SEVEN -PAGE PRETERISM HADES JERUSALEM

An apocalypse (Ancient Greek: ἀποκάλυψις apokálypsis, from off: ἀπό and cover: καλύπτω, literally meaning "an uncovering") is a disclosure or revelation of great knowledge. In religious concepts an apocalypse usually discloses something very important that was hidden or provides what Bart Ehrman has termed, "A vision of heavenly secrets that can make sense of earthly realities".[1] Historically, the term has a heavy religious connotation as commonly seen in the prophetic revelations of eschatology obtained through dreams or spiritual visions. It is believed by many Christians that the biblical Book of Revelation depicts as an "apocalypse", the complete destruction of the world, preceding the establishment of a new world and heaven. However, there is also another interpretation of the Book of Revelation in which the events predicted are said to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Roman armies of Titus. This second view is known as the Preterist view of eschatology. Christian understanding of the messianic age heavily depends on Jewish Scriptures, especially the Prophets. The characteristic of the messianic age, as shown in the Scriptures, was to be an extraordinary outpouring of the Spirit on all people. It should bring them special gifts and charisms. Most eminent prophecies are found in the Book of Zechariah 4:6b; 6:8 and the Book of Joel 3:1-2 (cf. Nb 11:29). Acts of the Apostles refer to them proclaiming that the word of the prophets was made flesh in Jesus on the day of Pentecost. Now, "he has received from the Father the Holy spirit, who was promised." (Acts 2:16-21.17.33) According to Isaiah, the messianic age was to have its anointed leader, the Messiah, who would be filled with the gifts of the spirit to be able to accomplish his saving work. (Is 11:1-3; 42:1; 61:1; see also Mt 3:16)[15] Jesus used miracles to convince people that he was inaugurating the messianic age. (cf. Mt 12:28). Scholars have described Jesus' miracles as establishing the kingdom during his lifetime.[16] According to the Book of Ezekiel, apart from bestowing special charismatic gifts, the Spirit would build the messianic age in the hearts of people by exercising their inward renewal resulting in exceptional adherence to the Law of God (cf. Ezk 11:19; 36:26-27; 37:14; Ps 51:12-15; Is 32:15-19; Zc 12:10). According to the Book of Jeremiah, messianic times would be sealed by the new covenant, final and eternal one, written ″on their hearts″ (Jr 31:31). Paul spoke about that new covenant in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians 3:6. Isaiah used the image of the life-giving water "poured out on the thirsty soil". People, "like willows on the banks of a stream" would have access to the Spirit which would enable them to bring fruits of integrity and holiness (Is 44:3) The Gospel of John would refer to that in the meeting of Jesus with the Samaritan woman at the well of Jacob: "the water that I shall give will become a spring of water within, welling up for eternal life." (Jn 4:14) Ezekiel would say that the holiness of the people would in turn be met by special love, favour and protection from God: "I will make a covenant of peace" and "set up my sanctuary among them for ever." (Ezk 37:24; 39:29)[15] Christian eschatology points out to gradual character of the Messianic Age. According to realized eschatology, the Messianic Era, a time of universal peace and brotherhood on the earth, without crime, war and poverty, to some extent, is already here. With the crucifixion of Jesus the Messianic Era had begun, but according to inaugurated eschatology it will completed and brought to perfection by the parousia of Christ.[17] In the past, the messianic age was sometimes interpreted in terms of Millenarianism. The Book of Revelation 20:2-3 gives an image of a 1000-year period in which Satan is to be bound so that he cannot influence those living on the Earth, and Jesus Christ will reign on the Earth with resurrected saints. After that Satan will be defeated once and for all, the Earth and heaven will pass away, and people will face judgment by Jesus Christ to determine whether or not they will enter the new heaven and earth that will be established. (Revelation 21) According to the Nicene Creed (381), professed by most Christians, after his ascension, enthronement at the Right hand of God, the time will come when Jesus will return to fully establish the Kingdom of God of the World to Come. INTRODUCTION This book proposes a new approach to the interpretation ofthe Apocalypse, or Revelation, of St. John, by applying the traditional method of interpreting Scripture by means of Scripture. The resulting interpretation differs from the one that is presented bythe majority of modern scholars, and is called ‘preterist’. Whilstthese scholars interpret the Apocalypse in the light of the history ofthe Early Church, the interpretation in this book has been developedin the light of religious traditions concerning the ancient Temple ofthe Jews in Jerusalem. Whereas the ‘preterist’ interpretation isfounded on the assumption that the greater part of the text isreferring to the historical struggles of the Early Church, interpretation proceeds from the hypothesis that the theme of theTemple is of such great importance in the Apocalypse, that it could be termed the ‘organizing principle’ of the text as a whole. This hypothesis is based on the following observations:1. The various parts, furnishings, objects and actions associatedspecifically with the ancient Temple in Jerusalem are recalledwith great frequency throughout the text. For example the central part of the Temple, the Sanctuary is mentioned 16 times - Ap 3,12; 7,15; 11,1.2.19; 14,15.17; 15,5.6.8; 16,1.17; 21,22).Also mentioned are the outer court (11,2) and altar (11,1), thealtar of incense (6,9; 8,3.5; 9,13; 14,18; 16,7), the goldenlampstand (1,12.13.20; 2,1.5; 11,4), as well as the harps (5,8;14,2; 15,2), trumpets(chs. 8+11) and libation bowls (chs. 15 16), which were all used in the liturgical activities of the formerTemple. Certain liturgical activities such as the offering ofincense, divine worship, thanksgiving and singing Psalms are -described with considerable emphasis in this sacred setting,whilst other liturgical actions are subtly alluded to. Despite this profusion of Temple imagery in St. John’s visions, it should benoted that the Greek word for the Temple complex as a whole does not appear in the text. Most of these elements of the ancient Temple in Jerusalem arerecalled in the visions of God’s Throne in heaven and itsimmediate surroundings, in a context that indicates the dominantand controlling role of this theme in the Apocalypse. In technicalterms, the theme of the Temple embraces both the spatial andtemporal aspects of St. John’s apocalyptic vision Given the importance of the theme of the Temple, theimmediate aim of this study has been to collect and reviewinformation on the subject and apply this knowledge methodically tothe relevant parts of the Apocalypse, with a view to understandingits sacred and liturgical setting in greater depth. The ultimate aim ofthe present study is to apply these findings to the interpretation ofthe Apocalypse as a whole, in order to clarify the meaning of its prophecy.For the purposes of this work, the principle source ofinformation about the Temple is taken to be the Catholic Bible,which comprises the Old and New Testaments (these will be referredto as OT and NT respectively) as well as certain apocryphal books.For information that is not available in the Bible, reference is madeto other primary sources, such as the first Book of Enoch, theMishnah, the writings of Josephus, and also to some of thesecondary literature on ancient religious practices in Israel. Only afew studies have concentrated on the theme of the Temple in the New Testament, and most of these do not include a detailedexamination of their subject in the Apocalypse. There are even fewerinvestigations that specifically address the theme of the Temple inthe Apocalypse, and none of the major commentaries on this Book Below are some random page numbers so the reader may take a look ! The Sanctuary of God 172. The Spirit of God 203. The Priest 244. The Sacrificial Victim 285. The Blood of the Victim 306. The Day of Atonement in the Ancient Temple 337. The Daily Morning Service in the Ancient Temple 388. The Liturgy in the Sanctuary of God 409. Discussion 43i The beginning of the liturgy 43ii The servicing of the lampstands 44iii The Lamb taking the scroll 44iv The breaking of the first four seals of the scroll 46v The breaking of the fifth seal 46vi The breaking of the sixth seal 47vii The sealing of the 144,000 men 48viii The offering of incense 49ix Understanding the correct order 50x The kindling of the offerings 51xi The sounding of the seven trumpets 53xii Sorry for the spaces for some reason when editing every word and phrase in sentences kept getting cramped all together!

Partial Preterism begins with the presupposition that Revelation narrative is mostly about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. (Rev 6-18). While all PP are not in complete agreement, the fundamental assertion are based on the early date of Revelation composition and that the Revelation is John's Olivet discourse. This paper brings three challenges fundamental to the claims of PP (1) The historical testimony of the early church, namely Irenaeus and his views on the beast. (2) The Revelation account of the attack against Jerusalem. (3) The demise of the beast is instigated by the return of the Christ.

In this final installment of my response to my friend Elton Hollon's critique of full preterism, I demonstrate that the attempted dichotomization between the the Great Tribulation, the judgement of Jerusalem, and the parousia is misguided and counters a mass of Biblical texts. The connection between the end times judgment of Jerusalem, the parousia and resurrection is a commonly overlooked Biblical doctrine.

Academia Letters, 2021

My short Letter explores three distinct phases within the mission of Jesus in Hades following his death on the cross. At the end of my textual exploration, these are the questions that emerge: Q1. Why do the Gospels and Paul never mention that Jesus had a special mission in Hades after he died? R1. My hunch is that the Gospels and Paul embraced the Jewish worldview wherein "immortal souls" did not exist. Thus, when Jesus died, (a) he had no "soul" and (b) Hades was merely "a Greek invention" that had no importance for Jesus. Q2. Why did 1Peter include Jesus' mission in Hades? R2. In the late first and early second centuries, Gentiles entered the Jesus movement and brought with them their belief in "immortal souls" and "Hades" (as the destination of all "souls" after death). Now, for the first time, believers were asking "What did Jesus do when his soul arrived in Hades?" Q3. Did resourceful pastors provide a faithful answer? R3. Yes, it would seem so. That is why the answer of 1Peter caught on, but was not completely satisfying. "Why did Jesus stop with the flood victims?" Thus, the next generation brought forward phase 2. But this still was not completely satisfying. So, Jesus initiated a commando raid that put the god Hades completely out of business = phase 3.

Advanced Research Master's Thesis (Leuven), 2018

Late antique teaching on deification and the patristic reception of the Book of Revelation are two topics that have drawn focused attention in recent scholarship; yet they have hardly been brought into conversation with one another. In this thesis, I build on a brief essay which I wrote last year and look at the New Jerusalem (NJ) and its significance as a sign of deification to the two earliest writers to have composed full surviving exegeses of the Book of Revelation in Greek—the late-sixth-century exegetes Oecumenius (Commentarius in Apocalypsin) and Andrew of Caesarea (Commentarii in Apocalypsin). Using a blend of literary-critical and historical-critical methods, I argue that together, these two neglected but influential commentators take the NJ sign to be spiritual, as opposed to literal, and personal, as opposed to historical. As such, the NJ represents the mystical union of the two main persons that the writers interpret the sign as encompassing: God and man. Chapter one introduces these two unfamiliar Byzantine figures, accounts for their work, presents their hermeneutical approaches, and discusses the contents of their commentaries both in general terms and in terms of how the contents relate to the topic at hand. The second chapter begins by exploring each author’s general conception of the New Jerusalem and leads into an in-depth study of their interpretations of the NJ vision in Revelation 21.2—22.5. This study surfaces the commentators’ preference for an understanding of the sign in which all of its primary components signify persons. Thereafter, a conceptual analysis is undertaken in which the relationships between the signified persons signified are characterized in terms of various kinds of union. The chapter concludes with an analysis of a metaphor that is closely related both to the NJ and deification in patristic literature. In the third chapter, a historical-critical methodology is adopted to discern why Oecumenius and Andrew elected to interpret the New Jerusalem mystically. A study encompassing persisting literalist interpretations, the condition of the Eastern Roman Empire, climatological factors, and popular apocalypticism leads to the conclusion that the commentators interpreted the NJ against the current of history in most respects but one: they adhered closely to several interconnected lines of theological tradition, particularly the Alexandrine tradition. Finally, their interpretation of the New Jerusalem is shown to be both a faithful continuation of traditional Alexandrian notions of deification and a creative application of those notions to Revelation’s final sign. In conclusion, this study (1) shows how the biblical image of the NJ is interpreted as a sign bespeaking deification in the Revelation commentaries of Oecumenius and Andrew and (2) demonstrates that this interpretation is grounded in the Alexandrian theological tradition to which the commentators were heir. It is intended that this thesis is a small first step toward a the first full-length scholarly monograph to deals comprehensively, analytically, and contextually with the NJ image’s leading interpretations throughout the patristic era as represented in its Greek and Latin writings.

The Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception, 2015

The twentieth chapter of the book of Revelation is one the most controversial sections contained therein. In conversation with scholarly controversies, all of which are readily accessible to those investigating the topic today, this paper will attempt to supplement previous research by illustrating one path of interpretation that is frequently ignored, while also shining light on some basic assumptions that are reasonably questionable. That path so often ignored is one which interprets the entire book as addressing a first century audience and their expectation of fulfillment. The unique contribution I would like to offer alongside this first century track is one that excludes Revelation 20:5a from its portrayal of ‘end times,’ on the grounds of it being a later scribal addition. Revelation 20:5a reads, “The rest of the dead did not come to life until after the thousand years were finished.” This unusually lengthy textual variant is more significant than most New Testament scholars seem to acknowledge. It is not found in some of the oldest, best, and most widely attested manuscript traditions available today. Considering that Revelation has the poorest preservation among all Greek New Testament manuscript traditions, and chapter 20 is not contained in the majority of those dated between 150–500 CE, its omission among the oldest manuscripts that do contain chapter 20 is particularly important for discerning its authenticity. If Rev. 20:5a is, indeed, a late scribal addition, that leaves an enormous amount of scholarly conjecture about the final chapters of Revelation open to serious reevaluation and reconsideration. In addition to showing the importance of Rev. 20:5a, I also hope to show that the so-called ‘millennium’ is not as pivotal as many scholars have imagined it to be. Part of my argument will entail that the ‘millennium’ plays such a minuscule role within the lengthy drama being told, that debates about its interpretive-timeline within history (whether in our past, present, or future) are noticeably misguided once the omission of Rev. 20:5a is taken into consideration. The ‘thousand years’ of Revelation chapter 20 need not be a crux of interpretation as long as 20:5a is considered spurious. At this point I also wish to be especially clear about my motives and goals, considering how controversial all views of ‘end times’ seem to be. This paper is not an attempt to be dogmatic about how the final chapters of Revelation ought to be interpreted. I have no authority to propose any dogmas in that regard. I am also aware that the book in question has a complicated history of reception and a wide variety of textual variations, resulting in an even wider variety of interpretive options, as the scholarly conjecture over the last two millennia have evinced. Instead, this paper is intended to be an exegetical experiment. As such it invites the reader to reimagine the perspicuity of the original message contained in the closing chapters of Revelation, assuming that 20:5a was not original. The outline of this paper is straightforward. Apart from this introduction and some concluding remarks, it consists of three distinct parts. The first part is contextual and text-critical; the second is exegetical and theoretical; the third is systematic and polemical. In the first part I will quickly address a handful of generally credible perspectives about Revelation’s overall historical context and message. I will then contrast those perspectives with one that I find frequently overlooked and seriously compelling—one which has also grown in interest over the last two hundred years of scholarly research. Following that I will present a brief historical and text-critical case for 20:5a as a late scribal addition, so that the experimental exegesis offered in part two is ready to be considered. In the second part I will provide an exegesis of Revelation chapter 20 without verse 5a. During that process I will attempt to simplify and synthesize the visions into one coherent message. This exegesis without 20:5a will also aid our understanding of the closing chapters that follow (i.e., chapters 21-22). In this section I hope to illustrate how lucid and uncomplicated the final visions of chapters 20-22 really are without 20:5a complicating everything else in sight. The third part will attempt to reincorporate Revelation 20:5a into the ongoing discussion about the chapter’s overall message. The input of many scholars will also be taken into serious consideration in order to highlight the many ways in which the final chapters of Revelation have been interpreted with the presumed textual-validity of 20:5a. Such an endeavor will also exhibit a variety of ways in which the presumed textual-validity of 20:5a complicates the coherence of its surrounding visions, given its considerable perspicuity without it.