Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | John 5:19 ¶ Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | John 5:19 ¶ So Jesus answered them by saying, "I assure you and most solemnly say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself [of His own accord], unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever things the Father does, the Son [in His turn] also does in the same way. |
Subject: First Century Second Coming? |
Bible Note: Tim, Julius, while never decreed "Emperor" of Rome, crossed the Rubicon and declared himself dictator for life. Whether formally recognized or not, he was the first, and the Jews would have recognized him. Further, this would be the rising of the beast. Antony I included because he was a legitimate ruler of Judea. After the death of Julius, Antony was given control of the East, including Judea and Egypt. From a Jewish perspective, he would have been one of the "kings," and I find it reasonable to include him in the list. Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, while recognized historically as emperors, were not in the public eye of the Jews. The Jews were busy being seiged during the time of the Roman civil war. They would have recognized the succession as being Nero to Vespasian, then to Titus, then to Domitian. Revelation 17 would actually set Vespasian as the eighth, who was in fact "an" eighth "king," but not necessarily "the" eighth king, that went forth to destruction (You may want to see if that word is an active verb; I haven't looked in the Greek), and the king that "is" is Claudius, not Nero. Paul mentions in 2 Thess 2:7-8 the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming. And also in 2 Cor 12:1 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows— was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak. Both of these things were written in the early to mid 50s AD. Claudius reigned from 41 to 54, and given a date of 41-43, the Revelation would be right on key with the line of kings, the statements of Paul, the internal evidence of the Revelation itself, etc. The dating IS a questionable issue, and there are two sides to that debate due to a translation error presented by ???? (have to get the book back from my brother to get the name) in regard to Iraeneus' statement regarding the writing of the Revelation during the time of Domitian. Even premillenialist scholars conceded to the correction in translation, and that correction threw the date back up in the air. Compare this line of kings also to Daniel's ten horns and one. Ten horns, and a little horn pushing three out of the way. Julius, Antony, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius. Ten rulers in all. Then up comes Vespasian, the eleventh horn, pushing three horns, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius out of the way. It is typically agreed that although the three were considered emperors, Otho and Vitellius were emperor at the same time as Vespasian, each on their own front, and of the three (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius), they were in truth little more than opportunists that barely held the throne. Vespasian and Titus, representing the smaller beast with two horns, were acting under the orders of Nero at first. So the two, though not yet emperors in their own right, still exercised the authority of the first beast. Now again, in relation to the number of the beast, if Nero was the one, then the number spoken of was the warning, and the wisdom of the number was given so it could be understood. If Nero fits the criteria, then there is no reason to believe he was not the one being spoken of. It does not take wild arithmetic to determine the number. Each character has a value. Add them up, and there you go. In the forties, John's primary audience would have been Jewish, so the Hebrew spelling of the pronunciation is not only reasonable but probable, as opposed to Greek. The questions to be considered are: COULD Nero have been the one of whom the number spoke? COULD this line of kings have been the line? COULD the persecution of Rev. 13 have been the one under Nero that lasted the appointed time? The answer to these questions is yes. These things COULD have been the ones spoken of, and they therefore bear consideration. Xerxes |