Early Christianity Supports Futurism over Preterism

Early Christianity Supports Futurism over Preterism

Early Christian testimony overwhelmingly places the writing of Revelation in the reign of Domitian (81–96 AD), long after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The early church was not preterist. They still believed there was an Antichrist to come and that the prophecies of John’s Revelation were still future. If the preterist proposition is true that John wrote in secret code to communicate to other Christians to get past the Roman soldiers, then, historically speaking, those Christians completely didn’t “get it.”

Irenaeus

Irenaeus speaks of “Titan” being a possible name for the number of the beast (Antichrist) to come. Irenaeus says that John had his vision towards the end of Domitian’s reign. John in no way thinks that 70AD was a fulfillment of John’s Revelation:

Inasmuch, then, as this name Titan has so much to recommend it, there is a strong degree of probability, that from among the many [names suggested], we infer that perchance he who is to come shall be called Titan. 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. But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes, we may avoid him. (Against Heresies 5.30.3-4).
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm

Clement of Alexandria

Clement of Alexandria records that John returned from the isle of Patmos after the tyrant’s death, the “tyrant” being Domitian:

And that you may be still more confident, that repenting thus truly there remains for you a sure hope of salvation, listen to a tale? which is not a tale but a narrative, handed down and committed to the custody of memory, about the Apostle John. For when, on the tyrant's death, he returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos, he went away, being invited, to the contiguous territories of the nations... (Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? XLII). https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-richman.html

Eusebius

Eusebius identifies the “tyrant” with Domitian, as Eusebius quotes Clement’s account and names Domitian as the emperor who exiled John. No early church father attributes John’s exile to Nero. Here is what Eusebius says:

Domitian, having shown great cruelty toward many, and having unjustly put to death […and…] stirred up a persecution against us […]. It is said that in this 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. (Church History, Book 3. Ch. 17-18.1).

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. (Church History, Book 3. Ch. 23.1).

Listen to a tale, which is not a mere tale, but a narrative concerning John the apostle, which has been handed down and treasured up in memory. For when, after the tyrant's death, he returned from the isle of Patmos to Ephesus, he went away upon their invitation to the neighboring territories of the Gentiles. (Church History, Book 3. Ch. 23.6).

The reason why John was released after the death of Domitian is because Domitian was the one who put him there on that island. Domitian is the name mentioned in reference to John being exiled to Patmos. This places the scholarship of the book of Revelation after Nero and after 70AD, since this vision of John occurred while he was on the island of Patmos (Rev 1:9).

Chapter 19 of Eusebius also mentions that Domitian had commanded that the descendants of David’s lineage should be slain. Domitian had heard that Jude was said to have been Jesus’ brother according to the flesh, and he found out that there were grandchildren of Jude still living. So, he wanted to kill them because he was afraid that Christ would come a second time to overthrow his rule. So, he questioned these Christians, but he decided to let them go and made a decree that the persecution of the church should stop. Here is Eusebius’ account:

And when they were asked concerning Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to appear, they answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and to give unto every one according to his works. Upon hearing this, Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising them as of no account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the persecution of the Church. (Church History, Book 3. Ch. 20.6-7).

At this point, if anyone thinks that Domitian may have been the antichrist, they should disregard that thought immediately, since the Scriptures say that when the Lord returns, He will slay the lawless one with the breath of His mouth and bring him to an end by the appearance of His coming (2 Thess 2:8). This excludes Domitian because he was killed in AD 96 and Nerva succeeded him to the empire.

Eusebius goes on:

Tertullian also has mentioned Domitian in the following words: “Domitian also, who possessed a share of Nero's cruelty, attempted once to do the same thing that the latter did. But because he had, I suppose, some intelligence, he very soon ceased, and even recalled those whom he had banished.”

Eusebius says:

But after Domitian had reigned fifteen years, and Nerva had succeeded to the empire, the Roman Senate, according to the writers that record the history of those days, voted that Domitian's honors 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 at Ephesus, according to an ancient Christian tradition. (Church History, Book 3. Ch. 20.9-11).

This clearly places John’s return from Patmos after the death of Domitian, during the reign of Nerva.

Eusebius quotes the trustworthiness of Ireneus in the second and third book Against Heresies:

“And all the elders that associated with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia bear witness that John delivered it to them. For he remained among them until the time of Trajan.”

“But the church in Ephesus also, which was founded by Paul, and where John remained until the time of Trajan, is a faithful witness of the apostolic tradition.” (Ch. 23.2-3).

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm

Victorinus and Revelation Interpretation

In the commentary of Victorinus on the book of Revelation, he says:

“And He says unto me, You must again prophesy to the peoples, and to the tongues, and to the nations, and to many kings.” He says this, because when John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the labour of the mines by Cæsar 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. This, therefore, is what He says: You must again prophesy to all nations, because you see the crowds of Antichrist rise up; and against them other crowds shall stand, and they shall fall by the sword on the one side and on the other. (Commentary on the Apocalypse, Ch. 10.11).

The time must be understood in which the written Apocalypse was published, since then reigned Cæsar Domitian. (Commentary on the Apocalypse, Ch. 17.10).

The common Amillennial claim that John distributed his book back to the churches while he was still on the island of Patmos is contradicted here, since it says that it was only after Domitian was killed that John was “dismissed” from his exile and “delivered” the book of the Apocalypse. This, again, also places the writing of Revelation after the time of Nero. Even if the Preterist rejects the timing of the book being released after John returned from exile, it still remains that the book was written during the reign of Domitian.

Some propose that since Victorinus was a later writer (3rd century), and that his comments tend to be very allegorical, the argument for Revelation being delivered post-exile is not that strong. There are other reasons as well that may suggest otherwise.

Victorinus had a very spiritualized interpretation of the book of Revelation. But nonetheless, he was still a futurist as he spoke of the earthquake of the sixth seal, which he interpreted as “that very last persecution” (6.12). The mountain and islands being removed from their place are also said to be “the last persecution” (6.14). In no way does he indicate in this whole book that the Antichrist has already come and gone. The closest he gets to Preterism is interpreting the seven kings as Galba, Vitellius, Otho, Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian as the first five kings/beasts that John speaks of. They all fell. Domitian is interpreted as the sixth (“one is”), and the seventh as Nerva, who only reigned for a short time, less than two years. Then he interpreted Nero as one of the seven and also the eighth. Of one of the heads that was slain, he believed to be Nero, and says that he killed himself by cutting his own throat when the senate sent cavalry after him. But as to his futurist interpretation, he believed Nero would be raised to life again to persecute the Jews. (17.9-16). To Victorinus, more than a particular person, “Antichrist” was a spiritual beast kingdom that persecuted the church (11.3). But he also indicated that Antichrist would be a person, and had his own interpretation for 666, though he does not mention Nero there for any kind of past fulfillment (13.18). Victorinus also speculated about who the coming two witnesses would be who would be slain by Antichrist (11.5). He interpreted the treading of the Gentiles (Lk 21:24) with the holy city being trodden down for forty-two months (Rev 11:3-4) as speaking of the same thing (11.2-3). Nonetheless, he calls this “the destruction and slaughter of the last time,” indicating that this event is still future and did not happen in AD 70. The woman fleeing to the wilderness from the serpent is also understood as future, because he says, “(we do not know) that this has happened as yet” (12.16).

Victorinus believed in a present spiritual reign of Christ’s kingdom as the first resurrection (12.4-5), and that the thousand years represented something similar to the Wesleyan doctrine of “entire sanctification” as that person overcomes the evil of the flesh (12.6). He said that “the first resurrection is now of the souls that are by the faith…” The Christians would have the opportunity within this time to perfect themselves before “the approaching advent of the kingdom of the hateful one” (12.6).

Victorinus interpreted the thousand years in which the devil was bound as taking place during “the first advent of Christ, even to the end of the age; and they are called a thousand, according to that mode of speaking, wherein a part is signified by the whole, just as is that passage, ‘the word which He commanded for a thousand generations,’ although they are not a thousand” (12.1-3). Basically, the devil is bound right now and cannot deceive or seduce Christians. The “nations” are interpreted as the universal church. But then this lengthy time period will be completed and “what is left of the sixth day, to wit, of the sixth age, which subsists for a thousand years; after this he must be loosed for a little season.” My interpretation for when Victorinus mentions “what is left of,” means that he is indicating that the age he is living in is the sixth day, relating to the days of creation. Other early Christians mention that after six days, God’s work will be complete on earth, and after seven days (seven thousand years), all things will be completed and all prophecy fulfilled. Therefore, his interpretation is that after 6,000 years of creation, the devil shall be loosed and shall make war against the Church. If my understanding of Victorinus’ thoughts are correct, that means that he believed that once the sixth age ends (which we are still living in), then the devil will be loosed into the earth, “will avenge himself under Antichrist against the Church,” and then the appearing of Christ will destroy him by the breath of His mouth, bring him to an end, consummate the world, and usher in the future kingdom of Christ (14.15). This would mean the seventh day or the seventh and final age of Christ’s physical reign on earth. Victorinus holds to an already but not yet kingdom. He did not believe that the sixth age had ended or that the eighth king of Antichrist had come yet.

Overall, Victorinus was a futurist, and if the Preterist were to be true, then that means Victorinus completely missed whatever hidden message the apostle John intended for the church to receive about the supposed “Nero” being the Antichrist or AD70 being fulfilled prophecy from John. Such prophecy supposedly was not even available for the universal church to read until somewhere late in John’s age, as he was released from his island exile and moved to Ephesus. Therefore, Preterism falls on its face when they say most of Revelation was fulfilled in AD70.

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0712.htm

Jerome

Jerome records:

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 Irenæus 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 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. (On Illustrious Men, 9).

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2708.htm

In Jerome’s record of events, fourteen years after the reign of Nero ended, Domitian persecuted the Christians a second time. His methods were so harsh and cruel that the senate annulled his authority and sought after him to put him to death. Even if he wasn’t as harsh as Nero in some ways, he was still too cruel to remain in power. It was only after Domitian’s death that John returned to Ephesus under the reign of Pertinax and then later died under the reign of Trajan.

From here, we might also ask, “Was Domitian assassinated? Or did he kill himself?” It seems like there are different stories regarding that, possibly because there were rumors about him dying one way or another way. Since there were no court documents or medical autopsy documents to verify exactly how he ended up dying, I would say just take your pick.

It also might seem a contradiction when Jerome says that John “returned to Ephesus under Pertinax,” while Eusebius says that Nerva had succeeded to the empire, and when he did, Domitian’s honors were rescinded so that everyone who was exiled under his harsh policies could come back. There may be ways to explain that possible error or possible misunderstanding, but I won’t get too much into that here. However, I maintain the better wording of Eusebius. Though I find it reasonably explainable to say that Pertinax was mentioned simply to identify who was ruling over Ephesus during the majority time of John residing there.

A short history of Nero

Jerome mentions the existence of the temple during the seventh year of Nero, and then briefly mentions “the siege of Titus,” implying that Titus came against Jerusalem to destroy it. (sec. 2). Mark died in the eighth year of Nero (sec. 8). When Paul said that God had delivered him from the mouth of the lion, he was indicating that this lion was Nero. In the fourteenth year of Nero’s reign, Paul and Peter were beheaded in Rome. (sec. 5). Two years prior to them, Seneca the Younger was put to death by Nero (sec. 12). Fourteen years after the reign of Nero, Domitian exiled John to Patmos (sec. 9).

Here is a rough timeline I had AI create for me, which you should definitely fact-check with scholarly sources and deep scholarly study

AD 6–15 — John is born

AD 30-33 — Crucifixion

AD 30–70 — John ministers in Jerusalem and Asia Minor

AD 81–96 — Domitian reigns

AD 95 — John exiled to Patmos

AD 95–96 — John writes Revelation

AD 96 — Domitian assassinated; Nerva becomes emperor

AD 96 — Senate annuls Domitian’s decrees; John returns to Ephesus

AD 96–98 — John ministers in Asia under Nerva

AD 98–100 — John dies early in Trajan’s reign

According to Jerome, John lived 68 years more after the crucifixion of Jesus. This means that 68 + AD 30 to 33 = AD 98-101. This does not mean he was necessarily 98-101 years old when he died, but that was the year he died. He would have been that old if he were born in 0 AD. But he was likely born later than that, as he was considered to be a young man when he was a disciple of Jesus.

Conclusion

All of these witnesses together (Irenaeus, Clement, Eusebius, Victorinus, and Jerome) form a unanimous and congruent testimony that Revelation was written at a later date after AD 70, making a pre-70 fulfillment of Revelation impossible.

Even if there may be discrepancies between some of the things they say (as they do not have infallible knowledge of all things), we can look at the things that they do say that overlap. Those things include that (1) Domitian was reigning during the time John wrote Revelation. (2) None of them hint at any Preterist interpretation of AD 70 prophetic fulfillment, even though they lived right up close to that time period. (3) Even if the early church had some very spiritualized interpretations of Scripture, they were still futurist regarding the prophecies of Revelation. (4) The Preterist claim that Revelation was a secret message to the early church that only Christians could understand, as it was purposefully obscured from the Romans so that the letter could disseminate, fails to prove credibility. None of these early Christians interpreted any of the Roman emperors to be the final Antichrist. So, whatever John was trying to communicate to them, he failed to do, as these Christians simply “failed to get it,” and, per Irenaeus, John did not feel it necessary to provide additional clarity for who the Antichrist was.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.”