RSS

Tag Archives: Clement of Alexandria

When Was the Apocalypse Written?

Clement of Alexandria

from Google Images

Eusebius, a fourth century AD church father and considered to be the “Father of Church History,” interprets Clement of Alexandria, a second and early third century church father (cir. 155-215 AD), saying the Apostle John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead”, and Eusebius identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian, Emperor of Rome from AD 81-96. He does this at the beginning of his testimony concerning John’s writing the Apocalypse.[1] It also seems as though many modern scholars simply accept Eusebius’ testimony without even consulting Clement. If they do read Clement, it must be with the eyes of Eusebius, because Clement mentions Domitian four different times in his writings, but not once does he claim he was a tyrant or even that he persecuted Christians. Eusebius and, apparently, most modern scholarship have read this understanding into Clement’s works. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements
 
4 Comments

Posted by on January 8, 2019 in Apocalypse, Book of Revelation

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

When Was the Apocalypse Written?

Revelation 17

from Google Images

In a previous study on the Second Coming of the Lord, I showed that Matthew 16:27-28 contains the same constituent elements found in Revelation 11:15-18, so they are, therefore, parallel scriptures, saying the same things. In that study I made the claim that the book of Revelation was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. At that time I also pointed to a statement made by one of the church fathers, namely, Clement of Alexandria. He made the claim: Read the rest of this entry »

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 21, 2018 in 70 AD Eschatology

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

The Second Coming and Revelation 11

Parousia -1In recent studies on the Second Coming of Christ, I have been demonstrating that the presumed gap between Matthew 16:27 and 28 simply does not exist. I have demonstrated this by going into the Old Testament showing the prophecies that Jesus applied to the foretelling of his coming into his Kingdom. I demonstrated the same by arguing that the literary content excludes a break between the two verses, and I’ve also used Jesus’ words that fulfillment of the whole Law (i.e. the whole Old Testament) had to have occurred before the Old Covenant ended. So, if the Old Covenant is no longer in force, then Jesus must have returned, because the Old Covenant predicted his coming in his Kingdom. Read the rest of this entry »

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 19, 2018 in 70 AD Eschatology

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Whose is Mark’s Gospel?

Mark's Gospel - 5

from Google Images

What we know to be the Gospel of Mark is not signed, and neither is there any direct internal evidence linking the Gospel to any individual. However, does this mean the work is truly anonymous? That is, do we have no reasonable idea of who its author is? The answer to this question largely depends upon your personal bias. If one completely rejects early testimony of its authorship and clings to modern criticism stating the author is unknown, then for you the author cannot be known. However, if you are willing to accept ancient testimony as evidence of its authorship, then one can be reasonably certain that John Mark, Peter’s assistant, wrote the Gospel we know by his name. Read the rest of this entry »

 
1 Comment

Posted by on February 9, 2012 in Textual Criticism

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,