I’ll never forget Easter 1946. I was 14, my little sister Ocy 12, and my older sister Darlene 16. We lived at home with our mother, and the four of us knew what it was like to do without many things. My dad had died five years before, leaving Mom with seven school kids to raise and no money. By 1946, my older sisters were married, and my brothers had left home.

A month before Easter, the pastor of our church announced that a special Easter offering would be taken to help a poor family. He asked everyone to save and give sacrificially. When we got home, we talked about what we could do. We decided to buy 50 pounds of potatoes and live on them for a month. This would allow us to save $20 of our grocery money for the offering. Then we thought that if we kept our electric lights turned out as much as possible and didn’t listen to the radio, we’d save money on that month’s electric bill. Darlene got as many house and yard cleaning jobs as possible, and both of us baby sat for everyone we could. For 15 cents, we could buy enough cotton loops to make three potholders to sell for $1. We made $20 on potholders.

That month was one of the best of our lives. Every day we counted the money to see how much we had saved. At night we’d sit in the dark and talk about how the poor family was going to enjoy having the money the church would give them. We had about 80 people in our church, so we figured that whatever amount of money we had to give, the offering would surely be 20 times that much. After all, every Sunday the pastor had reminded everyone to save for the sacrificial offering.

The day before Easter, Ocy and I walked to the grocery store and got the manager to give us three crisp $20 bills and one $10 bill for all our change. We ran all the way home to show Mom and Darlene. We had never had so much money before. That night we were so excited we could hardly sleep. We didn’t care that we wouldn’t have new clothes for Easter; we had $70 for the sacrificial offering. We could hardly wait to get to church! On Sunday morning, rain was pouring. We didn’t own an umbrella, and the church was over a mile from our home, but it didn’t seem to matter how wet we got. Darlene had cardboard in her shoes to fill the holes. The cardboard came apart, and her feet got wet, but we sat in church proudly, despite how we looked. I heard some teenagers talking about the Smith girls having on their old dresses. I looked at them in their new clothes, and I felt so rich.

When the sacrificial offering was taken, we were sitting on the second row from the front. Mom put in the $10 bill, and each of us girls put in a $20. As we walked home after church, we sang all the way. At lunch, Mom had a surprise for us. She had bought a dozen eggs, and we had boiled Easter eggs with our fried potatoes!

Late that afternoon the minister drove up in his car. Mom went to the door, talked with him for a moment, and then came back with an envelope in her hand. We asked what it was, but she didn’t say a word. She opened the envelope and out fell a bunch of money. There were three crisp $20 bills, one $10 bill, and seventeen $1 bills. Mom put the money back in the envelope. We didn’t talk, but instead, just sat and stared at the floor. We had gone from feeling like millionaires to feeling like poor white trash.

We kids had had such a happy life that we felt sorry for anyone who didn’t have our mom and dad for parents and a house full of brothers and sisters and other kids visiting constantly. We thought it was fun to share silverware and see whether we got the fork or the spoon that night. We had two knives which we passed around to whoever needed them. I knew we didn’t have a lot of things that other people had, but I’d never thought we were poor. That Easter Day I found out we were poor. The minister had brought us the money for the poor family, so we must be poor.

I didn’t like being poor. I looked at my dress and worn-out shoes and felt so ashamed that I didn’t want to go back to church. Everyone there probably already knew we were poor! I thought about school. I was in the ninth grade and at the top of my class of over 100 students. I wondered if the kids at school knew we were poor. I decided I could quit school since I had finished the eighth grade. That was all the law required at that time.

We sat in silence for a long time. Then it got dark, and we went to bed. All that week, we girls went to school and came home, and no one talked much. Finally on Saturday, Mom asked us what we wanted to do with the money. What did poor people do with money? We didn’t know. We’d never known we were poor.

We didn’t want to go to church on Sunday, but Mom said we had to. Although it was a sunny day, we didn’t talk on the way. Mom started to sing, but no one joined in and she only sang one verse. At church we had a missionary speaker. He talked about how churches in Africa made buildings out of sun-dried bricks, but they need money to buy roofs. He said $100 would put a roof on a church. The minister said, “Can’t we all sacrifice to help these poor people?”

We looked at each other and smiled for the first time in a week. Mom reached into her purse and pulled out the envelope. She passed it to Darlene. Darlene gave it to me, and I handed it to Ocy. Ocy put it in the offering plate. When the offering was counted, the minister announced that it was a little over $100. The missionary was excited. He hadn’t expected such a large offering from our small church. He said, “You must have some rich people in this church.”

Suddenly it struck us! We had given $87 of that “little over $100.” We were the rich family in the church! Hadn’t the missionary said so? Deep down, I knew that we were actually a rich family.

Author unknown

“Surely his salvation is near those who fear him, that his glory may dwell in our land. Love and faithfulness meet together; righteousness and peace kiss each other. Faithfulness springs forth from the earth, and righteousness looks down from heaven” (Psa 85:9-11).

“Righteousness and peace kiss each other!” Like two old friends who finally meet, after too long a separation — embracing and kissing one another, so thankful for each other’s life and health and fellowship and company.

What does it mean that, in God’s own time, and under His supervision, and to His glory, “righteousness” and “peace” finally “kiss” each other?

It will be such a blessing, such a wonderful occurrence, because of this sad fact… that God’s “righteousness” (His holiness, his awesome and perfect character) and God’s “peace” (His union, or unity — His loving family communion with sinful man) are so far apart, and so unattainable to us.

And why is that? Because, usually, and in practical outworking, and due to our sins, we have been shut out from both the “righteousness” and the “peace”.

But even more so, the Almighty — who is perfectly righteous — cannot even “look upon” sin and sinners… much less have true and lasting “fellowship” or “peace” with them! Even for the Father, “righteousness” and “peace” had to be kept at arm’s length — for He could not treat as “righteous” those who are unrighteous!

Something, or someone, was needed to bridge the gap between the “righteousness” of God and the “peace” of God.

And what, or who, might that be?!

---

So this was the age-old question: how could a pure God, who could not even look upon sin, save a world of sinners?

But in God’s work of salvation through His Son, two disparate (one might almost say, two mutually exclusive elements) are at work together. God’s “righteousness” is declared and vindicated in the sacrifice of His Son (Rom 3:21-31), and on that basis — the recognition of His righteousness, or holiness — God is pleased also to show His “peace”, or mercy, in the forgiveness of sins.

Thus it is a wonderful miracle that, in and through Jesus, the truth of God and the mercy and grace of God are met together in one. This mercy (grace) and truth have been manifested in the Word made flesh (Joh 1:14-18). These divine attributes parted company at the fall of the first Adam, when God’s holiness decreed an exile from the “garden” of His presence. But now they have been joined together again with the coming of the last Adam! The irreproachable righteousness of God may save sinners, and bring them “peace” (joy, fellowship, and reconciliation with Himself), without any diminishing of His absolutely righteous character, because of the mediatorship of His Son: “Father, forgive them… for MY sake!”

RIGHTEOUSNESS is perfection of character, or sinlessness.

And PEACE is “shalom” — joy, fellowship, and reconciliation with God: ie “good will toward men” (Luk 2:14)! Cp Rom 5:1; Act 10:36; Mat 5:9; Eph 2:14.

“Faithfulness springs forth from the earth, and righteousness looks down from heaven” (v 11). The figurative and poetic meeting of heaven and earth (in vv 10,11) is an anticipation of the advent of Jesus. In him heaven and earth are met together: Son of God and seed of the woman! Like the hymn: “Thy grace and truth became… Flesh for a saving name.” The righteousness of God looked down from heaven, planted the “seed” that germinated in the “earth”, ie, the soil of human nature, and from that “earth”, that soil, there sprang up a Righteous Branch, the Word made flesh, the “faithful and true witness”, the Amen of God, the priest and mediator of the Heavenly Father’s everlasting covenant with man!

Only through that man, says Paul to the Romans, can God offer “peace” (reconciliation, justification) to sinful man, whilst not letting go (as He surely cannot!) of His own righteousness and holiness.

---

One of the subtle beauties of these verses is that word “kiss”. God’s offer of salvation to man may be expressed in terms of a legal contract. It may even be worked out and explained in a fairly logical manner, and we are grateful that it can be so explained. Many people need such explanations in order to accept the gospel.

But, really, the gospel of salvation as presented in the Bible bears much more resemblance to a glance of love, a tender kiss, a gentle caress… the love of a Father for a small and helpless child, the love of a husband for a devoted wife… and the love of a man laying down his life for his friends.

So… is God’s plan of salvation a legal contract, or an ongoing act of love? I think it must be both — but surely much more of the latter.

But especially, in these verses, it is a way by which heaven and earth may be brought together. And a way by which the vilest of sinners (you and I) may have the veil lifted from our eyes, put out our hands, and touch the glorious face of the pure and righteous and eternal One… who has become — wonder of wonders! — our “Father”.

“If men were more busy judging THEMSELVES, which they are COMMANDED to do, they would not have so much propensity for judging others, which they are forbidden to do.”

“There are divisions that are uncalled for, and therefore sinful. Paul refers to such when he says, ‘Mark them that cause divisions among you contrary to the doctrine (the teaching on unity) that ye have learnt.’ He was referring, no doubt, to the factions arising out of personal preferences, but the warning applies to all divisions that ought not to be made. There is division enough, in all conscience — division that is inevitable, division that must be, unless we are to ignore divine obligations altogether; but there are divisions that ought not to be. It is possible to go too far in our demands of fellow-believers. How far we ought to go and where to stop, is at one time or other a perplexing problem to most earnest minds.”

“If good men would adopt the rule of refusing to listen to an evil report privately conveyed, until it had been dealt with to the last stage according to the rule prescribed by Christ, much evil would be prevented.”

As a very young man, Robert Roberts (1839-1898) formulated the “Bible Companion”, a plan by which the Old Testament was read once and the New Testament twice in the course of a year. Later he became the first editor of The Christadelphian magazine, a position which he held for 34 years until his death in September 1898. During this period he upheld and guided the brotherhood by his writings and by his indefatigable ministrations in speaking and lecturing throughout Britain and abroad — especially in America and Australia. He frequently engaged in public debates with leading figures on religious topics, and staunchly upheld the absolute inspiration of the Bible. He was instrumental in formulating and writing the original Christadelphian Statement of Faith, which survives today (with slight additions) as the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith.

His published works include:

The Blood of Christ, Christendom Astray, Seasons of Comfort, Further Seasons of Comfort, Nazareth Revisited, The Ways of Providence, The Visible Hand of God, and The Law of Moses.

1. Men may have a knowledge of God from general revelation, and thus all men are in some sense guilty, since they have rejected this revelation.

2. The Jews are guilty of rejecting God’s law as well, and thus are doubly guilty.

3. Since no man can be saved by his own righteousness, justification can only be by faith in the work of Jesus Christ.

4. The chief Old Testament example is Abraham, who was saved by faith.

5. The fruit of this justification is peace with God.

6. Free grace gives no license for sin, but rather provides resurrection power for a new life of righteousness.

7. Nevertheless, our regeneration introduces a struggle, within our own natures, against indwelling sin.

8. Christ works with us in the war against sin, and guarantees us our final victory in the resurrection.

9. Our security in Christ is grounded in God’s choice of us, not our choice of Him.

10. God brings His elect people to Himself by means of the preaching of the gospel.

11. God has taken the gospel to the Gentiles now, but there will come a time when Israel will also be gathered back to Him.

12. Paul shifts from theological exposition to practical application. The appropriate response to such a great salvation is to present ourselves as living sacrifices and transformed people in the ecclesia.

13. Believers should live in submission to the civil authorities.

14. Weak and strong believers need to live in harmony, understanding each other.

15. The apostle to the Gentiles hopes to visit Rome soon.

16. Paul sends greetings to the saints, and gives warnings against “wolves”.

The “Certain”

A fulfillment of prophecy can only be regarded as certain, for our finite and imperfect minds, when the fulfillment has already come about, or when its terms are absolutely incapable of any meaning save one; both factors would make our assurance doubly sure. Thus, we know that 2Sa 7:12-16 and its counterpart in 1Ch 17:11-14 were in part fulfilled in Solomon, because David so understood it in part (1Ch 28:6), as did Solomon himself (2Ch 6:9-11). We know that it was not entirely fulfilled in Solomon because David clearly looked beyond Solomon’s time (2Sa 7:19), and because the New Testament tells us explicitly that it referred to Jesus (Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5). Again, we know that the Bible promises the literal return of the Jews to the land of Israel, and of the Lord Jesus Christ to the earth, and many other such things plainly taught in Scripture because the terms of these prophecies do not admit of any other faithful interpretation.

The “Probable”

A fulfillment can be regarded as probable when the events we see in history are seen to correspond closely with the terms of a prophecy. Thus, it is hard to see that we could be mistaken in regarding the presence of some millions of Jews in the Holy Land today as, in part at least, a fulfillment of the prophecies of their return. It is probable, too, that this heralds the near return of the Lord. Some prophecies about the return of Israel to the land contain such apparently plain indications that they must suffer great afflictions before the final deliverance from their enemies (Eze 36-39; Zec 14), that we consider it probable that they will in fact suffer in this way.

The “Possible”

Things “possible” may have all degrees of likelihood from high probability to being highly unlikely, and the decision we come to in any particular case is bound to be in some degree subjective. We can hardly expect absolute unanimity, even among those sharing the same doctrinal foundation. Thus… it is possible to regard the “sun, moon and stars” of Rev 6:12,13 as referring to the nation of Israel; it is also possible to doubt this, since the symbols are certainly not invariably used in this sense in Scripture. Which conclusion we come to (if we come to a precise conclusion at all) is not, however, of the first importance, since other passages state in plain terms what may or may not here be intended by the symbols.

Indeed, it is not at all unlikely that we are sometimes moved to understand symbols in a particular way because we have already concluded on what are quite different grounds that certain things are true: in that event it is not the symbols which are teaching us, but we who are reading (right or wrong) our own meaning into them. This fault is more common than we sometimes realize, and we should be on our guard against it.

Within the category of “possible”, too, must be put all detailed predictions of things yet future which are not most categorically defined in Scripture itself — unless, indeed, our predictions are so outrageous as not to be thought possible at all. And in view of the fact that the New Testament often provides us with interpretations of Old Testament prophecies which we should not have thought of for ourselves (such as those of Hos 11:1 in Mat 2:15; and of Jer 31:15 in Mat 2:18), we need to be very careful before we pronounce any interpretation impossible. Even so, since it required the guidance of the Holy Spirit to enable New Testament writers to offer such interpretations to us, we might feel that our own feet should re-main firmly on the ground when we are disposed to adventure our own understanding of Scripture’s prophecies.

Since [in interpreting prophecy] we will be meeting events which certainly lie, in the future… it follows that detailed interpretations are bound to be speculative in some degree, even when they are offered at all. It might even be that no detailed interpretation is possible. But this is not in itself to be regarded as any weakness in the expository basis: it may simply be that information is inadequate for any assurance as to the meaning until the events have actually occurred.

To this it cannot properly be objected that a prophecy which one can only understand when it has happened is of little use. For in the first place its general tenor may be plain even when the detail is not; and in the second place it can be very valuable and reassuring to know that we have reached a certain point in the fulfillment of God’s purpose, and can look forward now to the next stage.

(NRev 131-133).

“Rahab” was the name of a mythological sea serpent or dragon, lit the “boisterous one,” referred to a number of times in the OT (Psa 87:4; 89:10; Job 9:13; 26:12; Isa 30:7; 51:9). The name of this monster has not hitherto been discovered in any extrabiblical text. In the OT, Rahab functions similarly to Leviathan, an originally Canaanite chaos monster, but whether these are to be identified or are separate monsters in origin is not entirely clear.

Rahab appears in two different contexts in the OT. On the one hand, it appears as a sea monster defeated at the time of creation (Psa 89:10; Job 9:13; 26:12), and on the other as a metaphorical name for Egypt (Psa 87:4; Isa 30:7). In Isa 51:9 the two usages may be combined.

Eur 1:36: Iraneus (c 169 AD) is said to have introduced the opinion that Apocalypse was written in reign of Domitian (80-96). Isaac Newton does not adopt Iraneus’s opinion: he suggests Iraneus might have heard from Polycarp that he had received the Apocalypse from John about time of Domitian’s death or that John might at that time have made a new publication of it. Eusebius (3rd/4th cent) adopts Iraneus’s opinion (but is thought by some to invalidate it by conjoining the banishing of John to Patmos with the deaths of Peter and Paul).

Eur 1:37: “There is no evidence to show how long he was an exile, or in what year of his sojourn in Patmos the Apocalypse was given.”

P 38: Tertullian says John was banished to Patmos by Nero (65 AD). Arethas quotes Iraneus from Eusebius, but does not follow it: he affirms Apocalypse was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. Syriac Version in title of Apocalypse states: “into which (Patmos) he was banished by Nero.

P 39: Isaac Newton: “It seems probable to me that the Apocalypse was there composed (ie in Patmos) and that soon after, the epistle to Hebrews and those of Peter were written, with ref to this prophecy as what they were particularly concerned in.”

P 40: In conclusion, JT: “It cannot be said with certainty in what year the Apocalypse was written.” (He means, from context, a date of 65 or 67 is quite possible.) JT: “The knowledge of these particular times does not at all affect the interpretation.”

WRev 53: “The date of the writing of Rev is of fundamental importance, vitally affecting the interpretation of the book.”

P 54: 2 objections to Iraneus’s testimony: (1) his doubtful value as a witness: (a) he insists Christ died at age 50; (b) he gives credence to the fantastic story of the miraculous translation of the LXX; and (2) possible mistranslation: Instead of “it was not long since it — Apocalypse — was seen, but almost within our own generation, about the end of Domitian’s reign”…the passage could read: “It was not long since HE — John — was seen…

The book was received during a time of intense persecution (ie 1:9), and the Neronian persecutions were the only such in the 1st century.

Ellicott, vol 8, p 526: Theophylact: John was in Patmos 32 years after ascension. Also, argument by comparing Rev 2; 3 to Eph and Col (also in Asia Minor): Since very little change in conditions, the general weight is in favor of earlier date.

Clarke (6:960,961): “So many conflicting opinions.”

IBD: “External evidence — Iraneus’s being the earliest — support later date.”

ISBE: Iraneus is confirmed by Clement, Origen, etc.

Hastings (IV, 259): “The efforts to force Emperor worship upon Jews goes back to Caligula (39,40 AD).” (But ct Peake, p 928.)

1. Fulfillment Would Be “Soon”: Many verses throughout the Book stress the immediacy, and the extreme urgency, of its message: Rev 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11; 6:10,11; 22:10,12,20. How was the prophecy fulfilled “soon”? How was it “near” in the days when John received it? The obvious answer is that the Apocalypse was fulfilled (partially, at least) within a very short time after it was given. If it were written in AD 66, the events of AD 70 would certainly be considered as happening soon!

2. Authenticity of a Prophet: A very common pattern with all Bible prophecy is this: one more-or-less immediate fulfillment, usually only partial, in the days of the prophet himself, and another fulfillment much later, often related to the Second Coming of Christ. The Olivet prophecy is notable in this regard. An immediate fulfillment (ie, within at most one generation of its proclamation) was absolutely essential for every prophecy, no matter what it might mean to much later generations — for how else could a would-be prophet prove his credentials to his original listeners? See Deu 18:19-22. So a prophecy, even one written by the Apostle John, would have needed some significant fulfillment within a few years — or the churches would have been well within their rights to reject it as a false prophecy! If the Apocalypse were given, and received, shortly before AD 67, then soon-to-come events would have validated it almost immediately. But if the Apocalypse were given about AD 95 or 96, and especially if it were designed for a single, long, almost imperceptibly slow working-out spanning 1,900 years, where would be any real test of authenticity to the generation first receiving it?

3. Jesus Did “Come” in AD 70: Upon his resurrection, Jesus was given “all authority in heaven and earth” by God (Mat 28:18). Earlier, he had twice declared that the Father had placed all judgment into his hands, in order that “the Son may be honored” (Joh 5:22,23,27). In his parable about the rebellious city, Jesus predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (Mat 22:1-7). As the Son of God, Jesus sent his destroying army (the Romans) against Jerusalem. As a prophet, Jesus had to be proven right — and he was! So in the sense of bringing God’s judgment (in order to induce repentance among the people), Jesus did “come” in AD 70.

4. The Theme Verse of the Apocalypse: “Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen” (Rev 1:7). This verse is a composite of two Old Testament prophecies, and is demonstrably a theme verse for the whole Book. The first half of the verse quotes from Dan 7:1. The rest of Revelation is based on Christ’s glory with God in heaven and his imminent return to earth in that same glory.

The second half of Rev 1:7 is derived from Zec 12:10-14. The recognition that Jesus is the Messiah brings the Jews to repentance. “Those who pierced him” means the Jews (Mat 26:14, 15,47; 27:2-12,62-66; Joh 18:39,40; 19:6; Act 2:22, 23,36; 3:13-15; 1Th 2:14,15). “The peoples of the earth” (in Rev) and “the clans of the land” (in Zec) are the same! They are the Jewish tribes (cp Rev 5:5; 7:4-8; 21:12), in contrast to “every tribe, tongue, nation, etc.” (Rev 5:9; 7:9; 13:7; 14:6). So a key opening verse in the Rev declares a “coming” of the Lord Jesus to the people of Israel, in Israel. The connection of Revelation 1:7 with the words of Jesus in his Olivet prophecy is unmistakable: Mat 24:30. Since Jesus was predicting the impending overthrow of Jerusalem (in AD 70), then this theme verse must also be part of a message predicting the imminent judgment of God upon Israel. Thus, Rev 1:7, properly seen with its OT links, may have much to say about the scope and the setting of the Book — and thus also about the date of its writing. Since the Book seems to be dealing with God’s judgments upon His people Israel, in their own land, because they have rejected His Son, then the only logical time for its writing in the first century would be before the great outpouring of those judgments, in AD 70. [See Rev, theme verse.]

5. A Judaizing Element in Revelation: Rev 2:9 and Rev 3:9 presume that there was a strong Judaizing element in the Church when John was writing. These were prob Christian brethren whose influence depended in large part on the existence of a Temple and a priesthood in Jerusalem, and whose influence would have been considerably reduced later, after Jerusalem fell in AD 70.

6. A Temple in Jerusalem: Rev 11:1-3 likewise presumes the existence, at the time of writing, of the great Temple in Jerusalem (cp Luk 21:20,21,24). This Temple was of course destroyed by the Romans in AD 70.

7. Other Pre-AD 70 Letters Quote Revelation: Several letters which were undoubtedly written before AD 70 appear to quote extensively from Revelation:

Hebrews… quotes from…	Revelation
The Word of God (Heb 4:12) (= Jesus: Heb 4:13)	The Word of God (= Jesus: Rev 19:13)
…is sharper than a two-edged sword (Heb 4:12)	…with a sharp two-edged sword (Rev 1:16; 19:15)
The city which hath (the: RV) foundations, whose builder and maker is God (Heb 11:10)	The wall of the city (of God) had 12 foundations (Rev 21:14)

And this whole sequence from Heb 12:

Mount Zion	The Lamb on Mount Zion (Rev 14:1)
Heavenly Jerusalem	New Jerusalem out of heaven (Rev 21:2)
The city of the living God	The God of the living creatures (Rev 4:6)
An innumerable company of angels	The voice of many angels (Rev 5:11)
The general assembly	The 144,000 sealed out of Israel (Rev 7; 14)
Written in heaven	Written in the Lamb’s book of life (Rev 13:8; 21:27)
God the Judge of all	The dead standing before God, to be judged (Rev 20:12)
Jesus the mediator of a new covenant	A Lamb as it had been slain (Rev 5:5,6)
The blood of sprinkling	Thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood (Rev 5:9)
Him that spoke from heaven	Revelation is the only message of Jesus spoken from heaven!´
Let us serve God	They serve Him day and night in His temple (Rev 7:15)

---

1 Peter quotes from…	Revelation
Things angels desire to look into (1Pe 1:12)	Angel: “Who is worthy to open the book?” (Rev 5:2)
Faith… gold tried in the fire (1Pe 1:7)	Buy gold tried in the fire (Rev 3:18)
Living stones (1Pe 2:5)	City with 12 foundations, and in them the names of the apostles (Rev 21:14)
A royal priesthood (1Pe 2:9)	Kings and priests (Rev 5:10; 1:6)
Redeemed with the precious blood of Christ as of a Lamb (1Pe 1:19)	A Lamb as it had been slain… Thou hast redeemed us (Rev 5:6,9)
The foundation of the world (1Pe 1:20)	The foundation of the world (Rev 13:8)
To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever (1Pe 5:11)	To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever (Rev 1:6)
Babylon (1Pe 5:13)	Babylon the Great (Rev 17:5)

---

2 Peter quotes…	Revelation
The more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well to take heed… (2Pe 1:19)	The Apocalypse itself? (What other “sure word of prophecy” could it be?)
The day star (2Pe 1:19)	The bright and morning star (Rev 2:28; 22:16)
False prophets (2Pe 2:1)	The false prophet (Rev 16:13; 19:20)
Angels… cast down to hell (2Pe 2:4)	The devil and Satan… cast into a bottomless pit (Rev 20:1-3)
Brute beasts made to be destroyed (2Pe 2:12)	The beast and false prophet and dragon… destroyed (Rev 13:11; 19:20; 20:10)
The way of Balaam (2Pe 2:15)	The doctrine of Balaam (Rev 2:14)
A thousand years (2Pe 3:8)	A thousand years (Rev 20:3,5,6)
A thief in the night (2Pe 3:10)	I will come as a thief (Rev 3:3; 16:15)
The heavens shall pass away with a great noise (2Pe 3:10)	The heaven fled away (Rev 20:11; 21:1)
We, according to his promise (where?), look for a new heavens and a new earth (2Pe 3:13)	A new heaven and a new earth (Rev 21:1)

Quite a number of the correspondences suggested above are the only occurrences of those phrases in all of the NT, and indeed, in some cases, in all of the Bible. While one or two such allusions could be attributed to mere coincidence, the (1) virtual uniqueness and (2) cumulative effect of many such allusions strengthen dramatically the case for the other writers quoting Revelation. This line of reasoning was first hinted at by Sir Isaac Newton in his writings on prophecy, and later expanded in WRev:

“It is possible to identify many allusions to the Book of Revelation in Hebrews and in the two epistles of Peter. If this assertion can be established as true, then Revelation must predate the three epistles mentioned. Since Peter definitely died in Nero’s persecution of AD 64-66 approx (much of his First Epistle was to strengthen the brethren in that fiery trial) and since Hebrews is generally admitted to have been written before the Jewish War of AD 67-70, the dating of Revelation is narrowed down to a very fine margin.

“…It may be as well to dispose of the only way of upsetting this argument. It could perhaps be suggested that whilst the links between Revelation and the three epistles may be undoubted, the facts are capable of the reverse interpretation, namely, that Revelation is borrowing from Hebrews and 1st and 2nd Peter… The answer to this comes from careful consideration of the character of the phrases under review. Practically all of them will be seen at once to be ‘Apocalyptic’ in style — they belong naturally to Revelation, they are in keeping with its idiom and symbolism: e.g. ‘the morning star’. Further, when they occur in the three epistles they often introduce matters which have received no mention whatever in their context but which are fully explained in Revelation, eg ‘the city which hath the foundations, whose builder and maker is God’ ” (WRev 55).

Questions About an Early Date

But the idea that the Revelation had a first-century fulfillment — in the Neronian persecution of the Church and the Jewish Wars of AD 67 to 70 — leads to a quite logical question: ‘Why didn’t the Kingdom of God — clearly so much a part of the Apocalypse — come in the first century?’

The answer is: it might have, if the conditions had been right. As JT wrote in Elp: “Had the nation [of Israel] continued to obey the Lord’s voice and to keep the covenant, and when Christ came, received him as king on the proclamation of the gospel, they would doubtless have been in Canaan until now [written in 1848]; and he might have come ere this, and be now reigning in Jerusalem, King of the Jews and Lord of the nations” (Elp 301, 11th ed).

So, ‘does the fact that the Kingdom of God didn’t come in the first century mean that the Apocalypse was in reality a false prophecy, ie, a prophecy not to be fulfilled?’

The answer, again, is: NO!: Sometimes, even though a particular prophecy is plainly from God and therefore inspired, it will not be completely fulfilled (at least, not at the time first anticipated) because those to whom the fulfillment of blessing should come have not properly prepared themselves to receive that blessing — or, conversely, because those upon whom the fulfillment of punishment should come have repented, and sought to be released from the judgment of God: Jer 18:7-10. A well-known case in point is the prophecy of Jonah, directed against the wicked city of Nineveh (the capital of Assyria): Jon 3:1-4. But the time for the destruction of Nineveh came and went, and the mighty city still stood, much to Jonah’s chagrin. Why? Was God’s word void? Of course not! Instead, the city, from king to slave, had repented in sackcloth and begged the mercy of God (3:5-9). And He had listened (3:10). [For more on this approach to Bible prophecy, see WRev 259-273.]

This, of course, leads to one last question: ‘If a first-century (and partial) fulfillment is a proper interpretation of the Book, then can there be any other interpretation which in any sense is also “soon” and “near”?’

YES! And the explanation is ready-at-hand, and easily grasped: see Luke 21:29-32. The Olivet prophecy is generally recognized to have two fulfillments (one in the first century and another in the near future). Likewise, the Apocalypse (which, not coincidentally, shares many points in common with the Olivet prophecy) may also have two fulfillments. The second, or Last Days, fulfillment may rightly be spoken of as “soon” or “near” if considered in relation to the proper starting point. So, to paraphrase the quotation above: ‘When you see the rebirth of the nation of Israel in the Last Days, and especially when you see Jerusalem in Jewish hands again, and again encircled by threatening enemies [cp Luk 21:20-24]… — that is, when conditions in the Middle East mirror the state of affairs in Jesus’ day — … then know that the fulfillment of all things is, from that time, very near — even upon that very generation!’

The Importance?

Why is the dating of Revelation important? Because, given the early date for its writing (AD 65/66), the Book may be seen to have had an immediate fulfillment, which then greatly influences what we may expect as its final fulfillment. In other words, the Last Days fulfillment should follow the pattern of the first century fulfillment. We can expect then:

1.         An attack by Gentile enemies upon Jerusalem.

2.         A downtreading period corresponding to 3 1/2 literal years (also designated as 42 months and 1,260 days).

3.         Severe trials upon Jews living in the Land of Israel, and tribulations which may spread to the rest of the world.

4.         Witnessing (preaching) which converts those who will listen (both Jew and Gentile) to believe in God and the Lord Jesus Christ.

5.         Judgments upon the enemies of God’s people in and around the Land of Israel.

The difference will be that, whereas the first century fulfillment stopped short of the actual Return of Christ, the final fulfillment will go on to the completion of the purpose of God. Jesus will return in glory, the dead will be raised for reward or punishment, the nations will be judged, and God’s Kingdom will be established!

Thus the Apocalypse is seen to gather together the threads of many Old Testament prophecies, and to weave them into a sequence of events that fit both the first century and the Last Days. Rather than clashing with, or standing as a contrast to, the OT prophetic picture, the Apocalypse is seen to extend and enhance it. Rather than being a mystical book, with relevance only to a few Bible scholars, the Apocalypse is seen to be quite understandable and applicable to “every tribe, tongue, people, and nation”!

Evidence for a later date:

The AD 95 date rests almost entirely on the testimony of the early Church “father” Iraneus (c AD 180) — generally considered by today’s scholars to be a rather unreliable witness. Iraneus wrote concerning John: “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 it was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”

This is often assumed to fix the date when the Revelation itself was “seen” as “towards the end of Domitian’s reign”, that is, in AD 95 or 96. But the Greek text itself is ambiguous as to the key pronoun and its antecedent; it could as easily read: “…For he [ie, the apostle John himself] was seen not very long ago…” — thus saying nothing about when the Book of Revelation was written, but only about how long its author lived! (Several later “fathers” simply quote Iraneus, perpetuating the same ambiguity; their witnesses are therefore not really independent.)