Tag Archives: Eusebius

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 »


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


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Divinely Appointed Time


from Google Images

It is hardly possible to read the book of Revelation without noticing that its fulfillment was near.[1] Many folks believe the book was written late in the first century, and, therefore, couldn’t be an indicator of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple, but this simply isn’t so. The error lies in simply believing what the fourth century church father, Eusebius, said about the writings of Clement of Alexandria who lived in the latter part of the second century AD and the beginning of the third. It is impossible for Clement to have said what Eusebius claimed. Yet, modern scholars seem bent on receiving Eusebius’ testimony. Read the rest of this entry »

Comments Off on The Divinely Appointed Time

Posted by on November 10, 2017 in Eschatology, Prophecy


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: , , , , , , , ,