Study Guild for the Book of Revelations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ranp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Ranp

Guest
Friends

Can any of you suggest a good online Catholic study guild for the Book of Revelations?

Thanks

Ran
 
Yeah, but not online or free.
But definitely worth a few bux.

The Lamb’s Supper, by Scott Hahn
His surprise conclusions after a 20 yr study of Revelation

Forget online, buy the book and curl up for a great read !
 
The Great Adventure Bible Study also makes a great study for Revelations.
 
Maybe if people call it Revelations and add an S to it we should quote the passage about adding to the book and the price to be paid for adding to the book.:eek:
 
Fidelis said:
Here are some recommendations:

Agape Bible Study

St. Martha Adult Faith Formation

Dr. Peter Williamson (unfinished at this time)

That should get you started. 🙂

BTW — It’s called Revelation (singular) NOT Revelations (plural).
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info, Fideles. For some reason I always forget to go back to St. Martha’s and see what’s new. Also, I’ve never heard of the Channel 2 website. I’ll give it a shot! Of course, I’m already a regular at Agape! It’s hard to beat their on-line study of Revelation.
 
Friends

Thanks for pointing out all of the resources. The Agape site is just what I was looking for.

Ran Pleasant
 
Saint Victorinus
Commentary on the Apocalypse
newadvent.org/fathers/0712.htm

Hahn’s work basically nullifies, or at least ignores, the eschatological meaning of the Book of Revelation. The traditional view is that Revelation is about the tribulation; the book predicts certain future events in the Church and the world.

some of my commentary on the Book of Revelation:
sacredbible.org/studybible/NT-27_Revelation.htm

my commentary on the Book of Daniel
catholicplanet.com/future/future-daniel.htm

In my theological opinion, the tribulation begins this year.
 
“Hahn’s work basically nullifies, or at least ignores, the eschatological meaning of the Book of Revelation. The traditional view is that Revelation is about the tribulation; the book predicts certain future events in the Church and the world.”
Click to expand...
This is a mischaracterization of Dr. Hahn’s work, as well as a misleadingly incomplete description of the “traditional view” of Revelation. Hahn can most accurately be described as a **“partial preterist,” **which means that the literal, primary meaning of the Book of Revelation is directed at it’s original audience, i.e., those who see the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70, and that the events described in the book were primarily fulfilled then. However he also takes great pains to point out that the book has a future fulfilment as well, both in the lives of believers, and as the Second Coming approaches. Niether of these last two, however are the primary meaning.

There are many of those who hate preterism (even partial preterism) because they feel it threatens their pet and vain futurist theories (to which they will tolerate no opposition) where they can delight in tying the events in the Book of Revelation and other biblical books to this morning’s newspaper. However, whether one is writing from a Protestant “rapturist” view or is a fringie Catholic “Great Chastisement” proponent, this approach is a misunderstanding of prophetic writing, and an abuse of Scripture.
 
Fidelis said:
This is a mischaracterization of Dr. Hahn’s work, as well as a misleadingly incomplete description of the “traditional view” of Revelation. Hahn can most accurately be described as a **“partial preterist,” **which means that the literal, primary meaning of the Book of Revelation is directed at it’s original audience, i.e., those who see the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70, and that the events described in the book were primarily fulfilled then. However he also takes great pains to point out that the book has a future fulfilment as well, both in the lives of believers, and as the Second Coming approaches. Niether of these last two, however are the primary meaning.
Click to expand...
The Book of Revelation was written by the Apostle John, when he was in exile on the island of Patmos during the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian, which was many years after the fall of Jerusalem. Therefore, it does not refer to that event.

[Revelation]
{1:1} The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, in order to make known to his servants the things that must soon occur, and which he signified by sending his Angel to his servant John;

Not the things that happened years earlier, but the future events. Also, a number of Saints, such as Victorinus and Irenaeus understood the book as referring to the tribulation.

The plain stated purpose of the book (Rev 1:1) is to reveal future events. Similarly, many of the events in the Life of Christ, and the details of His death, were predicted in the Old Testament.
 
Ron_Conte said:
The Book of Revelation was written by the Apostle John, when he was in exile on the island of Patmos during the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian, which was many years after the fall of Jerusalem.
Click to expand...
As you know, even though many modern scholars may favor this view, this dating is very much in dispute and has not been the traditional view of the Church, which has favored a pre-AD 70 writing.

That is why the premise one build’s ones interpretation on (in this case, the dating of the writing of the Book of Revelation) is very important.
 
Fidelis said:
As you know, even though many modern scholars may favor this view, this dating is very much in dispute and has not been the traditional view of the Church, which has favored a pre-AD 70 writing.

That is why the premise one build’s ones interpretation on (in this case, the dating of the writing of the Book of Revelation) is very important.
Click to expand...
Can you cite a scholar who dates Revelation pre-Fall of Jerusalem? The modern view (with which I disagree) holds that the synoptics were written after the Fall, and that John was written later, and then Revelation later than that.

The description in Revelation of the various afflictions does not fit the events when Jerusalem was conquered by the Romans. None of the Church Fathers or Saints or Doctors (of which I am aware) interpreted Revelation as referring to the Fall of Jerusalem.

Also, the book itself states that John was on Patmos, which is the island that Domitian used to keep prisoners (some of them had to work in the copper mines there). Domitian’s reign was certainly after the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple.
 
Ron_Conte said:
Can you cite a scholar who dates Revelation pre-Fall of Jerusalem? The modern view (with which I disagree) holds that the synoptics were written after the Fall, and that John was written later, and then Revelation later than that.

The description in Revelation of the various afflictions does not fit the events when Jerusalem was conquered by the Romans. None of the Church Fathers or Saints or Doctors (of which I am aware) interpreted Revelation as referring to the Fall of Jerusalem.

Also, the book itself states that John was on Patmos, which is the island that Domitian used to keep prisoners (some of them had to work in the copper mines there). Domitian’s reign was certainly after the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple.
Click to expand...
For what it’s worth, Ron, I agree with you. Synoptics? Before 70AD. John and Revelation? 90’s during the reign of domition.
 
Ron_Conte said:
[Revelation]
{1:1} The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, in order to make known to his servants the things that must soon occur, and which he signified by sending his Angel to his servant John;

Not the things that happened years earlier, but the future events. Also, a number of Saints, such as Victorinus and Irenaeus understood the book as referring to the tribulation.

The plain stated purpose of the book (Rev 1:1) is to reveal future events. Similarly, many of the events in the Life of Christ, and the details of His death, were predicted in the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
“Soon” means the initial fulfillment of the book was expected within the lifetime of it’s first-century readers.
 
Fidelis said:
As you know, even though many modern scholars may favor this view, this dating is very much in dispute and has not been the traditional view of the Church, which has favored a pre-AD 70 writing.

That is why the premise one build’s ones interpretation on (in this case, the dating of the writing of the Book of Revelation) is very important.
Click to expand...
It may or may not have been written pre-AD 70. If it was written later, so what? Daniel was composed during the persecution of Antiochus IV. Most everything that appears to be future prophesy was already passed including the abomination of desolation. John could have easily done the same thing in Revelation (write after the fact).
 
Sorry for butting into your conversation.
Ron_Conte said:
Can you cite a scholar who dates Revelation pre-Fall of Jerusalem? The modern view (with which I disagree) holds that the synoptics were written after the Fall, and that John was written later, and then Revelation later than that.

The description in Revelation of the various afflictions does not fit the events when Jerusalem was conquered by the Romans. None of the Church Fathers or Saints or Doctors (of which I am aware) interpreted Revelation as referring to the Fall of Jerusalem.
Click to expand...
Andreas of Caesarea, a bishop in Cappadocia in the fifth century, said that several scholars in his day both dated and interpreted the Book of Revelation in connection with the Roman siege and destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

The description of the events most clearly refers to Jerusalem’s destruction in my opinion.
Also, the book itself states that John was on Patmos, which is the island that Domitian used to keep prisoners (some of them had to work in the copper mines there). Domitian’s reign was certainly after the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple.
Click to expand...
Ancient testimony to a pre-fall date comes from the titles of Syriac versions of Revelation, which claim that John received these visions after being sent to Patmos by Caesar Nero.

With that said, I think Revelation is a pre-figurement of the Second Coming of Christ.
 
The tribulation begins this year, 2010, and will continue for 30 years, until early 2040; this is the first part of the tribulation, which includes the first six seals of the book of revelation, and the first six trumpets of the seventh seal.

The second part of the tribulation, which includes the return of Jesus, does not occur until hundreds of years later.

All these clever interpretations, which try to take the force from the Book of Revelation will be put to shame by the very events described in the book of Revelation and in the book of Daniel and in the eschatological discourse of Christ. The Book of Revelation describes the events of the tribulation, the same set of events described by Daniel, and later by Christ Himself. When these events unfold, it will be unmistakable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top