A Case for Futurism from the Early Church

[Guest]

A Case for Futurism from the Early Church

How does preterism correspond with early church teaching? I know pretrib/disp does not. But I don’t see preterism taught either. Rather I see Futurism / Historic Premillennialism taught with a post-trib slant or prewrath understanding. In an effort to understand and honestly grapple with the Scriptures and their transmission and understanding through the first few centuries, how does one reconcile a full or partial preterist understanding amidst contrary early church teaching? We will see below, many church fathers taught a future 70th Seven with a future Antichrist persecuting the church.

For preterist, the testimony of the early church fathers creates a serious dilemma. For if these things were fulfilled, the “tribulation”, coming of an “antichrist” or prince, etc at 70 AD, the church certainly did not recognize it. They continued to look forward to these things, even from the earliest teachings. These leaders of the church had access to all the material, people and testimony that is scantly in existence today. These orthodox (mainstream) fathers were much closer to the original teaching and oral traditions of the Apostles than we are today. Because there are so many quotes and the material so plentiful, I will only quote phrases taken from The Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by A Roberts and J. Donaldson, Master Christian Library CD, Ages Software, 1999, www.ageslibrary.com. (You can also get a free version from www.e-sword.net translated by various others from the late 1800s).

The Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) (Ca. 70 AD to 120 AD)
Watch…be ye ready, for ye know not what hour in which our Lord cometh.
…in the last time. For in the last days false prophets …lawlessness increaseth…betray one another …, and then shall appear the world-deceiver as Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands, and he shall do iniquitous things which have never yet come to pass since the beginning.
Fire of trial … stumble…perish…endure in faith…then shall appear the signs of truth; first the sign of an out-spreading in heaven; then the sign of the sound of the trumpet; and third, the resurrection of the dead…the Lord shall come and all His saints with Him. The world shall see the Lord coming upon the clouds of Heaven.

The Epistle of Barnabas (Ca. 100-120 AD)
The final stumbling block (or source of danger) approaches…in these last days…we also withstand coming sources of danger…take heed lest resting at our ease…we should fall asleep in our sins, and the wicked prince, acquiring power…

Dialogue with Trypho (Ca. 150-165 AD)
…that two advents of Christ…, but the other, in which He shall come from heaven with glory, when the man of apostasy, who speaks strange things against the Most High, shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the earth against us the Christians, who, having learned the true worship of God from the law,…

The Pastor of Hermas (Ca. 160 AD)
…put through the fire, will be purified by means of it….This then is the type of the great tribulation that is to come.

Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics (Ca. 190-210 AD)
…than will Antichrist persecute her at that day by the cruelty of his attacks, except that persecution makes even martyrs,[but] heresy apostates.

Ireneaus, Against Heresies in Book 5 (Ca. 182-188 AD)
And for this cause tribulation is necessary for those who are saved…
Another danger…shall overtake those who falsely presume that they know the name of the Antichrist. For these men assume one [number], when this [Antichrist] shall come having another, they will be easily led away by him, as supposing him not to be the expected one, who must be guarded against…It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy…many names can be found possessing the number mentioned…But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is.

Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh (Ca. 190-210 AD)
Being questioned by His disciples when those things were to come to pass which He had just been uttering about the destruction of the temple, He discourses to them first the order of Jewish events until the overthrow of Jerusalem, and then of such as concerned all nations up to the very end of the world.
He spake of it “drawing nigh” not of its being present already; and of “those things beginning to come to pass”, not of their having happened; because when they have come to pass, then our redemption shall be at hand, which is said to be approaching up to that time…
Who has yet beheld Jesus descending from heaven in like manner as the apostles saw Him ascend, according to the appointment of the two angels? Up to the present moment they have not…no one has yet escaped from Antichrist…
In the Revelation of John, again, the order of these times is spread out to view…the beast Antichrist with his false prophet may wage war on the Church of God…

Hyppolytus, On the Church and Antichrist (Ca. 220 AD)
…keep faithfully what has been told us by the blessed prophets, in order that when those things come to pass, we may be prepared for them, and not deceived. For when the times advance, he too, of whom these things are said, will be manifested… Now concerning the tribulation of the presecution which is to fall upon the Church from the adversary, John also speaks thus: “And I saw a great and wonderous sign in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars…And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the saints of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus.”… “and to the woman were given two wings of the grewt eagle, that shee might fly into the wilderness, where she will be nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.” That refers to 1260 days (the half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and presecute the Church….

Hyppolytus, On Daniel (Ca. 220 AD)
After this, then what remains, beloved, but the toes of the feet of the image, in which “part shall be of iron and part of clay mixed together?” ….among which shall come up another little horn spring from them;” by which none other is meant than the Antichrist that is to rise; and he shall set up the kingdom of Judah.
And when he has conquered all, he will prove himself a terrible and savage tyrant…persecution to the saints and exalting himself against them…in the last [times], then Antichrist will appear among them. When he makes war against the saints, and persecutes them, then we may expect the manifestation of the Lord from heaven.

Hyppolytus, Elucidation (Ca. 220AD)
He will shorten those days and the period of three years and a half, and He will curtail those times on account of the remnant of those…the kingdom of the deceiver and Antichrist shall be speedily removed.
As these things, therefore, of which we have spoken are in the future, beloved, when the one week is divided into parts, and the abomination of desolation has arisen then…what remains but the manifiestation of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ…

Cyprian, Epistle 55 of Cyprian (Ca. 252 AD)
For you ought to know and to believe, and hold for certain, that the day of affliction has begun to hang over our heads, and the end of the world and the time of Antichrist to draw near.
Nor let any one of you, beloved bretheren, be so terrified by the fear of the future persecution, or the coming of the threatening Antichrist…

Rufinus, A Commentary on the Apostle’s Creed (Ca. 307-309 AD)
[Quoting 2 Thessalonians 2] For this reason, therefore, is this “delusion” foretold unto us by the words of Prophets, Evangelists and Apostles, lest anyone of you should mistake the coming of Antichrist for the coming of Christ. But the Lord Himself says, “When they shay unto you, lo, here is Christ, or low, He is ther, believe it not. For many false Christs…[quoting Olivet Discourse and connecting it to 2 Thes. 2].

Victorinus, A Commentary On Apocalypse (Ca. 300-400 AD)
The little season signifies three years and six months, in which with all his power the devil will avenge himself trader Antichrist against the Church.

Athanasius, Festal Letters, Letter 10 (Ca. 338 AD)
Or how can long suffering be proved, unless there has first been the calumny of Antichrist?


Saint Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Lecture 15 (326 AD)
But since it was needful for us to know the signs of the end, and since we are looking for Christ, therefore, that we may not die deceived and be led astray by that false Antichrist…declares to thee these things concerning Antichrist before they arrive…But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come…and by lying sings and wonders of his magical deceit having beguiled the Jews…for then shall be great tribulation, such has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be.
…thou hast the signs of Antichrist; and remember them not only thyself, but impart them also freely to all.
I fear these wars of the nations; I fear the schisms of the Churches; I fear the mutual hatred of the brethren…God forbid it be fulfilled in our day…the Deceiver who is to come.. Flee therefore the False One; and look for the other, the True.

How could the early church leaders miss what the modern day preterist claim happened in 70AD? Who is in a better position to know? Why wasn’t the preterist idea widely propagated if it supposed to be true? Futurism was the original position of the early Church.

[Guest]

A Case for Futurism from the Early Church

How could the early church leaders miss what the modern day preterist claim happened in 70AD? Who is in a better position to know? Why wasn’t the preterist idea widely propagated if it supposed to be true? Futurism was the original position of the early Church.

Do you really want to quote the Church fathers that disagree? And why don't you keep quoting from the "church fathers" who are part of the Papacy? Quoting chruch fathers doesn't get us anywhere, although it's interesting.

Remember, there were many even in the lifetime of Paul who had turned away (2 Tim 1:15) and needed rebuke from him personally (note his epistles where rebukes are given and John's letters to the seven churches in revelation). So why is it so hard to believe that "early church fathers" could get it wrong. And were do you draw the line? Premillennialism was common in the early church, but that is much different from modern Dispensationalsim.

[Guest]

Sean,
Thanks again for your consideration. I do think the early church fathers had important things to say regarding the Christian faith. Who do you think met at council to agree to the canon of Scripture?

Paul said to pass on the teaching to trustworthy men and these Church fathers I’ve quoted are the trustworthy men the successors of the Church. Irenaeus is the spiritual grandson of the Apostle John. Don’t you think he’d have an idea what John taught and meant by Revelation?

It seems to me the early Church testimony points to having inheritied a premillennial view from the inspired Apostles.

[Guest]

Hi Cameron,

I have never read the Early Church Fathers. So what I say is based on the quotes that you have reproduced. [Also note that these letters were originally in Greek, and so perhaps we are also at the mercy of the translator's bias.]

None of the quotes would necessarily support a premill position. The quotes all suggest that there are events to occur before the second coming of Christ. From the quotes, none ventured to say that Christ would come to establish a 1000 reign on the earth.

Some of these quotes might even apply to a partial preterist position, especially since Rev 20:7-10 is yet in the future.

If I have any issues with these quotes, it would be the fact that these men saw the Antichrist as an individual who is to come in their future. Antichrist is mentioned in 1 John but I haven't decided whether it refers to a particular individual altho' I tend to favour the interpretation that Antichrist is a more generic term for those who oppose Jesus Christ and his teachings.

Just my 2 cents.

[Guest]

Benjamin,
What these quotes collectively testify points away from preterist (it happened all or partially in the past) and the pretrib/dispie scenarios. By still looking for the Antichrist and the coming persecution of the Church these fathers clearly sought for a future fulfillment of the 70th Seven. They understand Jesus' plain association of the two in Matthew 24:15. The view of the early Church Fathers has been called Historic Premillennialism and it appears to have developed even within the lifetime of the Apostle John characterized by something like post-trib views or the similar pre-wrath view.

[Guest]

None of the quotes would necessarily support a premill position. The quotes all suggest that there are events to occur before the second coming of Christ. From the quotes, none ventured to say that Christ would come to establish a 1000 reign on the earth.

Barnabas (100AD) Chp. 15
Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, “He finished in six days.” This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, “Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years.” Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. “And He rested on the seventh day.” This meaneth: when His Son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day…I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens.

Papias 70-155 AD (from fragment:chapter 6)
“The same person, moreover, has set down other things as coming to him from unwritten tradition, amongst these some strange parables and instructions of the Saviour, and some other things of a more fabulous nature.21 Amongst these he says that there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth. He moreover hands down, in his own writing, other narratives given by the previously mentioned Aristion of the Lord’s sayings, and the traditions of the presbyter John."
- - -
I don't claim to buy into the 1 day = 1000 yr scenario, but the interpretation is virtually as old as the Church.

Really, I recommend reading these early guys...that is if you like reading Christian authors. www.e-sword.net

So another question: if preterism is right, why is it absent in thought or comment in the early church after 70AD? If a "911" happened to the early church and these guys lived through it, especially Clement and Barnabas or right after it like Papias, why don't they extol the virtues of fulfilled prophecy? Why do they continue to look for future fulfillments?

Josephus is not mentioned in the Bible while fellows like Clement and Barnabas are. How do preterists rationalize around this.

I don't mean to be mean, I 'm curios in a loving way like we're having our 4th of July BBQ together, etc. I just don't see preterism in any form being a cohesive system or totally intellectually satisfying. If it is, I want to understand it. I'm always willing to be convinced, but throwing ambiguous verses at me and claiming broad-brushed fulfillments in a spiritual way doesn't cut it. I liken it to blurring my eyes to miss the detail or the historical reality.

[Guest]

Thank you Cameron for doing the research and posting it for all of us to read. I am relatively new to the preterist concepts but want to follow the truth. I deeply appreciate the early writings of these early church fathers that you have brought to our attention. Irregardless of whether or not their views were correct they do show a definate futurist view to some extent.

Roger

[Guest]

Thank you, Cameron for posting quotes from those early Christian writers who addressed the matter of the coming of Christ and other future events.

In my opinion as one who has read early Christian writings for many years, you are absolutely correct!

[Guest]

Hi Cameron,

I have to confess my ignorance on early church father's writings. I do plan to read them someday, I just haven't as of yet. You obviously have read them and seem to have extensive knowledge about their writings so maybe you could answer some of these questions I have.

You wrote:

So another question: if preterism is right, why is it absent in thought or comment in the early church after 70AD? If a "911" happened to the early church and these guys lived through it, especially Clement and Barnabas or right after it like Papias, why don't they extol the virtues of fulfilled prophecy? Why do they continue to look for future fulfillments?

Questions:
1. We do know that 70AD was a significant event and at least the end of "an age". We also know that at least part of the Olivet Discourse was addressing this event. Were there any of these writers who wrote about the event at all and spoke of the fulfilled prophesy by Jesus? Any of it? (I don't know, I'm just asking)

2. Did these church fathers demonstrate that they were familiar with Hebraisms and Apocalyptic literature and idioms? (Frankly, I can't even get the idioms of my own culture right, let alone Mexico or Canada...eh?)

3. We know that the winning views of debatable issues in the ancient world tend to write the history and the writings of the losers tend not to survive. Are there any hints in these fathers' writings that other views than their own were held by others in the church?

While I do value the input of those who were chronologically closest to the actual events and teachings of Jesus and the apostles, the Bible itself carries much more weight to me and, in the final analysis, it wins the debate. Internal evidence over external. However, I do like to look at the external for "hints".

Thank you for bringing up this discussion thread. Very interesting reading.

[Guest]

Again, Why would I just believe the quotes you have given? I mean, they could be 100% accurate. Or they could be wrong. Even you said you don't buy into the 1 Day = 1,000 years. Why not? If you don't believe this, maybe we should be just as critical of their belief in a literal 1,000 reign of Christ on earth after the resurrection.

Again, Paul said (in his own day) 2Ti 1:15 You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.

Weren't most or all of the Churches in Revelation in Asia?

If there was a massive falling away in Paul's day, isn't it possible that the men you quote, while well intentioned, got it wrong? I'm just asking, is it possible?