Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Apostolic Interpretation

Expand Messages
  • e_s_c_h_a_t_o_n
    Thank you very much Dr. Newton, and thank you for your questions. In my scheme the association of the abomination of desolation with 70 AD is due to a Jewish
    Message 1 of 43 , Jan 13, 2011
      Thank you very much Dr. Newton, and thank you for your questions.

      In my scheme the association of the abomination of desolation with 70 AD is due to a Jewish "non-wisdom," literal method of interpretation.

      Irenaeus (Heresies V.XXV) associated the abombination of desolation with Daniel 7:8,23 8:12,23 and 9:27 along 2 Thess. 2 with a future antichrist. Here is how a successor, Hippolytus put it.

      >> On this Hippolytus says, that in the siege of Vespasian this did not come to pass;for nothing new happened to the world in his days beyond the things that were before. If you speak of war, many times it has happened in former times : and if again of captives, there have not lacked massacres or blood-shedding that was more than that [of the siege]. And if of the eating of children and unclean beasts, lo also in the days of Ahab these things were [2 Kings, vi. 28].
      Also the Apostle has written that these things are concerning antichrist, Except if there come first a falling away, and the Man of iniquity be revealed, so that he as God shall sit in the temple, whom our Lord Jesus shall consume, etc. [2 Thess. ii. 3, 4, 8]. From these [words] it is evident that Vespasian did not call himself God, nor did he sit in the temple, nor was he killed by the Spirit of the Lord. Accordingly it is manifest that in the end tribulation arises against the Church, such as was none like it.' HIPPOLYTUS ON
      ST. MATTHEW XXIV. 15-22. ed. Roger Pearse, 2005<<

      Hippolytus like Paul, Barnabas and Irenaeus among others, saw the temple of God as the church. I believe Hippolytus did link Luke 21:20 with 70 AD like the modern day dispensationalist Cyrus Scofield. Augustine said that Mat 24:15, Mark 13:14, and Luke 21:20 were all about 70 AD, but that's my point. It was due to the influence of Jewish interpretation that these things came to be seen in a more historical way.

      It's not hard to see a connection between Luke 21:20 and the other passages if we trace the abomination of desolation as does R.H. Charles in "The Legend of Antichrist."

      >>Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. Deu 13:13-16<<

      The desolation of a city is caused by an abomination by the children of Belial. Compare that to a passage in the Ascension of Isaiah.

      >>4:1 AND now Hezekiah and Josab my son, these are the days of the completion of the world.
      2. After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king.
      3. Will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.<<

      Beliar is probably a Greek form of Belial. It is easy to see why the son of perdition, the lawless one of 2 Thess 2 could be linked with the abomination of desolation, Judas (John 17:12, 2 Thes 2:3), and the destruction of a city. Some interpreters believe that this is referring to Nero who supposedly had his mother killed. However, matricde was more common in the ruling classes of ancient times. There were other historical figures such as Cleopatra III and Berenice III that were killed by their sons, but the theme goes back far before that. In Babylonian legend, the god Marduk slew his mother Tiamet, and in Greek mythology Orestes and Electra murdered their mother Clytemnestra, also Alcmaeon killed his mother Eriphyle.

      The idea of interpreting an entire passage or passages based on a single word may be what Paul had in mind is 2 Tim 2:14 or 2 Cor 3:16. I think the best way to understand that sort of passage is explained by the concept of the continual coming of Christ in the church, as found in Justin Martyr and Augustine. Here is the way Augustine put it.

      >>And now the Lord God and His Spirit hath sent me." It was Himself who was speaking as the Lord God; and yet we should not have understood that it was Jesus Christ had He not added, "And now the Lord God and His Spirit hath sent me." For He said this with reference to the form of a servant, speaking of a future event as if it were past, as in the same prophet we read, "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, "not "He shall be led;" but the past tense is used to express the future. And prophecy constantly speaks in this way. City of God, Book XX, Ch. 30<<

      I deal with the subject at some length in my book "The Gospel Prophecy."

      I note that 17:9 might mean mountains instead of hills, but they are also kings that Hippolytus said were ages. The imagery comes from the heads of the four beasts in Daniel 7, and this influence is best seen in Rev 13:1-2. Again, I think the influence of Jewish interpretation was widespread, and may be what Barnabas referred to as Jewish error. I don't understand the relation of 20:11-15 to Rome, unless you are saying that amillennialism somehow infers Rome, and I don't see a conflict with the final judgment.

      I will attempt to explain further if things don't seem to make sense.

      Alan Fuller

      --- In revelation-list@yahoogroups.com, Jon Newton <jonknewton@...> wrote:
      > Very interesting article, Alan. Good to see allegorical readings of Revelation being put forward again.
      > However, I see some areas that may be in tension with your reading and would be interested to know how you handle them:
      > while Jesus doesn't refer to Antiochus, he seems to identify the coming abomination with the destruction of the temple in AD 70 (e.g. comapre Matt24 with Luke 21)Revelation 1:1,3 seem to anticipate forthcoming event/s in real time, as do 2:22; 3:10.the different beast passages seem to contain clear allusions to the Roman empire, e.g. the seven hills of 17:9Rev.20:11-15 seems to describe the final judgment as taught by, say, Paul.
      > There are others but these will do for a start
      > Jon
      > (Dr) Jon Newton
      > Harvest Bible College
      > Melbourne
      > Australia
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • George F Somsel
      You must also remember that this would have been read more than once so there would be opportunities to pick up further details later.  george gfsomsel …
      Message 43 of 43 , Jan 15, 2011
        You must also remember that this would have been read more than once so there
        would be opportunities to pick up further details later.


        … search for truth, hear truth,
        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
        defend the truth till death.

        - Jan Hus

        From: Jon Newton <jonknewton@...>
        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Sat, January 15, 2011 4:05:32 PM
        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Apostolic Interpretation

        Thanks for those comments George

        I fully agree about the intended audience which is clearly stated in Rev.1

        I also fully agree about the centrality of Jesus is the text, which seemed to be
        Alan's key thought too.

        Not sure about your comments about the details and speed reading. While I'm sure
        each detail is by no means random, the original audience would have been
        hearing, not reading, the text. This helps explain the sevens and other
        structural features in Revelation. But it makes it unlikely they could
        concentrate on the intricate detail of each stage of the revelation.


        (Pastor) Jon Newton

        --- On Sun, 16/1/11, George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...> wrote:

        From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...>
        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Apostolic Interpretation
        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
        Received: Sunday, 16 January, 2011, 3:31 AM


        I really don't know why we should discuss either Constantine or Justinian or any

        other figure subsequent to the penning of the Apocalypse.  It was not written

        primarily for a later age.  It was written for those to whom the book was

        delivered by the author's courier in his circuit around the loop which

        constituted the diocese of the author of the Apocalypse.  It was meant to be

        understood by them -- one must accept that it would have been compreshensible to

        them with their knowledge of the OT and the apocalyptic literature as well as

        the intimate knowledge they would have of their own age.  This was not something

        which would only become clear years and centuries or even millenia thereafter. 

        It was a message to the bishop's parishoners.  It is only a message to us today

        in the sense that they still convey the same vital message which was set to

        "paper" when it was written just as Paul's letters were primarily letters to

        living and breathing people of the time in which he lived.  They are still

        meaningful and even vitally significant to us today, but we understand them much

        less easily than the original recipients would have.



        … search for truth, hear truth,

        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,

        defend the truth till death.

        - Jan Hus



        From: asteresplanetai <asteresplanetai@...>

        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com

        Sent: Sat, January 15, 2011 6:27:46 AM

        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Apostolic Interpretation



        > Posted by: "e_s_c_h_a_t_o_n" rocsy@... e_s_c_h_a_t_o_n

        > In the fourth century the Roman emperor Constantine made

        > Christianity the religion of the Roman Empire.

        Just a minor correction, although it may color the way one sees some

        things: Constantine did *not* make Christianity the religion of the

        Roman Empire. Constantine made Christianity *legal*-- that is, he

        stopped the persecutions-- by the Edict of Milan, and he certainly

        encouraged it-- but it was Justinian who made it officially 'the

        religion of the Roman Empire', about 2 centuries later.

        And as usual, it's good to keep in mind that 200 years back then were

        the same as 200 years today. From Constantine to Justinian would be

        the same length of time as between, say, Thomas Jefferson and Barack


        kind regards,

        John burnett.

        Help Uganda high school students graduate!


        My South Africa education mission:


        Contribute through Paypal at


        or send checks to---

        St Nicholas African Education Fund

        102 Ross Avenue, San Anselmo, CA 94960

        Tel 415 454 0982


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.