Journal: Journal of Dispensational Theology
Volume: JODT 12:35 (Mar 2008)
Article: Preterism And Antiquity: Was Preterism a View of the Early Church?
Author: Ron J. Bigalke, Jr.

---

JODT 12:35 (March 2008) p. 49

Preterism And Antiquity:
Was Preterism a View of the Early Church?

Ron J. Bigalke Jr., Ph.D.

Director, Eternal Ministries;
Church Plant Pastor, Coastal Georgia;
Professor of Bible & Theology, Tyndale Theological Seminary

If the preterist view is correct that most, if not all, of the Book of Revelation was fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, there should be substantial evidence in the views of the early church to support this interpretation. Addressing the subject of “The Historical Basis of Preterism,” theonomists Greg Bahnsen and Kenneth Gentry attempted to demonstrate a “Nascent Preterism in Antiquity.” Indeed, Bahnsen and Gentry claimed that preterism has a vast history in antiquity. This article will examine the evidences advanced by Bahnsen and Gentry to determine if preterism indeed was a view of the early church.

The Claim Of Eusebius

The first evidence provided for such a claim was Eusebius. If true, this claim (among the others referenced) would be the most substantial (because of his historical research); therefore, the majority of this article will consider the preterist claim regarding Eusebius. Bahnsen and Gentry wrote, “Eusebius . . . details the woes that befell Jerusalem in A.D. 70, mostly by reference to Josephus. . . . He then cites Matthew 24:19–21 as his lead-in reference and later refers to Luke 21:20, 23, 24!”1 Prior to the rise of preterism in the nineties, J. Oliver Buswell had already devoted a section to the “distorted emphasis” of preterism.

Since the time of Eusebius . . . there have been those who have thought that Christ’s prophecy of the abomination of desolation was somehow fulfilled when Titus destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and that the words referring to “Jerusalem surrounded with armies” are just another way of saying “the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place.” It can be shown, however, that nothing which took place at the fall of Jerusalem fulfilled the prophecy of Christ in regard to “the abomination of desolation” spoken of by

JODT 12:35 (March 2008) p. 50

Daniel. Attention has been called to the fact that Eusebius, in his Canons, lists Luke’s reference to Jerusalem surrounded with armies as a verse peculiar to Luke, not parallel to anything in Matthew or Mark. Nevertheless, Eusebius’ Church History is a chief source for the erroneous identification.

The case for the theory that the predic...

visitor : : uid: ()