text:
|Previous Page
|Next Page
TRIUMPHANT RETURN #3 by Grant Jeffrey The Time of Christ's Return This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. (Acts 1: 11) Careful study of the Scriptures and Church history confirms that the Bible teaches and the faithful teaching of the orthodox Church in all generations has affirmed the hope of the return of Christ. The churches in all major Christian traditions - Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, and Coptic - acknowledge the scriptural teaching of the Second Advent. Consequently, virtually all Christians acknowledge the Second Coming of Christ. However, the controversy involves the question as to the timing and the literal details surrounding this critically important event, which is prophesied in numerous passages throughout the Old and New Testament. One of the most intriguing prophecies concerning the promise of His coming is that the final generation that experiences the fulfillment of the events of the "last days" will also witness an astonishing denial of the literal truth of the return of our Lord by scoffers who will openly deny the Bible's prophecies about the return of Christ. Specifically, the apostle Peter warned, "There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation" (2 Peter 3:3-4). In other words, in the last days, "scoffers" would appear in the Church who will deny the scriptural truth of a literal, future coming of Christ on the basis that a long period of time had passed since the original prophecies were given and the prediction remains unfulfilled. As mentioned in the first few chapters, we are now witnessing an amazing proclamation by a group of scholars calling themselves preterists. Extreme or full preterists strongly deny the truth of the literal and future Second Coming. However, partial preterists believe that the prophecies of Matthew 24 and the book of Revelation were almost completely fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D.70, but they suggest some kind of a Second Coming will occur in the far distant future. Rather than deny the truth of the hundreds of prophecies about the Second Advent, preterists claim these specific predictions were actually fulfilled almost two thousand years ago when the Roman legions burned Jerusalem. For example, a major full preterist writer, David Chilton, wrote, "The Olivet Discourse is not about the Second Coming of Christ. It is a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70." He also declared, "The Book of Revelation is not about the Second Coming of Christ. It is about the destruction of Israel and Christ's victory over His enemies in the establishment of the New Covenant Temple." However, it is obvious that the detailed prophecies in Matthew 24, 2 Thessalonians and the book of Revelation about Christ's return were not literally fulfilled by the limited historical events that transpired during the destruction of Jerusalem. Over 1,250,000 Jewish citizens of Jerusalem were starved, burned, and slaughtered by the brutal legions of Rome following the Jews' ill-considered revolt against the overwhelming military power of imperial Rome. The only way that the preterists can claim that the numerous prophecies about Christ's Second Coming were fulfilled during the burning of Jerusalem is to interpret the words contained in these numerous predictions in a totally allegorical, metaphorical, and symbolic manner. This method of allegorical interpretation of the prophecies is totally contradicted by the normal principles of scriptural interpretation that are used by all orthodox Christian scholars, including preterists, to interpret all other non-prophetic scriptural passages. Curiously, the preterists interpret the language of the Scriptures about the death and resurrection of Christ in a totally literal and natural manner, but they abandon this fundamental principle of biblical interpretation when they interpret the prophecies about the Second Coming. This inconsistency of interpretation is logically indefensible and biased by their desire to escape the clear teaching of the prophecies regarding the literal and future Second Coming to set up Christ's millennial rule. (See Chapter 2 for a complete discussion of why the literal method of interpretation is the most accurate.) The Scriptures declare that there will be a growing "spirit of Antichrist" in the last days (1 John 4:3). The Bible reveals that one of the characteristics of the spirit of Antichrist is that it denies that Jesus Christ comes in the flesh. Obviously, anyone who denies that Jesus Christ was incarnated into human flesh by being supernaturally born to His mother Mary is denying Christ's fundamental claim that He is both the Son of Man and the Son of God. That is "the spirit of Antichrist." In answer to this, John wrote: Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. (s John 4::1-6) This passage, 1 John 4:2-3, which declares, "Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God" also refers to His prophesied return in the last days. The New Testament confirms that just as Jesus truly came into this world as a physical human being, lived His life as a human, died, and rose from the dead, He will also return to the earth physically at the conclusion of the Battle of Armageddon. Therefore, the denial of the literal reality of the return of Christ is a fundamental characteristic of the spiritual opposition to God that will manifest during the last days leading up to His return from heaven. It is surely significant that the New Testament contains repeated warnings about the danger of spiritual deception in the final days. The apostle John specifically warned about deception in the last days regarding the nature of Jesus Christ's Second Coming (2 John 7-8). It should not, then, be surprising that in our generation we are witnessing an astonishing claim that denies the literal reality of the hundreds of prophecies that affirm that Jesus Christ will return in the flesh from heaven to defeat the Antichrist and establish His rule on earth. The Dating of Revelation In Chapter 2, we briefly touched on the basic weakness of preterism, that is, its complete dependence upon Revelation being written before the A.D.70 destruction of Jerusalem. Naturally, if John wrote his prophecy after the fall of the Holy City, then their argument falls apart. Thomas Ice summed up the preterist problem in the book "Dominion Theology: Blessing or Curse:" It must be pointed out that if Revelation was written before A.D. 70, then Chilton's view may be correct. But if the Apocalypse was penned before A.D.70, it would not by itself rule out the futurist and premillennial view (i.e., Revelation is still prophetic of the future). The futurist view could still be correct if it was written when Chilton says it was, since the date is not determinant to the validity of its view. However, if Revelation was written even one day after the fall of Jerusalem, then it ceases to be a prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. The preterists themselves understand that their theory cannot be true if John wrote his prophecies in the book of Revelation at any point in time after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, as the well-known preterist Ken Gentry admitted. "If it could be demonstrated that Revelation was written twenty-five years after the fall of Jerusalem, Chilton's entire labor would go up in smoke." To get past the fundamental weakness in their position, the preterists have come up with several arguments to place John's writing of Revelation before A.D.70 when both Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed by Rome. Their main points are as follows. The Preterist's Claim that the Temple was still Standing The preterists argue that the apostle John's accurate description of the Temple in the book of Revelation can only be explained on the basis that the Temple was still standing when he wrote his book. In David Chilton's Days of Vengeance, he writes, "St. John's intimate acquaintance with the minute details of Temple worship suggests that 'the book of Revelation and the Fourth Gospel must have been written before the Temple services had actually ceased.'" A careful examination of the text of Revelation reveals only two verses that directly refer to the actual Temple in Jerusalem. Both of these references are found in Revelation 11, which clearly describes John's prophetic vision of a future Temple that will exist in the years just prior to Christ's return at the Battle of Armageddon. These genuine references to the Temple in Jerusalem are as follows: "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months" (Revelation 11:1-2). (No! this does not prove a literal Temple will be built in Jerusalem, as the detailed explanation of Albert Barnes in his "Notes on the New Testament" plainly show. I have given the true meaning of Rev.11 in other studies on this Website - Keith Hunt) All other specific references in Revelation to the Temple are either symbols or they clearly refer to the Temple in heaven. Those who wish to examine the evidence will find a number of verses that refer to the Temple in heaven including: Revelation 3:12; 7:15; 11:19;14:15,17;15:5-6, 8;16:1;16:17; 21:22. Could John have accurately described the Temple in A.D.96 if it was destroyed approximately twenty-six years earlier? I believe so, for the following reasons. As a righteous Jew, John would have attended the major Temple feasts (Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles) for a significant portion of his life, roughly fifty years from his being an adult until the Temple was destroyed. This means that John would have attended Temple services about 150 times, providing more than enough visits for him to accurately remember and describe the Temple service. The gospel of John declares that John was a friend of the high priest, which would have afforded him additional opportunities to visit the Temple. This again would provide ample reason for his accurate description. In addition, as a disciple and important Christian teacher, John taught often in the Temple for many years following the ascension of Christ. Acts 3 through 6 show several instances of John's presence at the Temple. Unless the preterists argue that John suffered from Alzheimer's or some other specific memory problem, there is no reason to believe that John could not remember the few details regarding the Jewish Temple that are recorded in Revelation, regardless of whether the Temple was still standing at the time of his writing the book of Revelation. A careful evaluation of the Temple imagery found in the Apocalypse finds that virtually every single detail is also found in the extensive Temple imagery found in the books of Chronicles, Kings, Daniel, Ezekiel, Joel, and Zechariah. If the preterists used the same argument they use to attack John to attack the prophetic vision of Ezekiel, they would be forced to argue that the enormous Temple of Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel 4o-46) must have been standing in Israel (and must have been visited by Ezekiel) during the prophet's exile during the Babylonian Captivity, to account for Ezekiel's highly detailed description and exact measurements of the future messianic Temple. However, all serious biblical scholars acknowledge that Ezekiel described in astonishing precision an inspired prophecy about a future Temple that will only come into existence at some point in the future when the Messiah returns. John would naturally have known the details of the Old Testament prophets' visions about the Temple. This scriptural knowledge can easily account for the few details regarding the Temple that are found in the book of Revelation, if his personal memories were not sufficient. Finally, since those who support preterism accept that the Scriptures, including Revelation, are divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit, there is no reason to believe that God would have allowed John to inaccurately record details about the Temple service, regardless of the state of the prophet's memory or whether the Temple was still standing when John penned his inspired book. In John's Gospel, the Lord promised that He will inspire and "guide you into all truth." He said, "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come" (John 16:13). Furthermore, John specifically affirms in his Revelation that he "heard and saw these things" and then recorded in his inspired writing what the angel had shown him in divine vision. Therefore, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is sufficient to account for John's accurate description of the Temple and his use of Temple imagery without any need for John to visit the Temple and see it with his own eyes before recording his divinely inspired visions. Logically, therefore, there is no basis for denying that John could accurately record the divine visions he received from the Holy Spirit. Critics Claim Irenaeus' Testimony is Ambiguous Despite the clear testimony of Irenaeus, that Revelation was written by John "toward the end of Domitian's reign," which was accepted universally by the early Church, David Chilton wrote: "Although some scholars have uncritically accepted the statement of St.Irenaeus (120-202) that the prophecy appeared 'toward the end of Domitian's reign' (i.e., around 96), there is considerable room for doubt about his precise meaning (he may have meant that the Apostle John himself 'was seen' by others). The language of St.Irenaeus is somewhat ambiguous; and, regardless of what he was talking about, he could have been mistaken." However, no one ever suggested that Irenaeus was "ambiguous" or "mistaken" until the recent appearance of preterism and its need to deny his compelling testimony that John wrote his prophecy during the tyranny of Emperor Domitian. While Irenaeus is the earliest historical source for the 96 date, there are numerous other historical sources from reliable early Church fathers that provide powerful evidence regarding the late date (as we will discuss in the next section). Indeed, no church historians disputed Irenaeus' statement about the Apocalypse for many centuries. In comparison, there are no historical sources from the second or third century that claim that John wrote the Apocalypse during the reign of Nero. To try to make their point, the preterists quibble over semantics. David Chilton and other preterists reject the normal interpretation that Irenaeus' statement refers to John's prophetic vision as recorded in the book of Revelation. Rather, they suggest that the word that, which is part of Irenaeus' phrase "For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian' s reign," actually refers to the apostle John himself, not his vision or his book. The Greek word translated "that" is an impersonal pronoun in the neuter gender, which is consistent with the interpretation of "that" referring to the book of Revelation. When we consider the nature of the Greek word "him," which is part of the phrase "it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision," we see that it is in the masculine gender. Therefore, the neuter gender of the original Greek word translated "that" cannot logically refer to the apostle John. In Greek grammar a word such as "that" will almost always refer to the nearest antecedent unless there is a clear reason not to do so based on the context. Irenaeus' statement must therefore refer to the Apocalypse itself, which again is consistent with a late date of 96. Preterists' Claim Others Depend Solely upon Irenaeus Since they have already impugned Irenaeus' credibility, the preterists dismiss other Church fathers' testimonies as relying solely upon Irenaeus for their facts. David Chilton wrote: St.Irenaeus, incidentally, is the only source for this late dating Revelation; all other "sources" are simply quoting from him. It is thus rather disingenuous for commentators to claim, as Swete does, that "Early Christian tradition is almost unanimous in assigning the Apocalypse to the last years of Domitian." Certainly, there are other early writers whose statements indicate that St.John wrote the Revelation much earlier, under Nero's persecution. Refuting the A.D. 68 Date of Revelation Despite Chilton's hopes, there is ample historical evidence from numerous independent sources that supports the 96 date. In addition, the historical evidence demonstrates that Irenaeus is not the sole source. Most of the other witnesses regarding the date of the Apocalypse do not even mention Irenaeus, let alone quote him. The record of the early Church fathers and historians who supported the 96 date for the writing of Revelation is unanimous until approximately 367. There is also evidence from the Scriptures that support the 96 dating of Revelation. Furthermore, the following material will demonstrate that the first clear statement, and only non-contradictory source, that supports the date of Nero appeared in approximately A.D.550, almost 450 years after the Apocalypse was written. Irenaeus (160) Irenaeus stated that John wrote the Revelation during the final years of Emperor Domitian's tyranny. In approximately 160, Irenaeus wrote about John's prophecies in Revelation concerning the name and number of the Antichrist. After warning against trying to identify the name of the Antichrist, he clearly identified "the apocalyptic vision," Revelation, as a book that appeared not long ago "almost in our day, towards the end of Domitiari s reign." 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. Irenaeus' declaration is consistent with the traditional 96 date for Revelation (the date of Domitian's death). However, his evidence definitely contradicts the preterists' suggested date of 66-68. As an educated scholar in the Roman Empire, Irenaeus described the appearance of the book of Revelation at the end of the reign of Domitian. Because he was born only thirty-five years after Domitiari's death, the well-respected Irenaeus is an extremely reliable historical source. We also view Irenaeus as a very credible source because he was a student of Polycarp, who had been personally tutored by the apostle John. There was a direct link of transmitted knowledge from the apostle John, to his disciple Polycarp, and ultimately to Irenaeus. Therefore Irenaeus' declaration regarding the authorship of the Apocalypse and the 96 date is of tremendous historical value. An article on Revelation in "The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible" states: "The earlier church writers converged on a date in the reign of Domitian (81-96); such appears to be the united testimony of Melito of Sardis, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Victorinus, and Eusebius--church fathers ranging from the second to the fourth century. Jerome too knows of this tradition." Clement of Alexandria (190) In approximately 190, Clement of Alexandria also confirmed that John wrote the Apocalypse in 96. He referred to an encounter between John and a backslidden robber, which occurred when the apostle returned from exile on Patmos "after the death of the tyrant." Since two Roman emperors were tyrants during the first century of the Christian era, the word tyrant could logically refer to either Nero or Domitian. However, in the same writing Clement repeatedly referred to John as being a very old and infirm man. John was less than sixty years old during the reign of Nero. Sixty would hardly be considered old and infirm. Thus, it is clear from Eusebius' "Ecclesiastical History" that Eusebius understood that Clement of Alexandria taught in his "Quis Dives Salvetur" that John was imprisoned on Patmos during the reign of Domitian. Hippolytus (200) Hippolytus, the bishop of Portus (170-236), was a Greek but is associated with the Latin Church. He was a disciple of Irenaeus and wrote extensively about the prophecies. A remarkable marble statue of Hippolytus sitting on a chair was discovered near the Tiburtine Road outside Rome in 1551. On the back of the marble chair, archeologists discovered a list of Hippolytus's books, demonstrating the breadth of his scholarship. Unfortunately, many of his works have not survived. Hippolytus was an important Christian leader, and as he lived so close to the time of the apostle John, his testimony (given in approximately 200) supporting the Domitian date for the Apocalypse is significant. In 1888 Professor John Gwynn from Dublin, Ireland, discovered five fragments of an ancient Syriac manuscript belonging to Hippolytus. It is entitled "Capita Adversus Caium" and rests now in the British Museum (section Cod. Mus. Brit. Orient. 560). Later that year, Professor Gwynn wrote an article in the Trinity College Dublin Review, entitled Hermathena, referring to the writings of Dionysius Barsalibi, the Bishop of Amid. Dionysius' manuscript states that Hippolytus and Irenaeus believed that John wrote the Apocalypse during his banishment under Emperor Domitian in 96. Professor John B. Lightfoot (1602-1675), vice-chancellor of Cambridge University, also refers to this manuscript in his authoritative series on ancient Christian writings entitled "Apostolic Fathers." Professor Lightfoot wrote: "Dionysius Barsalibi states that Hippolytus, like Irenaeus, holds the Apocalypse to have been written by John the Evangelist under Domitian (Gwynn; Hermathena vii. p.137)." This previously unknown confirmation from Hippolytus provides additional and compelling evidence in support of the A.D.96 date for the Apocalypse. Tertullian (200) Tertullian (160-240) was an important Christian theologian in the city of Carthage in North Africa. Tertullian's writings clearly support a 96 date for the Apocalypse in his references to the persecutions of the apostles. But if thou art near to Italy, thou hast Rome, where we also have an authority close at hand. What an happy Church is that! on which the Apostles poured out all their doctrine, with their blood: where Peter had a like Passion with the Lord; where Paul hath 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. Tertullian declared that Emperor Nero martyred Paul and Peter, yet he does not mention John's banishment to Patmos during this first imperial persecution of the sword by Nero. However, Tertullian specifically described the later banishment of Christians, which was the punishment meted out to the apostle John "afterwards," when he described the persecution that occurred during the last two years of Emperor Domitian's reign (95-96). Tertullian described John's miraculous survival from boiling oil during the persecution of Nero in A.D.66 when Peter and Paul were killed. Hovever, Tertullian then mentioned John's banishment "to an island," which occurred "afterwards." Numerous sources confirm this banishment occurred during the tyranny of Domitian in A.D.96. Possibly confusion developed centuries later regarding these two separate persecutions under Nero and Domitian, both of which were experienced by the apostle John. Origen (225) Origen was one of the greatest scholars of the early Church. He produced an incredible number of books during his long career as a teacher, theologian, and writer in Alexandria, Egypt. Writing in about 225, Origen confirmed the fact that John was banished during the reign of the brutal Domitian. In writing his commentary on the book of Matthew, Origen made the following statement about John's banishment: The King of the Romans, as tradition teaches, condemned John, who bore testimony, on account of the word of truth, to the isle of Patmos. John, moreover, teaches us things respecting his testimony, without saying who condemned him when he utters these things in the Apocalypse. He seems also to have seen the Apocalypse ... in the island. While one might wish that Origen had been more specific regarding his identification of the "King of the Romans," it is most probable that he referred to Emperor Domitian. Knowing that Irenaeus had clearly identified Domitian as the one who banished John to Patmos, and that this conclusion was widely taught in the early Church (see Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, et cetera), it is logical that Origen would have specifically named another emperor if it were so. Origen's comment therefore tends to confirm that Domitian is "the King of the Romans" who "condemned John." R. H. Charles, in his commentary on the Apocalypse, discussed the preponderance of evidence that leads to this conclusion. "Neither in Clement nor Origen is Domitian's name given, but it may be presumed that it was in the mind of the writers. " Victorinus (280) Another Christian writer, Victorinus (240-303), bishop of Petau, wrote an extensive "Commentary on the Apocalypse." In this book, Victorinus, who lived during the persecution under Emperor Diocletian, confirmed that John wrote his prophecy during the reign of Domitian. Victorinus' ministry overlapped that of early Church authorities such as Irenaeus, who personally knew those who were taught by the apostle John. Victorinus commented: When John said these things he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the labour of the mines by Caesar Domitian. There, therefore, he saw the Apocalypse; and when grown old, he thought that he should at length receive his quittance by suffering, Domitian being killed, all his judgments were discharged. And John being dismissed from the mines, thus subsequently delivered the same Apocalypse which he had received from God. Bishop Victorinus commented on his interpretation of the seven kings described in Revelation 17. In Victorinus' commentary he wrote about the time of their appearance in history: "The time must be understood in which the written Apocalypse was published, since then reigned Caesar Domitian; but before him had been Titus his brother, and Vespasian, Otho, Vitellius, and Galba. These are the five who have fallen. One remains, under whom the Apocalypse was written-Domitian, to wit." (Victorinus was incorrect in understanding the five who had fallen. See my study "The Beast of Daniel and Revelation" for the detailed understanding. That study can be found on this Website - Keith Hunt) Eusebius (325) The early Church historian Eusebius (265-339) quoted the passage from Irenaeus that was referred to earlier in this chapter. Once again, it confirms Revelation as being written "towards the end of Domitian's reign." It is worthwhile to note that Eusebius, who had available to him all of the records of the early Christian Church, personally and directly testified that John wrote his Apocalypse under the reign of Emperor Domitian. In his historical chapter that details the cruelty of Domitian toward Christians, Eusebius wrote: It is said that in this [Domitian's] persecution the apostle and evangelist John, who was still alive, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos in consequence of his testimony to the divine word. ... To such a degree, indeed, did the teaching of our faith flourish at that time that even those writers who were far from our religion did not hesitate to mention in their histories the persecution and the martyrdom which took place during it. And they, indeed, accurately indicated the time. For they recorded that in the fifteenth year of Domitian Flavia Domitilla, daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement, who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome, was exiled with many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ. While he questioned John's authorship at an earlier point in his life, Eusebius later concluded that the apostle John was the true author of the Apocalypse. He wrote about John's book of Revelation as follows: But after Domitian had reigned fifteen years and Nerva succeeded to the empire, the Roman Senate, according to the writers that record the history of those days, voted that Domitian's honors [decrees] should be cancelled, and that those who had been unjustly banished should return to their homes and have their property restored to them. It was at this time that the apostle John returned from his banishment in the island and took up his abode in Ephesus, according to an ancient Christian tradition. After Emperor Nerva had reigned a little more than a year, he was succeeded by Emperor Trajan. At that time the apostle and evangelist John, the one whom Jesus loved, was still living in Asia and governing the churches of that region, having returned after the death of Domitian from his exile on the island. And that he was still alive at that time may be established by the testimony of two witnesses. They should be trustworthy who have maintained the orthodoxy of the Church; and such indeed were Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria. It is noteworthy that Eusebius is the only early Christian historical source who directly referred to the evidence provided by Irenaeus in his own statement. Jerome (385) The uniform tradition of the early Church is that the apostle John was born near the time of Christ's birth, possibly later, which would be consistent with him being in his sixties during Nero's reign. For example, the writer Jerome (c.e.345-419), one of the greatest writers in the early Church, refers to this apostle as follows: "Yet John, one of the disciples, who is related to have been the youngest of the Apostles, and who was a virgin when he embraced Christianity, remained a virgin." In the same passage in Book I, Jerome refers to John as "a youth, I may say almost a boy" at the time of the formation of the Church following Christ's resurrection. In this passage Jerome refers to John as "a prophet, for he saw in the island of Patmos, to which he had been banished by the Emperor Domitian as a martyr for the Lord an Apocalypse containing the boundless mysteries of the future." The clearest historical statement is Jerome's declaration: "We may be sure that John was then a boy because ecclesiastical history most clearly proves that he lived to the reign of Trajan, that is, fell asleep in the sixty-eighth year [A.D.100] after our Lord's passion."" In his book Lives of Illustrious Men, Jerome wrote about Johns banishment. In the fourteenth year then after Nero, Domitian having raised a second persecution, he was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse, on which Justin Martyr and Irenaeus afterwards wrote commentaries. But Domitian having been put to death and his acts, on account of his excessive cruelty, having been annulled by the Senate, he [John] returned to Ephesus under Pertinax and continuing there until the time of the emperor Trajan, founded and built churches throughout all Asia, and, worn out by old age, died in the sixty-eighth year after our Lord's passion and was buried near the same city. Another very important reference to the date of John's writing of the Apocalypse is found in Jerome's Works, Vol. iv. ii. p.549 (Bened. Ed.), as recorded in Epistle 44 Pauloe et Eustochii ad Marcellam, where Jerome specifically describes the Apocalypse as being written "after the destruction of Jerusalem." Sulpicius Severus (401) Another interesting report by the Christian scholar Sulpicius Severus, in approximately 401, declares: "John, the Apostle and Evangelist, was banished by Domitian into the isle of Patmos; where he had visions, and where he wrote the book of the Revelation, which is either foolishly or wickedly rejected by many." Primasius (540) During the sixth century, Primasius was the bishop of Hadrumentum in north Africa until his death in approximately 560. He wrote a major commentary on the Apocalypse (around 540) which was partly based on the earlier commentary of Bishop Victorinus. In the preface to his commentary, Primasius wrote that John received his apocalyptic visions while he was banished and imprisoned in the mines on the island of Patmos under Caesar Domitian (96). Primasius wrote: "Moreover, he was unfortunately seen to be deserving, [having been] sent on account of Christ to the island of Patmos under Caesar Domitian, to be condemned to the mine and incarcerated there until the end [of his sentence]." Isodore of Seville (596) Isodore of Seville became the archbishop of the Spanish city Seville in approximately 600. As a prolific author, Isodore wrote numerous theological works including an important manual of Church doctrine as well as a twenty-volume encyclopedia. In his Chronicle in 596, Isodore wrote a history about a number of the apostles during the first century. He wrote about the martyrdom of Peter under Emperor Nero and the banishment of the apostle John under Emperor Domitian. Peter, as before said, went to Rome in the reign of Claudius, to oppose Simon Magus. Here the dispute with Simon Magus, and his death, are placed in the reign of Nero, and near the end of it; for about that time the martyrdom of the two forementioned apostles are supposed to have happened. Of Domitian, whose reign is computed to have from 81 to 96, he says, "He raised a persecution against the Christians. In his time the apostle John, having been banished into the island Patmos, wrote the Revelation." Venerable Bede (700) The Venerable Bede (Baeda Bede, 673-735) was a famous Church leader and considered the "father of English history." Despite living in the neighborhood of Northumbria (northern England) throughout his life, Bede became known as the most learned man in Europe. He wrote a comprehensive Church history of the English people. After completing his famous translation of John's Gospel, he died. His fame continued to spread after his death and he was finally called "Venerable Bede" in recognition of his special spiritual qualities. Writing about John's Apocalypse, Bede stated the following: "John wrote his epistles, and his gospel, all about the same time; for after the death of Domitian, being returned from his exile, he found the Church disturbed by heretics, which had arisen in his absence, whom, in his epistles, he often calls antichrists." Other Historical Testimony Another fascinating comment on the date of the Apocalypse is found in a curious historical source. An Anglican scholar, Daniel Whitby (1638-1726), who wrote Paraphrase and Commentary on the New Testament, commented on the fact that the old Roman Martyrology records that the Christian known as "Antipas" in John's Apocalypse (2:13) suffered martyrdom under the reign of Domitian. Obviously, if the Apocalypse of John included information about the death of Antipas during the persecution of Emperor Domitian (A.D.95-96), then John must have published the book of Revelation at some point after his release from the island of Patmos. Contradiction With the Spiritual State of the Seven Churches Another contradiction with the preterist theory is revealed in the spiritual state and history of the seven churches in Asia that John writes to in the first three chapters of Revelation. In 66, the apostle Paul was writing his second letter to Timothy at a time prior to John's involvement with these churches. Consider John's first letter to the church at Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7); John declares that Ephesus has "left [their] first love," that they have "fallen," and that they must return to "the first works" and "repent." This spiritual condition could only occur after the passing of a number of years following the initial establishment of the church during Paul's missionary trips. The description of the church's spiritual challenges is consistent with a church that has existed for decades. When Paul wrote to the Ephesians in the late 60s, the spiritual life of this church bore no resemblance to the spiritual backsliding described by John in Revelation. For example, in John's letter he warns of the Nicolaitans, while Paul makes no mention of them. The obvious conclusion is that John wrote Revelation much later, as an encouragement to the Church to stand against the terrible persecution of Domitian and the trials that would follow and to confront the teachings destroying their faith. Preterist Claims in Support of A.D.68 Date A careful examination of the historical records of the early Church during the first few centuries following the resurrection of Christ fails to reveal any reliable and undisputed Christian authority that supports the preterists' view. Surely if John, the well-known disciple and bishop of seven churches, had truly written his Apocalypse before the destruction of Jerusalem, there would be ample surviving testimony to this fact. In addition, one would expect to discover several commentaries on Revelation that would have adopted the interpretation whereby John's predictions applied to the events concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. The total absence of historical references to Jerusalem's destruction in any early Church commentaries on the book of Revelation provides compelling evidence that this theory was unknown to the Christians who lived closest to the life, ministry, and death of the apostle John. While they have failed to find historical references in the first few centuries of the Christian era, preterists do suggest several later historical sources they claim support their position. Epiphanius (367) The first suggestion that the apostle John wrote the Apocalypse prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70 appears in the writings of Epiphanius (315-403), the bishop of Salamis (Cyprus) in A.D.367. Epiphanius wrote that "John prophesied, or had the Revelation, in the Isle of Patmos, in the reign of Claudius" [who ruled Rome from 41-54]. Since there is no historical evidence about the persecution of Christians during the reign of Emperor Claudius, Epiphanius' statement is an obvious mistake with no historical credibility. In my research on this subject, I have not found any scholars who accept that Epiphanius was correct in assigning John's banishment to Patmos during the reign of Emperor Claudius; there is not the slightest evidence that any significant persecution of Christians occurred during the reign of this Roman emperor. In light of the fact that Epiphanius does not refer to Emperor Nero at all, nor to the period just before the destruction of Jerusalem, his evidence provides no credible support for the preterist position of the 68 date. Another significant problem of inconsistency regarding Epiphanius' writing is the fact that he referred to John returning from the isle of Patmos "after ninety years of age." This statement reveals an internal contradiction - John's old age of ninety supports the 96 date. Since John was among the youngest of Christ's disciples he could not have been ninety years old in A.D.68. Rather than dismiss Epiphanius' obvious error and ignoring his false statement, preterists have illogically argued that his incorrect testimony about Emperor Claudius should still be used to support an early A.D.68 date for the Apocalypse. Significantly, John Lawrence von Mosheim, one of the greatest Christian historians and evaluators of early Christian writings, wrote that Epiphanius' manuscripts were "full of blots and errors, through the levity and ignorance of the author." A Sixth-Century Syriac Version of the Apocalypse (550) Preterists also point to the Syriac version of the Apocalypse, translated about the sixth century. It contains a subscription or title that refers to Emperor Nero. The subscription to the translation states: "The Revelation which was made by God to John the Evangelist in the island of Patmos, whither he was banished by the Emperor Nero." This is the first and, in fact, the only clear and non-contradictory historical evidence that supports the preterist argument. However, the weakness of this evidence is that the Syriac version of the Apocalypse was actually translated for the first time about the sixth century, more than four hundred years after the banishment of the apostle John to Patmos. The Church historian Johann David Michaelis notes, "The Syriac version of the Apocalypse is now known to be a part of the Philoxenian version, which was made by Polycarp at the beginning of the sixth century." Therefore, while this is interesting, preterists still fail to provide any reliable evidence from the first few centuries of the Christian Church in support of their A.D.68 date. As noted earlier, Tertullian described the Apostle John's participation and supernatural survival from boiling oil during the persecution of Nero in A.D.66 when Peter and Paul were killed. He then mentioned his banishment "to an island," which occurred "afterwards," that numerous other historical sources confirm occurred during the tyranny of Domitian in A.D.96. It is possible that there was some confusion four centuries after the life of John regarding the two different persecutions experienced by the Apostle which may have resulted in the writer of the Syrian translation of the Apocalypse in the sixth century mistakenly believing that John composed the Apocalypse during the first persecution under Nero when he survived rather than the correct date of A.D.96 during the second wave of persecution when he was banished by Domitian. Arethas (762 or possibly later) One of the important sources cited by the preterists is the Christian writer Arethas, who they claim wrote his Commentary about the Apocalypse around 540. While some scholars, such as Moses Stuart and Andrew Robert Fausset, agree with the 540 date, others such as Henry Barclay Swete suggest that Arethas lived up to three centuries later (approximately 914). There is some evidence that Arethas was the archbishop of Caesarea and wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse in approximately 800. However, Arethas wrote his commentary on the beast of Revelation (13:2), and mentioned the Saracen capital city of Baghdad near ancient Babylon. In light of the historical fact that Baghdad was only built by the Saracen dynasty in 762, it appears that Arethas must have composed his commentary on the Apocalypse at some point in time after this late date. Arethas claimed that the Revelation was written "before the destruction of Jerusalem." However, Arethas contradicts this statement in his earlier comment on Revelation 1:9. There Arethas approvingly quotes Eusebius, referring to the Apocalypse as being written by the apostle John at the island of Patmos under the tyranny of Emperor Domitian, "sub Domitiano." Unfortunately for the preterists, the evidence of Arethas is hopelessly contradictory, and was written over seven centuries after the Apocalypse. It does not support their argument. Therefore, the sole non-contradictory evidence in favor of Nero's banishment of John remains the sixth-century translation of the Apocalypse. However clear it may be, it was written over four centuries after John wrote his book. Preterists Claim Domitian's Persecution of Christians Was Not Sustained David Chilton wrote the following in his book "Days of Vengeance": "A good deal of the modern presumption in favor of a Domitianic date is based on the belief that a great, sustained period of persecution and slaughter of Christians was carried on under his rule. This belief, cherished as it is, does not seem to be based on any hard evidence at all." However, this argument is quite irrelevant to the issue in question. The issue of the 96 date for the Apocalypse does not depend at all on a "great, sustained period of persecution and slaughter of Christians." Chilton's argument is weak and somewhat bizarre in that the Bible does not describe the details about this persecution other than to refer to the fact that John was banished to Patmos. Therefore, the ample historical evidence about Domitian's banishment of Christians is sufficient to support the conclusion that the apostle John was indeed imprisoned by Domitian. The historical records reveal that Nero killed Christians near Rome in relatively large numbers. However, there are no early historical sources that support the preterist assumption that widespread banishment of Christians occurred during the limited persecution during the short reign of Nero. Preterists Claim John Referred to Nero in Revelation 17:9-10 According to David Chilton in his book "Days of Vengeance": Our safest course, therefore, must be to study the Revelation itself to see what internal evidence it presents regarding its date. As we will see throughout the commentary, the Book of Revelation is primarily a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. This fact alone places St.John's authorship somewhere before September of A.D.70. Further, as we shall see, St.John speaks of Nero Caesar as still on the throne - and Nero died in June 68. This argument is circular and without serious merit. Chilton first concludes, without compelling evidence, that Nero is clearly mentioned in John's prophecy (because he accepts the 68 date) and then he uses his own assumption as evidence for his premise that John must therefore have written his prophecies in the Apocalypse during the reign of Nero. Critics Claim God's Revelation was "sealed up" (Daniel 9:24) To again quote from the preterist David Chilton: More important than any of this, however, we have a priori teaching from Scripture itself that all special revelation ended by A.D.70. The angel Gabriel told Daniel that the "seventy weeks" were to end with the destruction of Jerusalem (Daniel 9:24-27); and that period would also serve to "seal up the vision and prophecy" (Daniel 9:24). In other words, special revelation would stop - be "sealed up" - by the time Jerusalem was destroyed. The Canon of Holy Scripture was entirely completed before Jerusalem fell. However, the Word of God does not teach that "inspired revelation was sealed" in A.D.70. The evidence of the Scriptures reveals that the prophecies extend to the final events at the end of this age, which will culminate in the return of Jesus Christ at the Battle of Armageddon. The prophet Daniel wrote: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy" (Daniel 9:24). We need to analyze this important prophecy to determine when these vital messianic predictions will finally be fulfilled. The six prophecies are: (1) to finish the transgression; (2) to make an end of sins; (3) to make reconciliation for iniquity; (4) to bring in everlasting righteousness; (5) to seal up the vision and prophecy; and (6) to anoint the most Holy. If you were to ask any person unfamiliar with the controversy if these six conditions were fulfilled at any previous point in history, it is highly unlikely that they would choose the Roman army's destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70 as the event that fulfilled these six important predictions. Most people will acknowledge that sins are still being committed and that "everlasting righteousness" would not precisely describe the times we live in that are reported daily in our newspapers, the Internet, and the television news. (True as for the date A.D.70 but not true for the finished work of Christ on the cross in 30 A.D. The reader is asked to see some of the famous Bible Commentaries such as Albert Barnes; Adam Clarke; Matthew Henry. They correctly understood the 70 week prophecy of Daniel chapter 9. See on this Website the study called "Daniel's 70 Week Prophecy" - Keith Hunt) An Evaluation of the Preterist Position These main arguments of the preterists are actually astonishingly weak when we consider the absence of strong historical or scriptural evidence for their position. Despite their lack of conclusive evidence, the preterists assert in the strongest terms that their position for a 68 date for the Apocalypse is absolutely proven. However, even some of the top preterists admit that David Chilton's arguments in favor of an A.D.68 date for the Apocalypse are quite weak. One of the most interesting books in defense of the doctrine of preterism is "The Parousia" by J. Stuart Russell, first published anonymously in 1878. This book has been republished from 1983 through 1999. Russell's book strongly supports the full preterist theory that all prophecy was fulfilled by A.D.70. He suggests that the Second Coming and the rest of Revelation's prophecies were either fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem or they were fulfilled "spiritually." Russell honestly admitted that his "explanation of the predictions of the New Testament, instead of relieving the difficulty, embarrasses and perplexes us more than ever." Russell even acknowledged the objections of many orthodox Christians when they consider the preterist view that all of these powerful prophecies were fulfilled spiritually, without any observed historical events: "But how can we be expected to believe in fulfillments which are said to have taken place in the region of the spiritual and invisible when we have no witnesses to depose the facts?" There is not one example in the Bible of a prophecy that was fulfilled in an allegorical, non-historical manner. Answering Objections to the Literal Kingdom Critics who reject the Millennial Kingdom often raise objections to its literal nature because they claim several scriptural passages support their view that the kingdom of God is purely spiritual. Jesus stated: "My kingdom is not of this world." In John 18:36 Jesus declared, "My kingdom is not of this world." Some suggest that Jesus affirmed in this passage the non-material and purely spiritual nature of His kingdom. However, Christ revealed that His coming kingdom is not part of this present, sinful, spiritual "world" system. His kingdom will be announced on earth at His glorious and triumphant return with His saints. "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world" (1 John 2:16). The Lord sharply defined the difference between His future kingdom and the present world of sinful rebellion. The gospel of John revealed Christ's separate view of this present sinful world in contrast to the glorious sinless kingdom of God which will be revealed at His Second Coming. "And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world" (John 8:23). "Behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Some claim that Christ's words "Behold, the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21) support their view that the kingdom of God exists only in the souls of believers. However, this is incorrect. Jesus was not stating that the holy kingdom of God existed in the hearts or spirits of the wicked Pharisees who rejected His Messianic claims. The Amplified Bible renders this verse as, "the kingdom of God is within you and among you." Jesus was referring to the promise of the kingdom of God as existing in the midst of the Jewish nation at that very time because Christ as the Messianic King represented that coming kingdom. (Not entirely so. There are two sides to the Kingdom, the present one within the minds and hearts of the saints, which is NOW - see Colossians 1:13. And we have the Kingdom yet to come to earth at the coming of Christ. There is a "spiritual" and "physical" side to the Kingdom. So depending on HOW and for what purpose you are using it, either one is correct. Jesus was trying in that context to get those Pharisee beyond just looking for physical signs and a physical Kingdom. If the heart is not right, the physical earthly coming Kingdom you will never see, for you will not be part of it - Keith Hunt) "The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink." Others point to Paul's words, "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost"(Romans 14:17). In other words, Paul was saying that the Kingdom of God is not simply public observances. These inspired words of the apostle cannot mean what the critics suggest - that the future kingdom will not involve physical reality such as eating and drinking. For example, Jesus declared, "Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God" (Luke 14:15). In another passage, the Lord stated, "And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Luke 22:29-30). "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." Those who believe in a purely spiritual kingdom claim support from the passage where Paul warns that "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 15:50). They suggest this passage teaches that Christ's kingdom is not a real one. However, the Scriptures repeatedly declare that the coming kingdom will exist on earth under the direct rule of Jesus Christ as "King of Kings." Paul revealed that our present mortal and corruptible bodies are not designed for the holy and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus will supernaturally resurrect the bodies of all believers to enable us to rule and reign with Christ forever in His eternal kingdom. "Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1 Corinthians 15:51-53). The kingdom of God will be ushered in at the return of the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matthew 25:34) The Preterist Denial of the Imminent Second Coming of Christ Though we have discussed in depth the issue of the date when Revelation was written, the implication of the preterist's teaching must not be lost. The point of the preterist's claim that the writing of Revelation occurred in the year 68 is to show that Revelation was fulfilled in 70, when Rome destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. They argue that Revelation holds no promise of the imminent return of Christ. Their additional points are as follows. The Preterist Argument - The Time Texts Preterist scholars reject the teaching of a future premillennial return of Christ and specifically point to New Testament phrases such as "the Lord is at hand," "the coming of the Lord draweth, nigh," et cetera. They argue that such phrases demand that the Lord must have returned within a very short time of the original utterance of these prophecies or the prophecies would be false. The problem of the proper interpretation of these time passages has led to several unfortunate responses: (1) Some have chosen to ignore the prophecies of the Second Advent on the grounds that they are vague and not literal. (2) Others have rejected these prophecies as false because Christ did not return in the generation when these specific predictions were given. (3) Finally, some have chosen to interpret these "time prophecy" passages as being fulfilled in the Roman destruction of Israel and Jerusalem. The preterists argue that these predictions specifically demand that the prophesied events must be fulfilled within a few years of the original prophecy. The Time of Christ's Return Preterists often refer to three specific texts that they claim show that the Second Coming of Christ must have occurred in the first century (i.e.,70). First Time Text-Matthew-10:23 "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come" (Matthew 10:23). They claim this passage clearly points to the coming of "the Son of Man" in the lifetime of the disciples. However, many scholars admit that Matthew arranged his Gospel according to subject rather than a strict chronological sequence. The prophecy of Matthew relates to the prophecy given by Christ on the Mount of Olives, recorded in Matthew 24. The prophecy of Matthew 10:21-23 will be fulfilled when the Jews preach the "gospel of the Kingdom" during the tribulation, ending with the Second Coming. The prophecy's use of the title the "Son of Man" always appears as a reference to the Second Coming of Christ. This prophetic phrase, expressing Jesus' humanity, points to His visible, personal coming. Nothing corresponding to Christ's visible and personal coming as described in numerous prophecies including Matthew 24 and Revelation 19 ever occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem, according to the historical records of Flavius Josephus, who lived at the time and wrote The Jewish War. For example, Jesus prophesied that, "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened" (Matthew 24:21-22). The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70 was indeed horrific with the death of an estimated 1,250,000 Jewish citizens. However, Jesus prophesied an unprecedented global "great tribulation" so devastating that if He delayed His return "no flesh [would] be saved." Revelation's prophecies declare, "behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth" (Revelation 6:8). If words have any meaning whatsoever, then we must reject the claim of the preterists and amillennialists who declare that these scriptural predictions and numerous others about the coming Tribultion were fulfilled in A.D.70. Obviously, these prophecies must be fulfilled at some point in the future. (Of course this must be true, for horrific as the slaughter was in 70 A.D. it cannot come close to the horrific killing during the Second World War. Yet there is a time coming [last 42 months of this age] that will make the killing of WW2 look like a Sunday-afternoon picnic - Keith Hunt) Second Time Text-Matthew 16:27-28 "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (Matthew 16:27-28) Many amillennialists and postmillennial preterists who state that the kingdom of God appeared spiritually (including the Second Coming) at the destruction of Jerusalem point to Christ's words in both the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. These critics of the millennial kingdom suggest that Christ's statement demands that the Second Coming must occur during the lifetime of those disciples who heard His prophecy and wrongly conclude that Jerusalem's destruction is the correct fulfillment. However, the very next verse in the passage provides the correct answer to the question. "And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias [Elijah] talking with him" (Matthew 17:1-3). Only six days after His prophecy, the same disciples, Peter, James, and John accompanied Jesus up into a mountain and they personally saw the glory of the Lord revealed as they witnessed, "the Son of man coming in his kingdom." To emphasize the glory of His appearing to the disciples, God the Father announced in "a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him" (Matthew 17:5). The Scriptures repeatedly refer to the glorification of the resurrected saints at Christ's appearing. The apostle Paul taught of the glorification of the resurrected saints as follows: "If so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God" (Romans 8:17-19). The transfiguration of Christ together with the appearance of the resurrected saints, Elijah and Moses, provided powerful confirmation to His disciples that God will resurrect and glorify all of those who place their faith and trust in Christ when He ushers in the kingdom of God. Third Time Text-Matthew 24:34 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" (Matthew 24:34) Preterists such as Ken Gentry wrote about Matthew 24:34 "This statement of Christ is indisputably clear and absolutely demanding of a first-century fulfillment of the events in the preceding verses, including the Great Tribulation." However, the question of the correct time indicated by Christ when He refers to "this generation" in Matthew 24:34 is clarified when we consider the related phrase "all these things," which appears in this verse as well as the preceding verse, "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors." In other words, Jesus Christ prophesied that the "last days" generation that sees "all these things" occur will not cease to exist as a generation until every one of the events of the future tribulation period are literally fulfilled. Jesus is ultimately speaking to those who will be living in the generation that will personally witness the fulfillment of the prophetic signs of Matthew 24. Understanding The Time Texts The correct solution to the problem of these "time texts" is found in the understanding that these prophets were writing with the specific style used in the Old Testament Jewish prophetic form. Israel's ancient prophets, such as Isaiah, Joel, and Zechariah, prophesied about God's promise of ultimate national salvation, the coming day of the Lord, and the coming of the Messiah in prophetic language that pointed to its being close at hand. However, both history and the New Testament reveal that a number of these specific prophecies were fulfilled centuries after the prediction was given. It is significant that no scholar has ever objected to the language of these Old Testament prophets on the basis that these predictions referred to events far in the future, despite the fact that the prophecy used language that described events as though they were about to be fulfilled. Obviously God, who is eternal, views time quite differently than we do. The Word of God specifically refers to this phenomenon in the following passages: "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night" (Psalms 90:4). "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Peter 3:8). For example, consider the "time text" references found in the language of several Old Testament prophecies: "Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty" (Isaiah 13:6). "For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near, a cloudy day; it shall be the time of the heathen" (Ezekiel 30:3). "Alas for the day! for the day of the Lord is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come" (Joel 1:I5). "Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the Lord cometh, for it is nigh at hand" (Joel 2:1). "Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision" (Joel 3:14). "For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head" (Obadiah 15). "Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord God: for the day of the Lord is at hand: for the Lord hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests.... The great day of the Lord is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the Lord: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly" (Zephaniah 1:7,14). "Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee" (Zechariah 14:1). It is obvious that each of these Old Testament prophecies contains prophetic language dealing with time ("the day of the Lord is at hand") that is very similar to the language used by the New Testament prophecies in reference to the nearness of Christ's Second Coming. The language of these inspired prophets contain phrases such as "near," and "at hand," yet these inspired prophecies were given by God twenty-five centures ago. The language confirms that the prophesied event is as certain in its future fulfillment as if it had already happened. Implications of the Preterists' Beliefs In David Chilton's book Paradise Restored, he revealed the implications of his rejection of this historic hope of the Church. Speaking about God's promise of the coming Messiah, he said: The God of the covenant told His people that He would bless them to the thousandth generation of their descendants (Deuteronomy 7:9). That promise [the Second Coming] was made (in round figures) about 3,400 years ago. If we figure the biblical generation at about 40 years, a thousand generations is forty thousand years. We've got 36,600 years to go before this promise is fulfilled. Incredibly, some preterists such as David Chilton actually claim that Jesus Christ will not return for over 36,000 years! Tragically, the rejection of the truth of the premillennial and imminent return of Christ leaves those who embrace this teaching to face a future that offers little hope of a dramatic spiritual victory over the forces of Satan. While all Christians rejoice at the wonderful growth of the Church in the Third World in these last days, we also observe the tragic growth of unrestrained evil. The world is filled with historically unprecedented evil developments including devastating chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons of mass destruction, the genocide of millions in Africa, concentration camps holding millions (including many innocent Christians) in China for "reeducation," the harvesting of organs from Chinese prisoners, partial birth and forced tri-semester abortions, the slavery of millions in Africa and other nations, and the sexual abuse of millions of young children The preterists who reject the literal teaching of the scriptural prophecies that Christ's Second Coming is imminent and future are left with a viewpoint that teaches that Satan will continue his powerful and evil opposition to Christ for many thousands of years. They claim that their view is optimistic in that they believe that the Church will eventually, after thousands of years, Christianize the world and then deliver the kingdom to Christ. However, I believe this view is, in reality, pessimistic because it inevitably accepts the continued growth of evil in this world for thousands of years while the majority of humans will continue to be lost to an eternity in hell. If someone believes that Christ will not return until a thousand years after the world is converted to Christianity, it is difficult to see how the doctrine of the Second Coming can seriously motivate their witnessing, their daily walk in holiness, or their hope for His return. Yet Jesus Christ taught His followers to watch constantly for His return because, although He might tarry, He will definitely return for us. Jesus warned: For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch. Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cock crowing, or in the morning: And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch. (Mark 13:34-35,37). Pessimism or Optimism? Postmillennial and amillennial critics of the premillennial return of Christ often complain that our view is somehow pessimistic. The Time of Christ's Return For example, the preterist, post-millennial writer David Chilton claimed that those who believe in the premillennial Second Coming (such as this author and most prophecy teachers) are supporters of "pessimillennialism." Chilton declared that the "pessimillennialists" are "content to remain historical (presecond coming) losers." The truth is that both postmillennialism and amillennialism represent a real surrender to theological "pessimism" because they reject the hope of Christ's imminent return in favor of their spiritually pessimistic view that the world shall continue in sinful rebellion for many thousands of years while they gradually Christianize the world. These critics deny the hope of the prophesied triumphant return of Christ to usher in the glorious kingdom of God. Those who long for Christ's imminent premillennial return totally reject this false characterization that we are pessimistic. Our optimism is based on our confidence in the inspired Word of God and its glorious promises that Jesus will triumph over evil when He returns as King of Kings. Premillennialists are pessimistic about the likelihood of this present evil world becoming truly Christian before Christ's return because the Scriptures deny this. However, we are totally optimistic about the Bible's prophecies that Christ will triumphantly return suddenly in an evil generation such as ours. Then Christ will defeat Satan and usher in the kingdom of God with righteousness and justice forever. The message of prophecy is not a pessimistic view of "doom and gloom" but rather a glorious announcement that the Church's time of waiting is almost over. The King is coming to victoriously set up His long awaited kingdom. As we contemplate the prophetic events that are being fulfilled in our generation we are reminded that Jesus Christ commanded His followers: "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh" (Luke 21:28). Someday soon the angels will proclaim the glorious truth: "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Revelation 11:15). This is truly the greatest and most optimistic message ever proclaimed. ........................... Note: There is not one book of the New Testament that has a verse contained within itself that tells us the "date" the book was written. This chapter by Jeffrey I fully agree with and endorse. From the historical and analytical perspective I believe Jeffrey is quite correct in the arguments he presents here. Keith Hunt
|Previous Page
|Top of Page
|Next Page
|Navigation List:
|Word Search:


text:
Contact Us
We offer a most flexible training schedule
It doesn't matter whether you are in Israel for a short business trip, a relaxed vacation or social gathering.
You can join one of our classes even for a short, 1 session, experience.
To book you Krav Maga session:
Fill in the form or call us +972-54-3444305

subset: commoncrawl


text:
One of the region's most striking areas of outstanding natural beauty, Fossil Rock is a top spot for hiking, camping and fossil hunting.
This large natural rock formation is jam-packed with marine fossils. The area around Fossil Rock is being turned into a nature reserve for oryx, gazelle and mountain deer, while the boutique Mleiha Fossil Rock Lodge is scheduled to open soon.
Clearly visible from over 25km away, Fossil Rock is located near Mleiha, an hour's drive from Sharjah city. The area is famous for its many archaeological sites.
A hike to the top of Fossil Rock is well worth it for the amazing views of the surrounding dunes. Explore nearby Camel Rock or join a 4WD tour run by the Mleiha Archaeological Centre to learn about the area's unique geological features.


text:
Gillian Dunphy graduated from University College Cork in 1998 with a Degree in Social Science and a H. Dip in Computer Science.
Gillian has many years experience working in Industry with Companies such as Ericsson, Ennis Information Age Services, Teles and RSA Security both in technology roles and in project Management and Sales.
She also has a number of years recruitment experience having worked for both Skills Group Recruitment and Premier Recruitment.
Gillian is based in our Shannon office having joined CareerWise as a Recruitment Consultant in May 2018.
Upload your CV to apply for as many jobs as you like.upload your CV
CareerWise Recruitment. EastGate Village, EastGate, Little Island, Cork.
Phone: +353 (0) 21 206 1900
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Are you looking for a 75023 Dentist and experienced disappointments and failures? Then worry no further as Shifa Dental is now available. The clinic has created a reputation of being the best, well trained and passionate on what we do. The clinic deals in dental appointment Plano and has in the past helped its clients all over Texas. The main reason the clinic has grown, is the fact after having a procedure, the clients are always back for more. The Medicaid Garland dentist, will always target the affected area, to minimize any pain or side effects. Our world renowned dental technology ensures that your smile is restored to its original form. While hiring, we use rigid rules that govern the process thus ensuring all our personnel are the best. Policies like this has helped us cement our name as the absolute best in Plano, giving us respect and a loyal customer base. We are not biased and ensure all our business is carried out fast and efficiently.
One of our many achievements, as the best 75023 Dentist is investing in professionals, who have experience and technical knowledge to make clients happy. As with all business, our competition tries and fails to emulate us. Booking a dentist appointment Plano has never been so relaxing and professional. We serve residents of Plano and its surrounding areas, with an office time that ensures you never miss an appointment or worry in the case of an emergency. Our cost has been praised as being pocket friendly and budget friendly to most people within the Plano area. We treat any Medicaid garland clients, no matter what the injury is, and enable you to resume normal schedules. The office also ensures any problems or question a client has is resolved. The manner in which our dentist handle clients has cemented our status as the best dental clinic and ensured we have the most recurring clients in Plano. The clinic has a long history of performing well and dedication to medicine than anyone else, helping us be number one every year.
As with everything else technology Is changing the dental industry. This is why our 75023 dentist office trains and hires personnel often, who understand how to operate advanced tools. Whether a client has a dentist appointment Plano for cosmetic dentistry, restorative surgery, or recurring services, our office will ensure you are looked at with the best technology. The office also deals with family dentistry where we treat all your loved ones at a cost effective way, making your children smile better. Your children will always be treated by professionals, who ensure clients are looked after with unwavering dental care at all times. We also include a member's club where clients can get discounts and special prizes. We also create exclusive discounts to members such as 60% the normal fee, with almost all major insurance companies being accepted. Sometimes the discounts ca The club is essentially exclusive and ensures all its owners reap the full benefits of Shiva dental. So what are you waiting for? Try the clinic and you will never regret.
Find more information relating to 75023 Dentist, and Dentist Appointment Plano here.


text:
Satin-finish dress
Satin-finish culottes
Straight satin-finish trousers
Silky midi skirt
Linen trousers
Jacquard T-shirt
Cotton trousers
Wide-leg Tencel® trousers
Mandarin collar T-shirt
Frilled t-shirt
Cuffed linen trousers
Linen shorts
Ruffled T-shirt
Puff sleeve shirt
Long ruffled cotton dress
Medium polka dot dress
Medium polka dot blouse
Medium polka dot trousers
Dotty classic briefs
Dotty bandeau bikini top
Dotty Brazilian briefs
Dotty triangle bikini top
Brazilian bikini briefs with polka dot print
Classic bikini briefs with polka dot print
Bow detail halterneck bikini top
Brazilian bikini briefs with ties
Strap detail hipster bikini briefs
Asymmetric bow trikini
Tie triangle swimsuit
Bow back swimsuit
Seersucker bikini top
Seersucker classic briefs
High-leg seersucker Brazilian briefs
Copper top
Copper Brazilian bikini briefs
Copper classic bikini briefs
Strap detail bikini top
Strap detail classic briefs
Strap detail Brazilian briefs
Underwired bikini top
Plain thong
Classic bikini briefs with ties
Classic strap bikini briefs
Double ruffle triangle bikini top
Red ruffled triangle swimsuit
V-cut Brazilian bikini briefs
Frill swimsuit
Black structured triangle swimsuit
Structured black bikini top
Brazilian bikini briefs with strap detail
Classic structured strappy bikini briefs
Halterneck bikini top
High-waisted knot bikini briefs
Knot hipster bikini briefs
Beaded triangle bikini top
Beaded classic bikini briefs
Ruffled bikini top
Classic bikini bottoms with ruffles
Black ruffled wrap trikini swimsuit
Asymmetrical ruffle swimsuit
Crossover bikini top
Ruched Brazilian bikini briefs
Classic ruched bikini briefs
Structured triangle bikini top
Structured Brazilian briefs
Structured classic briefs
V-neck swimsuit
Triangle bikini top with khaki spots
Brazilian bikini briefs with khaki spots
Classic bikini briefs with khaki spots
Leopard spot bikini top
Leopard spot high-rise bikini briefs
Leopard print Brazilian bikini bottoms
Leopard print triangle swimsuit
Classic leopard spot print bikini briefs
Leopard spot long tunic
Leopard spot long dress
Patterned dress
Cuffed spotted trousers
Floral bows swimsuit
Floral bikini top
V-cut floral bikini briefs
Classic floral bikini briefs
Indian floral triangle bikini top
Indian floral classic bikini briefs
Indian floral Brazilian bikini briefs
Satin midi tunic
Tropical Brazilian bikini bottoms
Tropical bikini top
Tropical hipster bikini briefs
Palm tree print bikini top
Classic bikini briefs in recycled polyamide fabric with recycled polyester lining. Side slit detail and African palm tree print.
Palm leaf Brazilian bikini bottoms
Palm tree print swimsuit
Plain triangle bikini top
Bikini bottoms with straps
Floral triangle bikini top
Floral classic briefs
Off-shoulder crochet dress
Wide-leg crochet trousers
Short crochet tunic
100% linen tunic
OYSHO logo towel
Breton stripe towel
Crochet tunic
Multicolour stripe open tunic
Knotted crossover jumpsuit
Short-sleeve bow T-shirt
Ties classic bikini briefs
Bandeau slit swimsuit
Square neck swimsuit
Low stock
Be the first to receive the latest news.
Payment systems
Download our App
We have updated the information about the use of your personal data contained in our Privacy Policy, which we invite you to read here.
We use cookies to improve your experience in our website. By continuing to browse this website you accept our cookies policy. READ MORE


text:
The first time we tasted crispy shallots in a salad, we knew we'd hit the jackpot. These crunchy, salty bits of deliciousness have become one of our favorite ways to impress dinner guests (even the salad non-believers). Crispy shallots first debuted in our Roasted Squash Salad ... Read more →
Roasted Squash Salad with Crispy Shallot & Balsamic Reduction
This may be one of my favorite salads to date! And that's saying a lot considering we have heavy hitters like our Loaded Kale Salad and Garlicky Kale Salad with Crispy Chickpeas (both of which are total home runs). This seasonal salad relies on winter squash, my favorite ... Read more →
Roasted Squash, Pecan, & Pomegranate Salad
Thanksgiving Week Extravaganza recipe #2? Squash! Do you remember what I did last year? I made a Butternut Squash Sweet Potato Casserole (yes, a hot dish) for Thanksgiving. And? It was amazing! My aunts even made it at my grandma's house for the big day! The Midwesterner in me ... Read more →
Pea Pesto Pasta with Sun-Dried Tomatoes & Arugula (Vegan + GF)
Lately, I've been trying to focus on protein. No, I'm not ignoring how food tastes and shoveling protein shakes in my face. I'm going about things in a more intentional way, considering how I can thoughtfully incorporate more healthy protein sources into my daily diet. Ya ... Read more →
Apple Pecan Arugula Salad
Can I talk to you about salad, and also, life? First, salad. No one should be forced to have a conversation on an empty stomach. ... Read more →
Strawberry Arugula Salad
Sweet Peppery Crunchy Fresh Satisfying All of that fun goes into this fantastic salad. Hello, summer! ... Read more →
Warm Roasted Butternut Squash Salad
For some reason I've never been a big squash person. In fact, the first time I even tried or touched a butternut squash was last fall when I showed up early for a party and my friend put me to work peeling and cubing one (which, by the way, is not an easy thing to do for a squash ... Read more →


text:
Monday was the first day in which it finally felt like winter was done.
Monday we beat it – warm temperatures and thunderstorms vanquishing all but the most persistent snow. The dramatic flair of the thunderstorms added to my wonderful feeling of victory and accomplishment. I felt as if we should all be commended for a winter well-spent and soundly overcome. It has been a long winter. Sure, we had a couple of warm days prior to this week but we were still below freezing at night (and some days, too) and we were still having flurries. On top of that, the snow in the yard was at least knee-deep with no bare spots to speak of. In other words, the spring warm-up felt weak and tentative, as if winter might come roaring back in at any moment.
The hearty folks of Montpelier do not let a little thing like snow and blustery 20-degree days keep them from embracing the changing seasons. Until this week the only real difference in the weather was the sunlight. The sun is higher in the sky and the light is noticeably more intense. Also, whereas the sun would be falling behind the mountains by 3 or 4 in the winter, we already have light until well after 7 pm and it is up well before we are crawling out of bed around 7. Taking the sun as the sign of change, a few weeks ago folks began to put away their winter coats and boots (we've been in them since November, after all). We're sick of the sweaters, vests and wool socks. We've rediscovered footwear that is not waterproof and temperature-rated. We've pulled out the short-sleeves and put away the hats and mittens. We've been marching around town under-dressed in the local equivalent of a rain-dance. Dressing for the way we want it to be.
While Montpelierites have been dressing for a spring for a few weeks now, with this week's weather it feels as if the climate is really on our side. Neighbors, who have had little contact for a few months as we tended to hide-out inside from the dark and cold unless we were out in it on skis, sleds or snowshoes, have come out to fraternize – extending dinner invitations, planning summer parties, chatting about camping trips and gardening plans as the children splash in the puddles and rivulets of melting snow. I have been here long enough to know that the low buzzing of sociability will crescendo through chatter to roaring litany of impromptu visits and conversations, community events, spontaneous and planned lawn parties, hikes, swims, paddles and rambles in the pasture. The days will be 16-hours-and-a-gorgeous-sunset long and there still will not be enough time for all that is wonderful about Summer in Vermont.
By August we will all be a bit a tired and notice the intermittent surfacing of grumpiness on the streets of downtown. The days will be getting shorter, the nights cooler and we will quietly anticipate the calm and quiet solitude of the winter while we explicitly anticipate the fall foliage and the harvest. The frenetic pace will not subside as scheduled talks, community organizing and school activities displace trips to the reservoir. It will not be over until Halloween (or maybe Thanksgiving). The first frost will be long past, the foliage lying on the ground under the first light snows – not quite enough for sledding but the kids will give it a try all the same. We will embrace the prospect of a long-night's sleep and the way the world gets so quiet during heavy snows. We will prepare the winter gear. We will dig around in the closet for our flannels and fleeces, our wool socks and synthetic base-layers, greeting them like old friends as we stow away the light-weight shoes and clothes we will have no use for until this time next year.
I wouldn't have it any other way.


text:
The Cybersecurity Capacity Portal is taking the next step in its evolution.
The Global Cybersecurity Capacity Centre (GCSCC), University of Oxford, invites interested individuals with expertise in cybersecurity capacity building to become a correspondent for the Cybersecurity Capacity Portal and to share their expertise on a regular basis. The purpose of a correspondent is to provide content to the Cybersecurity Capacity Portal and to support its goal to be a central source for stakeholders around the world to access expertise and knowledge on how, when and why to develop capacity in cybersecurity.
You can send your profile and writing examples to the Portal Manager, Carolin Weisser, email@example.com.


text:
South Korea Conducting Survey Over ICOs
- By : Karan Balwani
- Category : ICO News
- Tags: blockchain, blockchain technology, FSS, Hong Nam-ki, ICO, ICOs, Regulations, South Korea, Survey
An increasing number of countries look to regulate the cryptocurrency market. The South Korean government has said that their stance on ICOs will be released after a survey this November. This additional time taken to give its decision is due to the survey that is currently being conducted by the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS).
The survey is being sent to blockchain companies that currently exist in the country as a means for the government to gain information. This will allow them to come to a concrete decision. For now, the ICOs are still banned in the country. This is forced investors and users to look for alternative places to investment opportunities.
Even though ICOs are banned in the country, the stakeholders that are part of the Blockchain industry will need to wait a little longer to know the final decision by the government on grounds of legalization. Hong Nam-ki, Chief, Office for Government Policy Coordination confirmed this information on Thursday while speaking with the parliamentary audit team. The government is looking to take a well-informed decision on ICOs and blockchain companies. This will also help protect the country's population against incidents of fraud.
Nam-ki further said that the Financial Supervisory Services (FSS) of South Korea has shared the survey with local blockchain businesses. The government wants additional opinions on the existing legal and regulatory framework for this particular sector. FSS is responsible for creating crypto-related policies including anti-money laundering measures.
The government is also hosting talks with existing blockchain companies on ICOs. Although there is an ongoing ban enforced in the country, multiple companies are planning to launch an ICO project. Nam-ki confirmed that the final decision will be given by November.
The Survey
FSS has been given the responsibility of carrying out this survey on ICOs. As reported by the Korea Economic Daily, the blockchain companies will need to specify the ICO project that they are working with or are planning to invest in. They would be required to justify the tokenization and the methods used for the distribution of the same.
The FSS has made the survey participation optional for the blockchain companies. The government seeks to understand ICOs better and is not planning to impose sanctions on existing companies. Some blockchain businesses are skeptical when it comes to some of the survey questions. This is because currently, it is illegal to be involved with ICOs in South Korea.
Choi Jong-Ku, FSS Chairman said that the government of South Korea understands the potential of blockchain technology. He said that ICOs help startups raise capital for their platform, it has a high chance of being exploited. Ever since the ban on ICOs was enforced, the companies planning to launch their own ICOs are doing it outside of South Korea.


text:
Membership Code of Practice & Terms and Conditions
Code of Practice
Members will:
- Have a valid SIRET number.
- Be clear, honest and professional with customers.
- Be realistic about a start date and how long work will take.
- Arrive on the date and time agreed.
- Treat customers, property and the environment with respect.
- Be clear if there are any call out charges.
- Provide a written devis, an additional contract for variations, and a written invoice, if requested.
- Provide proof of insurance, trade-related qualifications and client references, if requested.
- Maintain any registration, qualification and insurance required by French law.
- Only undertake work within the scope of the insurance policy.
- Keep customers updated about all aspects of the work including any problems, additional costs and delays.
- Deal with customer enquiries, complaints and problems promptly, proactively and professionally.
- Encourage customers to submit a review.
- Alert Artisan Central staff within 48 hours of any changes to their business which affects the accuracy of their profile, for example cancellation of business insurance, no longer trading etc.
General Terms and Conditions
Artisan Central may vary, amend, change, or modify the Membership Terms and Conditions from time to time and any such changes will take effect from the date of posting on the Website.
- Members will have read the Artisan Central Code of Practice, Membership Terms and Conditions and User Agreement, and will comply with them throughout their membership or risk having their account suspended or membership refused.
- The member is the registered owner and the business is registered in France.
- Members will ensure a minimum of two customer reviews are posted within the first six months of membership and a minimum of two current reviews thereafter.
- All members must have Responsabilité Civile Professionnel cover (third party liability) in place as a minumum.
- Members will alert Artisan Central staff within 48 hours of any changes to the business which affects the accuracy of their profile, for example cancellation of insurance, no longer trading etc.
- Members will provide the necessary documentation for pre-membership and ongoing checks, including a call to the insurance provider if necessary.
- Membership does not confer any right to use Artisan Central Intellectual Property, including the brand and logo, except where expressly provided in writing.
- Members agree their profile information may be used by Artisan Central for media/PR/advertising.
- As a minimum, members will provide
- proof of ID and trading address (compulsory).
- proof of business insurance (compulsory).
- proof of qualifications/accreditations (if applicable).
- two customer references (compulsory).
Membership Cancellation
- After two months' membership, members may cancel membership at any time.
- To cancel members must submit one month's notice in writing (registered mail) to Artisan Central's registered address.
- The 'termination date' is one month from the proof of posting date or the date the letter was received (if sent unregistered).
- It is the responsibility of the member to cancel any direct debit or other automatic payment and to ensure fees are paid up to and including the termination date.
- Fees paid in advance will be refunded (whole months only based on the termination date) less any advance payment discount applied.
- When membership is suspended by Artisan Central any automatic payment should be cancelled by the member with immediate effect. For fees paid in advance, the remainder of the fee will be refunded (whole months only) less any advance payment discount applied. The member's profile will be removed with immediate effect.
- Refunds for automatic payments which continue to be paid to Artisan Central after the termination date will not be refunded.
- If an automatic payment is cancelled by a member or the member fails to send payment by the renewal date, Artisan Central will contact the member. If payment remains unpaid after 10 working days, Artisan Central will suspend membership and remove the member's profile with immediate effect.
- Members who cancel their membership or whose membership is suspended by Artisan Central are not permitted to use the Artisan Central member logo or claim or suggest in any form that they are an Artisan Central member, with immediate effect.
Version française (PDF) »
Join today
If you would like to become a member click here to begin the application process.
Currently accepting artisans in all departments of France.


text:
So, you are apparently curious about the person behind this petty blog. Be my guest. I'd like to share two things with you on this page:
- Who I am (and what I'm doing when I'm not writing, which is > 99% of my time)
- Why I started this in the first place
So, who am I, after all?
Hint: I am not the lovely little lady in the photo, this is my elder daughter Eleanor.
My full name is Cai-Nicolas Ziegler, just Cai for brevity. I am the CEO of XING Events, a Munich-based digital company with a team of ~120 great people that specializes in event management services, serving > 180,000 organizers of events such as re:publica, Online Marketing Rockstars, LeWeb.
At the same time, I am professor for Computer Science at the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität in Freiburg. My specialties are Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Recommender Systems, Social Network Analysis, and a twist of Game Theory. I've written several papers in the realm of Recommender Systems which are regarded as seminal by the research community.
However, most of my time is devoted to my CEO activity, which goes without saying.
You might have guessed that XING Events is not where my work life started. You are right so. My professional life looked pretty much like this:
- Headed the product management department at PAYBACK, an American Express company, which is the world-leading provider of coalition loyalty programs, boasting > 25 Mio. users in Germany alone
- Worked at BCG, the Boston Consulting Group, as management consultant, leading teams of consultants (I did enjoy an exposure to a broad range of industries; actually, this is what got me in touch with "business administration" and "management" matters)
- Did applied research and technical consulting at Siemens Corporate Technology in Munich. This was right after my Ph.D. in Computer Science at the University of Freibug. My speciality was Natural Language Processing and Reputation Intelligence. And my tenure at Siemens allowed me to file 16 US patents
Writing has always been one of my favorite pastimes. So I wrote more than 100 articles for Germany's most renowned tech and internet print magazines while studying, which basically earned me a decent income. If you are German and are just a little interested in tech, you sure know c't, iX, Internet World.
In fact, at some point in my life (before university) I wanted to become a writer. On the other hand, at some point in my life I also wanted to become a psychologist, specializing in marketing and commercials. At some point in my life, I pondered with philosophy as a viable path to earn money (and then discarded this idea for obvious reasons). Finally, I decided to study computer science, as programming in Assembler, C++, and Java had been a big passion of me during school time.
In the end, I am pretty happy about where I am today.