PART I
DATING THE REVELATION

CONCLUSION

Late in the first century seven ecclesias in Asia Minor received a message from the last living apostle. In his exile on Patmos, the aged apostle had received wondrous visions. It was a message of comfort and hope in that the future destruction of the present world order was foretold, and the coming reign of Messiah was assured. Before that day should dawn, however, there would be difficult times for which the ecclesias must be prepared. The Spirit, through the apostle, viewed each of the ecclesias in turn, analysed their current position before God and gave warnings appropriate to each of them. Seven ecclesias, representing the whole community of believers, were given a message which had to be carefully considered, lest they lose their place among the lightstands. Already, significant signs of apostasy were there in their midst, and if not checked, the ecclesias would cease to be instruments for revealing God's Truth in the world. Nicolaitanism and other false teachings had been brought into the communities and were having their effect. The message was urgent, and it was timely.

Over the ecclesias of Asia Minor storm clouds were gathering. Under Nero believers had for the first time suffered persecution at the hands of the Roman authorities. This persecution did not extend much beyond Rome itself, but there would have been reverberations from it through the Empire. Under the Caesars who came after Nero, persecution of Christians was sporadic but not sustained. Serious harassment by Roman authorities became a widespread reality under Domitian, who reigned A.D. 81-96. This emperor was the son of Vespasian and brother to Titus, the destroyers of Jerusalem, and he was hostile to both Jews and Christians. He forced the Jews to pay a tax to the temple of Jupiter in Rome - replacing their temple tax, and he demanded that his subjects, particularly in the provinces, worship him as a deity.

"... The Domitian authorities charged Christians with being criminals, confiscated their property, exiled some, and decreed death for others ... Nerva (96-98) reversed Domitian's policy and recalled many of the banished." 1

There were assertions during the latter part of the nineteenth century by some German and English theologians, among them Westcott and Hort, to the effect that the Revelation was more likely written during the time of Nero or Vespasian (i.e. between 66 and 70 A.D.). The evidence they present for this conclusion is not weighty.2 It appears in fact to have been something of a passing fancy, for scholars from the same school as these men, i.e. Alford and Swete, offer exhaustive evidence in support of the later date of the Apocalypse. Thus, James Orr writes, after discussing the Nero theory, "...the tide of opinion flows back to the age of Domitian as the time of its origin, (i.e. the Apocalypse)." 3

The following is a brief summary from Peake's Commentary on the dating of the Revelation.

"The book (of Revelation) was written to meet an extremely grave situation with persecution on all sides. Systematic attempts were made to establish Caesar worship. An edict was issued. Devotees to the cult of Caesar wore a special mark 'on the right hand or the forehead' ... untold sufferings came upon the followers of Christ. To profess the Christian faith meant the risk of martyrdom and the certainty of petty persecution in ordinary avocations. Large numbers of Christians grew weak in the faith and compromised ...

"Some have attempted to place it as early as the reign of Nero. The main argument for this is a statement in 11:1 which appears to imply that the Temple at Jerusalem was still intact. This theory is not easy to maintain in view of the following facts: (a) the widespread cult of Caesar worship (large in the Apocalypse) belongs to the age of Domitian rather than the earlier period. Moffatt says, 'No worship of the emperor which is adequate to the data of the Apocalypse was enforced until Domitian's reign.' (b) There is no trace before Domitian of such a persecution in Asia Minor as is described in the Apocalypse. Nero's persecution was limited in the main to Rome, and there does not seem to have been another serious outbreak until we reach Domitian's reign, (c) The allusion to the 'eighth' emperor in 17: 11 carries us beyond Vespasian (A.D. 69-79) and seems to identify Nero redivivus 4 with Domitian. In view of these facts, it seems best to maintain the traditional date during the reign of Domitian (A.D. 80-96)."5

1 Manschreck, A History of Christianity in the World. "In Conflict with Rome", p. 26.

2 Neither Westcott nor Hort wrote commentaries on the Apocalypse, and except for three published lectures on the Revelation by Hort. their references to the subject are incidental. Dr. Swete. in his commentary on the Apocalypse, notes that in the partition of the New Testament between the three (Lightfoot, Westcott and Hort), the Revelation was "not finally assigned". "It would appear," he writes, "that they were guided in their judgment on this point partly by the relation which they believed the Book to occupy with reference to the Fall of Jerusalem, partly by the contrast which it presents to the Fourth Gospel" (Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, p. ciii).

4 The term Nero redivivus ("Nero back again"), refers to a legend current toward the end of the first century, that Nero would return in some form to renew his cruelties. The term was applied to some of his successors, particularly Domitian. Some expositors have suggested that the apostle John alluded to this as another subtle means of stressing the Roman character of the Beast. Henry B. Swete in his commentary. The Apocalypse of St. John, presents the basis of this view (p. ci) in the very extensive section on the background and the dating of the Apocalypse.

5 Peake's Commentary. 1920, ed. A.S. Peake, "Revelation", by Prof. H. T. Andrews, p.926.

This quotation is from the original edition of the commentary. The 1962 edition, edited by Matthew Black, retains this view, and the following is taken from the new edition.

"... It is doubtful whether Nero's persecution was sufficiently sustained to provoke such a book as the Apocalypse, and the edict concerning emperor-worship which appears to be envisaged in 13: 15 hardly belongs to this reign. The church of Ephesus, moreover, would scarcely have had time to forsake its first love (2: 4) ... The most reasonable suggestion is the reign of Domitian (81-96), and this accords with the very early Church tradition of Irenaeus and also with the demand for emperor-worship in this reign, and the fierce persecution of Christians (c. A.D. 92, according to Pliny)" (Peake's Commentary, (Nelson, 1962) ed. Matthew Black, p. 1045).