11 Comments

Flavius Josephus and the Apocalypse of John


Regardless of your view concerning the book of Revelation, you have to admit this is interesting.

Was Flavius Josephus Familiar with the Apocalypse of John?

John’s Revelation – “And there were noises and thundering and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such a mighty and great earthquake as had not occurred since men were on the earth.” (16:18)

Josephus – “for there broke out a prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost violence, and very strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, with continued lightnings, terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions and bellowings of the earth, that was in an earthquake. These things were a manifest indication that some destruction was coming upon men, when the system of the world was put into this disorder; and any one would guess that these wonders foreshowed some grand calamities that were coming” (“Wars of the Jews” 4:4:5)

John’s Revelation – “Now the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And great Babylon was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath.” (16:19)

Josephus – “it so happened that the sedition at Jerusalem was revived, and parted into three factions, and that one faction fought against the other; which partition in such evil cases may be said to be a good thing, and the effect of divine justice.” (5:1:1)

John’s Revelation – “And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a talent.” (16:21)

Josephus –  “Now the stones that were cast were of the weight of a talent, and were carried two furlongs and further. The blow they gave was no way to be sustained, not only by those that stood first in the way, but by those that were beyond them for a great space. As for the Jews, they at first watched the coming of the stone, for it was of a white color, and could therefore not only be perceived by the great noise it made, but could be seen also before it came by its brightness;” (5:6:3)

Source

Advertisements

11 comments on “Flavius Josephus and the Apocalypse of John

  1. These parallels are indeed very interesting. My Bible study group studied this chapter (Rev. 16) just two weeks ago, and it was quite fascinating. We noted some of the same parallels, aided by Steve Gregg’s “Four Views of Revelation,” of course.

    I suppose there are several ways to look at the question of whether or not Josephus was familiar with John’s book of Revelation:

    [1] Staunch late-date scholars wouldn’t entertain the question, since Josephus wrote “The Jewish Wars” around 75 AD and Revelation is assumed by them to have been written in 95 or 96 AD.

    [2] Those skeptical of the Bible’s inspiration might insinuate that John borrowed imagery from the writings of Josephus (i.e. if these skeptics were to accept the late-date authorship theory).

    [3] Those who believe (like myself) that Revelation was written prior to 70 AD would likely conclude that John prophesied regarding the very events which Josephus later recorded as an eyewitness. [It might not be possible to know whether Josephus ever personally had access, though, to the book of Revelation, especially before 75 AD. It’s certainly not a necessity in this case for him to have done so.]

    [4] One might see these (and other) parallels between the writings of John and Josephus as interesting, but coincidental and not speaking of the same events.

  2. Regarding Rev. 16:18, it’s also interesting to note that this phenomena (“noises and thundering and lightnings”) mirrors the phenomena which occurred when Moses delivered the Law to the Israelites on Mount Sinai. Exodus 19:16 reads, “On the morning of the third day there were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled.”

    This same phenomena appears in Rev. 4:5, 8:5, and 11:19; the last two cases being in response to the cumulative prayers of the saints (Rev. 8:5) and at the sight of the ark of the covenant and God’s temple in heaven (11:19). The significance of this parallel for partial-preterists (if I might speak from this perspective briefly) is that Jerusalem’s destruction (along with the temple) completed the transition from Judaism (the Old Covenant) to the New Covenant (i.e. now standing exclusively, apart from the Old Covenant). In Steve Gregg’s commentary on chapter 4, regarding verse 5, he wrote this:

    “Similar phenomena are mentioned here to suggest the end of that covenant and its replacement with another. The writer of Hebrews (citing Hag. 2) likened the overthrow of the first covenant (publicly demonstrated by the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70) to the time of its establishment at Sinai, but the latter would be accompanied by even more fearful phenomena (Heb. 12:18-29).”

    Other relevant passages would include Matthew 21:33-46 (The Parable of the Tenants), and Hebrews 8:13, which reads: “In speaking of a new covenant, He makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming [i.e. at the time Hebrews was written] obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

  3. Regarding Josephus’ account of that particular earthquake (in mid-68 AD, if I’m not mistaken), some preterists (partial or full)—if I may speak for this viewpoint again—also (or alternatively) see this as a fulfillment of Revelation 11:13. This verse reads, “And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.”

    The reason for this is that a few short sections later, still speaking of this same event, Josephus adds, “[Taking advantage of the noise of the storm, some of the Jewish zealots cut the bars of the temple gates with temple saws, allowing the Idumaeans to come in and join them in slaughtering some of the people]. The din from all quarters was rendered more terrific by the howling of the storm. And by daybreak they saw 8,500 dead bodies there” (Wars of the Jews 4:5:1).

    Josephus does not attribute a certain number of deaths to the earthquake, and a certain number of deaths to the warfare which took place, but only notes that a total of 8500 dead bodies were discovered the morning after this earthquake. This is remarkably close to the Biblical account (i.e. it’s entirely possible that 7000 were killed due to the earthquake, and 1500 due to the warfare). Estimates of Jerusalem’s population prior to its destruction (at non-feast times) range as high as 200,000. This number in 68 AD, however, should have been lower considering that the Christians had fled to Pella (in modern day Jordan) and the city was in the throes of civil war.

    Being that 7000 were to be killed in that earthquake, in order for a tenth of the city to have fallen in 68 AD, the population would need to have been somewhere around 70,000. This is feasible, from what we know of history. Today’s population in Jerusalem, on the other hand, is close to 800,000. This, of course, could also change.

  4. Staunch late-date scholars wouldn’t entertain the question, since Josephus wrote “The Jewish Wars” around 75 AD and Revelation is assumed by them to have been written in 95 or 96 AD.

    Adam that was my first thought–does this bring into question the timing of John’s vision.

    I’m not familiar with what the early church fathers and historians taught, as far as when John’s experience on Patmos took place.

    “Similar phenomena are mentioned here to suggest the end of that covenant and its replacement with another.

    Wow! I hadn’t even considered that possibility–veeeery interesting.

    All i know for sure is i definitely don’t believe all of Revelation is future.

    One question i’ve always had was the futurist teaching concerning the events being presented chronologically.

    Years before i even began my own study of Revelation, i would pick up books on Revelation (which included charts/timelines) which did not add up for me.

    • “Wow! I hadn’t even considered that possibility–veeeery interesting.”

      PJ, one of the most interesting things my Bible study group has seen in our current study on the book of Revelation is the large number of direct references and/or allusions to [1] the Old Covenant delivered through Moses [2] the dedication of the first and second temples [3] the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 586 BC. Some of these parallels have been uncovered simply through cross-referencing, but Steve Gregg has also done an excellent job in bringing these out.

      I regret that I haven’t been listing these parallels out in a separate document, but they are scattered throughout the posts we have up so far on Revelation (chapters 1-14). At some point I hope to compile this info specifically and create a post on it. A couple of examples do come to mind right away, though.

      In Rev. 10:8-11, we see that John was told to eat a scroll which would taste as sweet as honey, but would become bitter in his mouth. Sam Storms, a Historicist, rightly recognizes that Ezekiel was also given a scroll to eat, and that he experienced the same results (Ezek. 3:1-3, 14). Steve Gregg, when articulating the preterist position, then makes the connection that “Ezekiel’s prophecy was about the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians in 586 B.C. John’s similar action also is connected with his prophesying the destruction of Jerusalem, this time by the Romans in A.D. 70.”

      In Revelation 7:1-4 (cf. Rev. 9:4), God’s faithful remnant was to be marked with God’s seal on their foreheads before judgment was poured out. Again, Ezekiel carried out the same exercise in Jerusalem just prior to its judgment in 586 BC (Ezek. 9:4-11).

      Yet another such parallel is seen in one of the passages being examined here in this post (Rev. 16:19). Not only would an ideal fulfillment be found in the three factions which engaged in civil war (the Jewish zealots led by Eleazar, the Galileans led by John of Gischala, and the Idumaeans led by Simon); There is also an apparent reference/allusion here to Ezekiel 5:1-12,

      “where the prophet was required to shave his hair from his head, divide it into three parts, and conduct a symbolic action upon each part. He was told by God: ‘This is Jerusalem’ (Ezek. 5:5). One third of the hair was burned, another third was to be chopped up with a sword, and the remaining third was to be scattered into the wind. This symbolized the fate of the inhabitants of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.: some were to be burned inside the city, some would be slain by the swords of the Babylonians, and the rest would be scattered among the nations. That which occurred to Jerusalem in 586 B.C. happened again in A.D. 70. The dividing of the city into three parts symbolizes that fact” (Steve Gregg, p. 392).

      ————————————————————

      On another note, one real eye opener for me was in Revelation 10:7, which says, “…in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God would be fulfilled, just as He announced to His servants the prophets.” I’ll quote here a portion of our study on this verse:

      “The phrase ‘the mystery of God’ should ring a bell for anyone familiar with the epistles written by Paul. He speaks of this mystery in Romans 16:25-26, but he covers this topic most thoroughly in his epistles to the Ephesians (1:7-10, 2:11-3:11, 5:31-32, 6:18-20) and to the Colossians (1:24-27, 2:1-4, 4:3-4 [cf. 3:11]).

      In his book to the Ephesians, Paul reminds the Gentile believers that they were formerly called “the uncircumcision” (2:11), they were ‘separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise’ (2:12), and ‘far off’ (2:13). Now they ‘have been brought near by the blood of Christ’ (2:13) and ‘made one new man’ with Jewish believers (2:15). They are ‘no longer strangers and aliens,’ but are ‘fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God’ (2:19), being ‘joined together…into a holy temple in the Lord’ (2:21).

      Paul told the Ephesians that by reading his description of the mystery made known to him by revelation (3:1-4), they could perceive his insight into ‘the mystery of Christ’ which was not made known to previous generations as it had been revealed to the apostles and prophets in his day (3:4-5). Paul is then most explicit regarding what this mystery is in Ephesians 3:6, and this is most crucial to our understanding of Revelation 10:7:

      ‘This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.’

      Therefore, David Chilton and Jay Adams are correct as they are quoted for the Preterist commentary on Revelation 10:7 in Steve Gregg’s book, ‘Revelation: Four Views (A Parallel Commentary)’:

      This ‘Mystery’ is a major aspect of the letters to the Ephesians and Colossians: the union of believing Jews and Gentiles in one church, without distinction (Chilton, as quoted in Steve Gregg, Revelation, p. 208).

      The completion of the mystery of God (v. 7) refers to the fact that the ‘predominantly Jewish nature of the church was to be ended by the destruction of the temple, the distinctive feature in which it centered’ (Adams). The mystery itself, of course, is that of which Paul frequently speaks, namely, as Adams writes, ‘that the Gentiles should come into the church on an equal footing with the Jews, not first having to become Jews themselves…’ (Steve Gregg, ibid).”

      Source: http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/revelation-chapter-10/

      I was then curious to see how Futurist writers would interpret the phrase “mystery of God” in Rev. 10:). I was hoping they would at least connect it to Paul’s teaching on the subject, even if they did consign its fulfillment to the future. However, I was disappointed. Here’s how four different Futurist authors identified the “mystery of God” which they believe is not yet unveiled (as quoted in Steve Gregg’s book):

      [1] Hal Lindsey: “…the secret of His allowing Satan to have his own way, and man too (that is to say, the wonder of evil prospering and of good being trodden underfoot).”

      [2] Arno C. Gaebelin: “How great has been that mystery! Evil had apparently triumphed; the heavens for so long have been silent. Satan had been permitted to be the god of this age deceiving the nations… And now the time has come when the mystery of God will be completed.”

      [3] John Walvoord: “truth concerning God Himself which has not been fully revealed” (He wrote this in 1966; Was he baiting the NAR? LOL).

      [4] H.A. Ironside: “Everything will then be made plain. The mystery of retribution—the mystery of predestination—the mystery of the great struggle between light and darkness and good and evil—all will be explained then.”

      I suppose that, as far as these men were Dispensationalists (I’m not sure if they all were/are), it’s no big surprise that they would miss the reference to this same subject in Paul’s epistles. I think it’s sad, though, because this subject deals with the very heart of the gospel, granted to Jews and Gentiles without any distinction or preference.

      ——————————————————-

      PJ, I hope I’m not derailing this post in any way. Please let me know if I am. This has to be by far the longest comment I’ve ever posted at your site, and I still plan to address John’s experience on Patmos, which you brought up…

    • “Adam that was my first thought–does this bring into question the timing of John’s vision. I’m not familiar with what the early church fathers and historians taught, as far as when John’s experience on Patmos took place.”

      PJ, in my term paper on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD I was able to locate some quotes from some relatively early church writers regarding John’s exile to Patmos taking place during Nero’s reign (54-68 AD) rather than [or possibly in addition to] during Domitian’s reign (81-96 AD). If you’re interested, here’s the link to that specific post:

      http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/pp3-external-evidence-for-an-early-date-revelation/

      Here’s an excerpt, including also a few statements by early church writers proposing a pre-70 AD date:

      Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. (1998) records the following quote from the Muratorian Canon (written around 170 AD): “[T]he blessed Apostle Paul, following the rule of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name…John too, indeed, in the Apocalypse, although he writes to only seven churches, yet addresses all” (pp. 93-94). By calling John the predecessor of Paul, and saying that Paul followed John’s rule, the writer of this canon clearly taught that John wrote to the seven churches (Revelation 2-3) before Paul finished writing all of his epistles. The ‘Monarchian Prologues,’ dating back to 250-350 AD, make the same claim. It’s universally agreed that Paul died in 67 or 68 AD.

      Other sources during the first several centuries after Christ also refer to an earlier date for the writing of Revelation, even explicitly. Krejcir (2009 [2]) cites statements from three sources: [1] The ‘Muratorian Fragment,’ dating back to 170-190 A.D., overtly states that the book of Revelation was written during the reign of Nero (who reigned from 54-68 AD). [2] The ancient ‘Syriac version’ of the New Testament, dated in the sixth century or earlier, echoes this statement that “Revelation was written during the reign of Nero.” [3] “The ‘Aramaic Peshitta’ version [which had become the standard Aramaic/Syriac translation by the early 5th century] has a remark that places its date prior to 70 A.D.”

      Tertullian, an early church father who lived from 145-220 AD, seems to place John’s banishment to Patmos at the same time as the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, who we know were killed during the reign of Nero prior to his own death in 68 AD. In his writing, “Exclusion of Heretics,” speaking of the history of Rome, he had this to say (Dennis Todd [6], 2009): “…on which the Apostles poured out all their doctrine, with their blood: where Peter had a like Passion with the Lord; where Paul bath for his crown the same death with John; where the Apostle John was plunged into boiling oil, and suffered nothing, and was afterwards banished to an island.”

      Jerome (340-420 AD) and others confirmed in their writings that it was Nero who had John plunged into boiling oil. So based on their testimony, and taken together with this quote from Tertullian, it was also Nero who had John banished to Patmos (Of course, the possibility exists that John was banished twice to the island of Patmos, i.e. during Nero’s reign and again during the reign of Domitian). Eusebius (263-339 AD), whose own writings echoed Irenaeus’ controversial statement, wrote that both Nero and Domitian were known for banishing individuals to various islands, but that Domitian showed more mercy and restraint. Quoting from Tertullian, Eusebius said, “Domitian also, who possessed a share of Nero’s cruelty, attempted once to do the same thing that the latter [Nero] did. But because he had, I suppose, some intelligence, he very soon ceased, and even recalled those whom he had banished” (Dennis Todd [4], 2009). L.L. Thompson (1990) writes that any campaign of terror during Domitian’s reign was rather selective and (unlike in Nero’s time) was generally aimed at influential members and even members of his family suspected of political conspiracy, rather than toward Christians (p. 95). As far as these testimonies are reliable, then, John found himself on Patmos during the reign of Nero (54-68 AD).

      A number of late-date proponents (i.e. those who believe Revelation was written around 96 AD) admit that it’s very difficult to find evidence that Christians were undergoing any significant persecution from Rome in that decade. Therefore, it’s not easy to imagine why John would have been banished to Patmos at that time, something that only Rome could do. George Eldon Ladd (1987), a prominent New Testament scholar who teaches that Revelation was written during Domitian’s reign, nevertheless had this to say (p. 37): “The problem with this theory is that there is no evidence that during the last decade of the first century there occurred any open and systematic persecution of the church.” Kenneth Gentry (2002, p. 63) records similar statements from the following late-date authors: Michael Grant (1973), Leon Morris (1969), Reginald Fuller (1971), Donald B. Guthrie (1990), D.A. Carson (1992), Douglas Moo (1992), G.K. Beale (1992).

      Andreas, writing in the year 500 AD, said regarding Revelation 6:12-13, “There are not wanting [i.e. it is not hard to find] those who apply this passage to the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.” A few centuries later, Arethas of Caesarea (850-944 AD), a Byzantine scholar and deacon in Constantinople, said the following in his commentary on Revelation 7:1 and 7:4: “Here, then, were manifestly shown to the Evangelist what things were to befall the Jews in their war against the Romans, in the way of avenging the sufferings inflicted upon Christ; When the Evangelist received these oracles, the destruction in which the Jews were involved was not yet inflicted by the Romans” (Dennis Todd [5], 2009). So Arethas, being only one example of this viewpoint in his time, clearly believed that John wrote Revelation before 70 AD and that what it contained was a prophecy of those events.

      —————————————————————-

      That post then continues on to discuss some pivotal statements by Clement of Alexandria regarding John’s rather vigorous activities after he left the Roman prison island of Patmos. That post is a discussion of EXTERNAL evidence for an early date for the book of Revelation. The following four posts then move on to a discussion of INTERNAL evidence for an early date. Much could be added to those four posts actually.

  5. By the way, PJ, the most direct link to the chart of parallels you posted appears to be here, at least for now:

    http://www.preteristarchive.com/whatsnew.html

    I suppose as new items are posted to the Preterist Archive site, this will be bumped down. For now, though, it’s right at the top. I couldn’t find this chart in either of the other links which were hyperlinked in your post. It doesn’t seem to have its own link yet.

  6. First, thank you thank you for the links!! 🙂

    You’ve given me more to read and study Adam…

    in my term paper on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD I was able to locate some quotes from some relatively early church writers regarding John’s exile to Patmos taking place during Nero’s reign (54-68 AD) rather than [or possibly in addition to] during Domitian’s reign (81-96 AD).

    I’ve wondered if the later date came about by those teachers who have taught all of Revelation is still future?

    For to even consider an earlier date “could” throw a wrench in many of their eschatology beliefs.

    You spoke of the mystery of God.

    On another note, one real eye opener for me was in Revelation 10:7, which says, “…in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God would be fulfilled, just as He announced to His servants the prophets.

    I agree,…

    ‘This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.’

    It was a mystery hidden from those who lived under the old covenant.

    I don’t understand the answers given by those you quoted on this mystery.

    1] Hal Lindsey: “…the secret of His allowing Satan to have his own way, and man too (that is to say, the wonder of evil prospering and of good being trodden underfoot).”

    [2] Arno C. Gaebelin: “How great has been that mystery! Evil had apparently triumphed; the heavens for so long have been silent. Satan had been permitted to be the god of this age deceiving the nations… And now the time has come when the mystery of God will be completed.”

    [3] John Walvoord: “truth concerning God Himself which has not been fully revealed” (He wrote this in 1966; Was he baiting the NAR? LOL).

    [4] H.A. Ironside: “Everything will then be made plain. The mystery of retribution—the mystery of predestination—the mystery of the great struggle between light and darkness and good and evil—all will be explained then.”

    They make no sense at all when reading the scriptures…

    7In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; 8Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; 9Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: 10That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: Ephesians 1

    25Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, 26But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: Romans 16

    • PJ,

      You’re most welcome. You asked about the late date theory and how it came about. I’m not entirely sure, except that it probably found much basis in a certain quote by Irenaeus. I know this theory was also around, along with the early date theory, at least by the third century. Here is an excerpt regarding the much-disputed statement by Irenaeus:

      An early date is not possible, Dispensationalists say, because of the testimony of Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, who is said to have been a disciple of the apostle John. The following statement made by Irenaeus (120-202 AD), and quoted later by Eusebius (263-339) and others, is often seen as the foundation for the “late date” theory which holds that the book of Revelation was written in 95-96 AD:

      “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 (Grant Jeffrey, 2001).”

      At face value, it could appear that Irenaeus said John received his vision during the time of Domitian, who reigned from 81-96 AD and was the last emperor of the Flavius Dynasty. However, a number of objections have been made against this conclusion. Among these are the following, articulated by Richard Joseph Krejcir (2009 [1]), who at first set out to prove through research that Revelation was written around 95 AD but changed his stance as he viewed the evidence: [1] This is a second-hand quote, a paraphrase of a statement originally made by Polycarp. [2] It is not entirely clear what Polycarp meant when he said “that was seen.” (The original manuscript of Irenaeus’ work, in ancient Latin, no longer exists in any legible condition, and those who first translated it complained at the time about the poor condition of the manuscript evidence of his work. Some translators contended that the phrase should have been translated “he was seen,” meaning that Irenaeus was referring to John, rather than his apocalyptic vision, being seen during Domitian’s reign.) [3] The writings of Irenaeus suffer from credibility and textual issues. For example, in the same publication from which this quote comes, Irenaeus stated that Jesus ministered for more than 15 years and was crucified at the age of 50.

      Source: http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/pp3-external-evidence-for-an-early-date-revelation/

      Jerome (340-420 AD) is one who, it is said, made a statement or two in support of the late date for John’s writing of Revelation. Yet at the same time, he also made this very interesting statement:

      “As for the Antichrist, there is no question but what he is going to fight against the holy covenant, and that when he first makes war against the king of Egypt, he shall straightway be frightened off by the assistance of the Romans. But these events were typically prefigured under Antiochus Epiphanes, so that this abominable king who persecuted God’s people foreshadows the Antichrist, who is to persecute the people of Christ. And so there are many of our viewpoint who think that Domitius Nero was the Antichrist because of his outstanding savagery and depravity.” (St. Jerome – Commentary on Daniel; notes on Daniel 11:27-30, — BAKER BOOK HOUSE Grand Rapids 6, Michigan 1958)

      Source: http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/n/nero.html

      I would be curious to know who are the “many of [his] viewpoint,” but perhaps he never says. I also assume he equates “the Antichrist” with the beast of Revelation 13. Speaking of Rev. 13, if you have the time and the interest, I’d be honored to have your feedback on this post here:

      http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/revelation-chapter-13-part-5-ten-fulfilled-prophecies/

      For me, chapter 13 was a most fascinating study, and I decided to put together the chart in this post as a reader-friendly summary of what we had covered in our study.

  7. […] is an article somewhat related by with different conclusions: Flavius Josephus and the Apocalypse of John * Sola Dei […]

  8. […] key statements from Josephus compared with Revelation. (From WordPress site written by pjmiller here). John’s Revelation – “Now the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Rooted and Grounded In Christ

Teaching Sound Doctrine & Glorifying Christ

Music from Broken Chords

Down in the human heart, crush'd by the tempter, Feelings lie buried that grace can restore; Touched by a loving heart, wakened by kindness Chords that were broken will vibrate once more. From the Hymn "Rescue the Perishing" by Fanny J. Crosby

Lead Me

"Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the LORD understand it fully."

I Was a Teenage Dispensationalist

It's the end (of the end) of the world as we know it...

%d bloggers like this: