Refuting Preterism (part 2 of 4)

Part 1: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/refuting-preterism.html

     Did the Events of AD 70 “Perfectly Match” Prophecy?

The final argument put forth in favor of preterism is that the events surrounding the Jewish-Roman War from AD 66 - 70 perfectly fulfilled the prophecies about the “tribulation”, namely, the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation. But is this true? Let’s start by examining whether the events of the Olivet discourse and their supposed fulfillment in the Jewish-Roman War actually match up:

1. Jesus prophesied that every stone in the temple complex which stood in His day would be thrown down. This was literally fulfilled in AD 70.
   
   
2. Jesus prophesied that, prior to the end, many would come in His name, claiming to be the Christ (Matt. 24:5). Though there were many false prophets, no Messianic claimants are explicitly documented in the first century (apart from Jesus Himself), and certainly not claimants who came in the name of Jesus.
   
   
3. Jesus prophesied that there would be “wars and rumors of wars” prior to the end (Matt. 24:6), and yet prior to the Jewish-Roman War, the Roman empire was governed by the Pax Romana. Furthermore, there was not more than one nation or kingdom within the empire such that “nation” could “rise against nation” or “kingdom against kingdom” (v. 7).
   
   
4. Jesus prophesied that there would be pestilences and famines in various places prior to the end (Matt. 24:7). This did indeed occur prior to the Jewish-Roman War (cf. Acts 11:28). However, it is important to note that famines are fairly commonplace occurrences, both in the ancient and modern worlds.
   
   
5. Jesus prophesied that there would be earthquakes accompanied by signs and sights from heaven prior to the end (Lk. 21:11). This simply did not occur prior to the Jewish-Roman War.
   
   
6. Jesus prophesied that “this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole inhabited world, and then the end will arrive” (Matt. 24:14). According to Paul, this did indeed happen when the gospel was preached throughout the Roman empire (Rom. 10:18 cf. Col. 1:23). However, it will happen again in the future by miraculous means (Rev. 14:6).
   
   
7. Jesus prophesied that when Jerusalem would be surrounded by armies, and the abomination of desolation would appear in the holy place of the temple, those in Jerusalem should flee (Matt. 24:15-20; Lk. 21:20-23). However, if this was fulfilled in the Jewish-Roman War, it would be terrible advice. By the time the Roman armies entered the temple in AD 70, it was far too late to flee; the war was already over.
   
   
8. Jesus prophesied that “then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, nor shall ever be in any way” (Matt. 24:21). Clearly, this did not occur in the first century, unless one is willing to say that the Jewish-Roman War surpassed the Holocaust and other modern atrocities in magnitude. Furthermore, this tribulation is said to begin after the abomination appears in the temple, though the Jewish-Roman War was ended by the armies entering the temple.
   
   
9. Jesus prophesied that “if those days had not been cut short, not any flesh would have been saved, yet because of the elect those days will be cut short” (Matt. 24:22). Again, this was obviously not fulfilled in the Jewish-Roman War - the Roman armies were not in danger of killing “all flesh”, nor did they come even close. This statement indicates catastrophe of the highest magnitude such as never occurred in history.
   
   
10. Jesus prophesied that false Christs and false prophets would arise during the great tribulation (Matt. 24:23-25). Again, not even a single Messianic claimant (apart from Jesus) is recorded as having lived during the first century, let alone during the Jewish-Roman War.
    
    
11. Jesus prophesied that the coming of the Son of Man following the tribulation would occur in such a way that no one could say that He appeared in secret, but would instead be as visible as the lightning flashing from east to west (Matt. 24:26-28). It should be obvious that, as even the vast majority of preterists acknowledge, there was no visible coming of Jesus in AD 70. Instead, the supposed coming of Jesus ‘in judgment’ went undiscovered until the first preterist exposition of prophecy was published in the seventeenth century.
    
    
12. Jesus prophesied that, immediately after the great tribulation, signs would appear in heaven including a complete darkening of the sun, moon, and stars (Matt. 24:29; Lk. 21:25-26). Preterists allegorize this by saying that it refers to the failing of national powers, symbolized by the sun, moon, and stars. This is a potentially legitimate interpretation. However, I am inclined to see these signs as literal, since the sun was also literally darkened at Christ’s death (Matt. 27:45) — exegetically, there is little reason to take the signs preceding His second coming as any less literal than the signs which followed His first coming.
    
    
13. Jesus prophesied that the Son of Man would be seen coming on the clouds after the signs in the heavens (Matt. 24:30; Lk. 21:27). Preterists interpret this in light of similar figurative imagery associated with judgment in the Old Testament (cf. Isa. 19:1-2). However, this same “coming on the clouds” is associated with Jesus’ bodily return in Acts 1:9-11. Suffice it to say that this did not occur in AD 70.
    
    
14. Jesus prophesied that, following the coming of the Son of Man, the elect would be gathered from around the entire earth (Matt. 24:31). In context, this refers to the people of Israel who had previously been scattered across the earth (Lk. 21:24 cf. Deut. 30:2-5; Isa. 11:11-12; Zech. 10:8-10). However, even if (as non-dispensationalists believe) this refers to the ‘Church’, no comparable event occurred in AD 70.

As you can see, of the fourteen predictions which Jesus made in the Olivet discourse, only one of them was certainly fulfilled in AD 70, and that was the specific prediction that the temple complex of Jesus’ day would be torn down. Everything following this prediction is related to the future “sign of Jesus’ coming and end of the age” (Matt. 24:3). Although preterists claim that the Olivet discourse was perfectly fulfilled in the events of the Jewish-Roman War, there are far more differences than there are similarities between these two accounts, when even one major difference would be enough to invalidate this interpretive framework.

    The fact that the Olivet discourse does not match up with the events of the Jewish-Roman War should be enough to show that the preterist interpretation is incorrect. However, preterists also make specific and testable claims about the prophecies of the book of Revelation occurring in the first century. The two main pillars of preterist interpretation of Revelation are that (1) the “beast out of the sea” of Revelation 13 is the Roman emperor Nero, and the 1260 days, 42 months, and 3.5 years for which he afflicts the church refers to the Neronian persecution of AD 64 - 68; and (2) the city of Babylon in Revelation 16 - 18 is an allegorical reference to Jerusalem.

    The first claim, that Nero is the “beast out of the sea”, is based on the fact that the gematria of his name, Kaiser Neron, adds up to 666 when transliterated from Greek to Hebrew (cf. Rev. 13:18). This interpretation is fraught with problems. First, the name Kaiser Neron is cherry-picked out of many other titles and names used by Nero, and even other forms of the same title and name which add or remove certain letters. Second, this calculation only works if the name is transliterated to Hebrew, and yet John was writing to a largely Hellenic, Greek-speaking audience in Asia Minor (Rev. 1:11). Every time John uses a Hebrew word, he clarifies its meaning (Rev. 9:11; 16:16), and yet no such thing occurs in his description of the “beast”.

    Third, and most importantly, no ancient Christians made this same connection. The earliest Christian commentary on the beast comes from Irenaeus of Lyons, who identifies the number 666 with a then-future individual (Adv. Haer. 5.30.2). Although I do not believe that the early ‘Church fathers’ are particularly reliable sources of exegesis - they are just as susceptible to bad theology as we are, and perhaps even more so due to their non-Hebraic, Greek philosophical background - the preterist claim is that prophecy was fulfilled in their lifetimes, which they should have been able to recognize taking place. Ultimately, the identification of 666 with Nero amounts to nothing more than preterists’ wishful thinking.

    The claim that Nero’s persecution of Christians lasted for 3.5 years, 42 months, and 1260 days (cf. Rev. 12:6, 14; 13:5) is technically possible. However, the fact is that we simply don’t know how long the Neronic persecution lasted. The Roman historian Tacitus tells us that it began when the Christians were blamed for the Great Fire of Rome which ended in July 27 AD 64 (Annals 15.44), and it ended no later than Nero’s death in June 9 AD 68, meaning that it could have lasted for any amount of time up to 46 months and 13 days. To claim that this must match up with the 42-month persecution by the “beast” is simply an anti-intellectual “prophecy of the gaps” argument.

    Furthermore, if the persecution by the “beast” is actually the Neronic persecution, this would hold very little significance for the churches in Asia Minor to which John was writing (Rev. 1:11), since the persecution was localized to the city of Rome itself. In fact, recently some historians have begun to doubt whether this persecution ever even occurred, because the only primary source for this event is a single passage in Tacitus of questionable authenticity [1]. But even if Nero did persecute Christians for 42 months, none of the other aspects of the “beast” match up with his reign: he did not send a large army after Israelites hiding in a wilderness (Rev. 12:14-16), did not receive or require divine worship (Rev. 13:8), did not collaborate with a miracle-working false prophet (Rev. 13:14-16), and did not cause all people to take a mark on their forehead or hand in order to participate in the economy (Rev. 13:16-18).

    The second pillar of preterist interpretation of Revelation is the belief that Babylon of Revelation 16 - 18 is an esoteric reference to Jerusalem. This is necessary for preterism because Jerusalem was the only city of any significance which was destroyed in AD 70. Preterists cite two main exegetical reasons for believing this. First, because Babylon is called the “great city” (Rev. 18:9, 16, 19), and “the great city” is Jerusalem (Rev. 11:8), Babylon must be Jerusalem. Second, because Babylon is said to be guilty of “the blood of the prophets” (Rev. 18:24), and yet Jerusalem is guilty of “the blood of the prophets” (Matt. 23:34-35, 37), Babylon must be Jerusalem.

    However, these arguments fail to take into account that these attributes may be simultaneously true of multiple cities. For example, although it is true that both Jerusalem and Babylon are called the “great city” in Revelation, there are many cities which are called the “great city” in scripture, including Gibeon (Josh. 10:2), Nineveh (Jon. 1:2; 3:2-3; 4:11), Jerusalem (Neh. 7:3-4; Jer. 22:8; Lam. 1:1), and literal Babylon (Dan. 4:30). Of course, not all of these are identical. And even though both Jerusalem and Babylon are said to have killed the prophets, this is also true of literal Babylon (e.g., Dan. 6:16). Thus, these are fairly weak exegetical arguments for seeing Revelation’s Babylon as one and the same as Jerusalem. Instead, there are many reasons why Revelation’s Babylon should not be seen as Jerusalem:

1. John writes that Jerusalem is “spiritually called Sodom and Egypt” in Rev. 11:8, and yet no such language is used of Babylon, giving no indication that Babylon is to be seen as spiritual, rather than literal, Babylon.
   
   
2. “Babylon” is itself an explanation of a symbol, namely the “prostitute who sits on many waters” (Rev. 17:1-2, 5). To take this as anything less than literal Babylon would require seeing the interpretation of the symbolic vision as, itself, symbolic, something which is without precedent in scripture.
   
   
3. Babylon is said to sit upon seven mountains (Rev. 17:9), which is a fairly blatant reference to the seven hills of Rome. Jerusalem never had such a relationship with Rome, especially not during the first century, when there was great hostility between the two cities.
   
   
4. John writes that Babylon is ruler of the “kings of the earth” and an important center of commercial trade (Rev. 17:2; 18:3, 9-19). No such thing was true of Jerusalem in the first century.
   
   
5. Even as late as Revelation 16:19, the “great city” of Jerusalem is explicitly distinguished from Babylon. Preterists also understand the “great city” of this verse to be a reference to Jerusalem and yet fail to notice that God’s judgment on the great city is distinct from God’s judgment on Babylon.
   
   
6. Six times, it is said that Babylon “may in no way be found anymore” following its destruction (Rev. 18:21-23). This is not true of Jerusalem which remained under Jewish control for quite some time after AD 70. Even after the Jews were finally expelled in AD 135, it has always remained inhabited from that time until now.

As you can see, although the preterist arguments for Babylon being Jerusalem are superficially convincing, the description of Revelation’s Babylon does not match up in any way with first century Jerusalem. There is no exegetical reason to take these two cities as the same unless one already holds to a preconceived interpretive framework which requires one to make such an identification. But if Revelation’s Babylon refers to literal Babylon, or even if it refers to Rome as some interpreters suggest, this provides an even worse fit with the events of AD 70.

    Finally, the last preterist argument from the book of Revelation is that the specific judgments prophesied in that book came upon Judea and Jerusalem during the Jewish-Roman War. They claim to find support for this position in the accounts of ancient historians Josephus and Tacitus. These supposed ‘fulfillments’ fall into three separate categories:

1. Allegorizing the prophecies. For example, the second and third ‘trumpet’ and ‘bowl’ judgments (Rev. 8:8-11; 16:3-7) prophesy a great mountain falling into the seas, turning the entire sea blood-red and making the water poisonous to drink. Preterists often allegorize this prophecy to fit one battle of the Jewish-Roman War in which 6500 Jews were killed and their bodies cast into the Galilee (Wars 3.10.9). Yet this does not fit the prophesied events even a little bit, nor does the scale of the killings match the prophecy.
   
   
2. Citing ancient historians out of context. For example, the seventh ‘bowl’ judgment describes hailstones the weight of a talent coming down on the earth and killing many men. Preterists claim that this was perfectly fulfilled when the Romans cast talent-stones which had been painted white into the city of Jerusalem (Wars 5.6.3). However, Josephus immediately goes on to write that these stones failed to kill many men, and were then painted black in order to be more effective. This doesn’t fit the events of the prophecy at all when read in context.
   
   
3. Ignoring hyperbole in ancient accounts. For example, preterists often unironically cite Josephus’ and Tacitus’ descriptions of lightning flashes from the temple and armies fighting on the clouds as literal fulfillments of fantastic prophecies (Wars 6.5.3, Histories 5.13). However, this was simply a common way for ancient historians to hyperbolically describe major events in their day, since they saw wars and battles as manifestations of divine anger. Tacitus also describes the entire period from AD 69 - 96 as a period of “prodigies in the heavens and upon the earth” during which the gods were punishing Rome (Histories 1.3.3)

Overall, the supposed fulfillments of the judgments of Revelation during the Jewish-Roman War only match if the prophecies are allegorized to an absurd extent and/or the remarks of ancient historians are misconstrued and taken out of context. This really can’t be used as evidence for preterism over against futurism, especially in light of the many other specific prophecies which did not even come close to fulfillment during the first century.

    In summary, I think it is fairly clear that the prophecies of the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation were not in any way fulfilled during the first century, with the exception of Jesus’ prediction that the temple complex of His day would be thrown down (Matt. 24:2). Futurists are often accused of “newspaper exegesis”, erroneously reading prophecy into current-day events, and I agree that that’s a practice which should be stopped. However, preterists are guilty of the exact same thing to an even greater degree when they try to force the prophecies of the “great tribulation” to fit the events of the Jewish-Roman War. No such fulfillment is to be found, because these prophecies simply do not describe that time period.

Part 3: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/refuting-preterism-part-3.html

______________________________

[1] See Brent Shaw, “The Myth of the Neronian Persecution.”