it on KZfaq). Mark lays out both internal and external evidence to support the late date (it was the subject of his doctoral dissertation iirc). Maybe you could invite Mark on! 😅

I'm so glad my amillennial idealist view does not rest on when the date was. It fits either way and the typology for the destruction of Jerusalem fits either in past (if later date) or future (if earlier date) Very interesting topic though that I need to look into more at some point Lord willing.

Good discussion. Nice job by both of you.

Hey Steven, unrelated question: what was the base text of translation for the different languages of the world prior to the TR?

The biggest problem to me with the early date of the Revelation, specifically in applying it to the fall of Jerusalem, is that NONE of the pre-Nicene fathers have that understanding. They all, insofar as I have been able to research it, see the book as a prophecy about FUTURE persecution, or as a rather eclectic collection of allegories expounding the commentators' favorite theological hobby horses.

Hello Steven, there was a statue of Rome in Caesarea Maritima. Could it be the statue of Revelation 13? Patmos is located on the roman waterway between Caesarea and Ephesus. I believe John is telling Asia Minor about what is happening in Judea, somewhere around 70 CE.

Revelation was clearly written prior to the end of the age and destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. That is indeed a huge part of the book!

Like so many preterists, amillennialists, et al., I fear that Dr. Wilson's eschatology has colored his conclusion regarding the dating of Revelation.

This was an enjoyable video. I would prefer an early date. It'd be easier by a long shot, but, unless I have strong evidence to the contrary, I assume that early Church testimony is sound, and external evidence is more reliable than internal evidence on most things. Thus, Irenaeus' testimony is just too strong. His "I don't know" on the number has little bearing on "He wrote a short while ago, during the reign of Domitian," and that cannot have been a short regency instead of imperial rule. The same is true about Christian martyrs under Domitian. The Christian historians and hagiography testify to Domitian persecuting, albeit to varying degrees. We don't have contemporary witnesses to a lot of things in antiquity, so it's very hard for the absence of contemporary testimony to constitute evidence of absence for me. If we assume an absence of evidence is evidence of absence, then a lot of biblical events must disappear, too. The Exodus, for certain, would have to go.

I am for the early date, and base it primarily on Scripture (see the references). I believe the Apostle John wrote the book of Revelation before AD 70, but lived to witness Jesus coming in judgment upon Israel and the destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd Temple. In John 21:20-23 Jesus tells Peter that John will remain alive till He (Jesus) “comes “, (meaning coming in judgment upon Israel, 66-73 AD). Sometime after that I believe John was martyred. See: Matthew 20:20-23 and Mark 10:35-40. Also, a careful look at the 7th chapter of Daniel references the 4th Beast and the Saints occupying the Kingdom. Also see: Matthew 16:28.

Revelation was the words of Christ, dictated to John. Jesus said He was coming "soon" and gave John the description of the 6 seals in Revelation 6 and so much of the book of Revelation deals with the 12 tribes of Israel (Rev 7-14, etc) The 6 seals of Revelation 6 matches Matthew 24 where Jesus says He was coming in that generation with all the similar signs (wars, false messiahs, famine, earthquakes, sun/moon turning dark, etc). Therefore Revelation was most likely written prior to AD70. Also Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the man of lawlessness would sit in the temple of God when Christ would come to destroy him. Given that the Jerusalem temple was the main temple of God pre-AD70, then it most likely seems that Christ's coming of judgment on Israel was in AD70. But I guess the question is this: who was the beast? Was it the zealot-led Jewish army? Or was it Rome? Rome was not destroyed by Christ in AD70. It was the zealot-led Jewish armies that were destroyed. But then again, the Jewish forces led by Simon Bar Kokhba recaptured Jerusalem in AD132-136 before the Romans defeated them again. The Roman empire became Christian and then the empire collapsed in the 4th century. If Revelation was written before AD70, then AD70 was the main focus of Revelation. Otherwise, the AD136 war was the main war in focus.

People such as yourselves have been predicting the revelation for 2000 years and this one won’t come true either.

Wrong, Irenius dates it at 95 in his writings

Hey Steven, unrelated question: what was the base text of translation for the different languages of the world prior to the TR?