Church History’s “Preterist Assumption”

EARLY CHURCH (EC) – A) Views espoused by all Christian sources during the first thousand years of church history, during which the only systematizing being done was in Catholic and Orthodox circles.  B) This class includes all the earliest church fathers, historians and pseudepigraphic writers, dating back to the writings of the New Testament.  C) Sources could be considered “Historicist” or “Futurist” but very rarely “Preterist” in any developed way (Eusebius would be the most likely to be considered Preterist)  (Broadest in Years, Broadest in Doctrine – First Thousand Years of Church History – Pret-related comments color-coded with “Historical Preterism” due to similarities)

MIDDLE AGE B/W EARLY CHURCH AND REFORMATION

     What momentum was being gained from the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity was largely slowed by the Imperial propaganda methods of the developing Catholic Church. Accordingly, there was little exegesis of any real worth or hermeneutical progression presented in the Middle Ages. Commenting on this point, the notable Milton Terry states the following:

“During the period extending from Gregory the Great to the time of Luther (A.D. 600 to A.D. 1500), the true exegetical spirit could scarcely be expected to maintain itself, or produce works of great merit. The monasteries became the principle seats of learning, and the treasuries of theological literature gradually found their way to them as to so many asylums. Superstition and ignorance effectually hindered the progress of critical inquiry.” (Biblical Hermeneutics, p. 661)

    During this period, Catholicism was apparently the only position to aggressively systematize its doctrine publicly — at least, all that has survived to this day.  This is due, without question, to the extent of its Imperial power, enabling the full suppression and destruction of dissenters and their writings.   The newer, holier Roman Empire fell from grace and was quick to utilize a tyrannical power which crushed all forms of dissent.  Luckily for all students of the Word, part of the Catholic Church’s strategy of control was to confiscate and archive the writings of dissenters for later use as research materials for Catholic refutations.  Thanks to the institution’s hoarding of wealth and information, much ancient material has survived the ages for contemporary examination — and there is a great deal of hope for the release of materials for centuries to come.

      It is highly likely that early and middle aged documents exist within the vast storehouses in Rome which espouse more fully developed preterist views, but which are unknown to the outside world.  Consider the famous preterist commentary on Revelation written by the Jesuit Alcasar, ‘Vestigatio Arcani Sensus in Apocalypsi’ (1604).  It is generally accepted that this work is not wholly original, but is built upon earlier works — including those not available to those outside of The Order.   Kathleen McCormack states that “preserved in the monastery libraries were.. the sacred books of the persecuted sects, such as the Gnostics and the Albigensians.” (Tarot Decoder, p. 15)  In the book “The Secret Vatican Archives,” it is claimed that there are 25 miles of protected archives within the Vatican library.

    Aside from what may still be hidden away to be revealed in the future, understanding of the doctrine of ‘rebellious’ sects is most often garnered from bits and pieces spoken from scaffolds, or that written in final wills and testaments – All other representation was given by inquisitors. Of the doctrinal representation that we do have from non-establishment sources, the majority focuses on defenses of the doctrines which led to the dissenters’ demise. As most materials relate to the authority of Christ or the priesthood of the believer, there is little presentation of eschatology in this era, aside from that accepted by the Catholic institution.  Some of the best materials generally available are found in the commentaries of the Latin Vulgate, referred to as scriptural glosses.

Below is a table of some of the Christian theologians of the Middle Ages.  Many display prophet fulfillment in the form of spiritual exercises, but nearly all remain within the official Futurist Catholic dogma.

• Sir Thomas More, or Colloquies on the Progress and Prospects of Society – “Sir Thomas More. — Remember that the Evangelists, in predicting that kingdom, announce a dreadful advent! And that, according to the received opinion of the Church, wars, persecutions, and calamities of every kind, the triumph of evil, and the coming of Antichrist are to be looked for, before the promises made by the prophets shall be fulfilled.  Montesinos.–To this I must reply, that the fulfilment of those calamitous events predicted in the Gospels may safely be referred, as it usually is, and by the best Biblical scholars, to the destruction of Jerusalem”

• Jesuit Futurism or Protestant Historicism – Times of Nigeria “This Jesuit Futurism sweeps 1,500 years of prophetic history under the proverbial rug by inserting its infamous gap theory. The gap theory teaches that when Rome fell, prophecy stopped, only to continue again at the time of rapture. Thus, the 10th horn, the little horn, the beast and the Antichrist have nothing to do with Christianity today.”

HISTORICAL VIEW OF FULFILLMENT REJECTED BY PROTESTANT REFORMERS,  WHO ESPOUSE POPE-CENTERED VIEW OF PROPHECY – THE RISE OF PARTIAL PRETERISTIC HISTORICISM

         Until the slackening of the Catholic power, believers had not the opportunity (or resources) to fully systematize or disseminate dissenting doctrinal positions. Once they were afforded the opportunity, however, diverse schemes of doctrine were created (or established), bringing into question the validity of nearly every doctrine of the Catholic church. It was during this great upheaval that the early church’s preterist presupposition were addressed critically for the first time. Though not forsaken, the fulfillment paradigm was generally discarded, and were replaced with a more contemporary prophetic scheme, with the Pope as the main antagonist.  During this same period, Premillennialism, today’s largest sect, was hardly mentioned. 

“We must remember that Premillennialism too was in almost total eclipse for a thousand years, between the time of Augustine and the Reformation, and that during the Reformation period and for a long time afterward it was held by only a few small sects that were considered quite heretical.” (Loraine Boettner, The Millennium, rev, ed, (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, [1957] 1984, 11.)

     The assumption of contemporary application of prophetic fulfillment, though held by a majority of non-Catholic Christians during the Reformation period, was clearly a response to the great evil so many saw in the Catholic establishment.   Serving as an example of the self-centered Futurism developed during this period is John Bradford:

“As now, dearly beloved, the wicked world rejoices, the papists are puffed up against Christ and his people after their own kind, now they cry out, Where are these new-found preachers?  These and such-like words they have, to cast in our teeth, as triumphers and conquerors; but, dearly beloved, short is their joy; they beguile themselves, this is but a lightening before their death. As God, after he had given the Jews a time to repent, visited them by Vespasian and Titus, most horribly to their utter subversion, delivering first all his people from among them, even so, my dear brethren, will he do with this age, when he has tried his children from amongst them, as now he begins to do, and, by suffering, has made us like to his Christ, and, by being overcome, to overcome indeed, to our eternal comfort. Then will he, if not otherwise, come himself in the clouds: (I Thess. iv.) I mean, our dear Lord, whom we confess, preach, and believe on; he will come (I say) with the blast of a trump, and shout of an archangel, and so shall we be caught up in the clouds to meet him in the air: the angels gathering together the wicked wretches, which now welter and wallow as the world and wind blows, to be tied in bundles and cast into the fire, which burns for ever most painfully. (Matt. xiii.)” (John Bradford: Sermons & Tracts, 1553)

     The Pontiff-centrism of this Futuristic eschatological position has since failed to bear witness of itself (and has since evolved into the ‘historicist’ view of prophecy), but the seeds of critical examination sown at that time brought about the greater critical examination of the foundational doctrines of eschatology.  This subsequently inaugurated a revival of Preterism in the 19th Century.

     This table will include the initial creators of the various Reformed theologies, as well as those bred in the theological culture that resulted. The Archive curator has chosen to end this list with John Gill, as he stands as a bridge between the evolution of Reformed theology, and the subsequent preterist revival which its writings helped facilitate.

     For a good example of the doctrine of this period, please read The Prophecy of the Destruction of Jerusalem – N. Nisbett (1787) or The Prophecy of Matthew 24 – Dr. Thomas Newton (1754).

Preterist Eschatology in the Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries

      PRETERIST REVIVAL HITS EUROPE, STALLS IN U.S.A. WITH RISE OF DISPENSATIONALISM, WW-I/II

     The preterist revival of today is simply a continuation of the brilliant light that was shined on the Scriptures in Europe during the 19th century. Seldom have we seen an entire century marked by such a consistent march toward greater and greater revelation of the doctrines of Scripture, as we saw then. Preterist doctrine, which was examined and treated critically, for the first time, in the Reformation period, benefited greatly from the scrutiny and painstaking examination afforded in the 19th century.   Scholars from every background embraced the early date of Revelation, including a bizarre endorsement from a founding father of Communism:

On the Early History of Christianity – Frederick Engels (1894) “But we have in the New Testament a single book the time of the writing of which can be defined within a few months, which must have been written between June 67 and January or April 68; a book, consequently, which belongs to the very beginning of the Christian era and reflects with the most naive fidelity and in the corresponding idiomatic language the ideas of the beginning of that era. This book is the so-called Revelation of John.. John describes his book at the very beginning as the revelation of “things which must shortly come to pass ; an immediately afterwards, I, 3, he declares “Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this prophecy … for the time is at hand.” To the church in Philadelphia Christ sends the message: “Behold, I come quickly.” And in the last chapter the angel says he has shown John “things which must shortly be done” and gives him the order: “Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.” And Christ himself says twice (XXII, 12, 20) “I come quickly.” The sequel will show us how soon this coming was expected..”

     The seeming lack of critical examination of fulfilled eschatology prior to the Reformation, is due, in my opinion, to not only the power of the Catholic institution, but also Christianity’s widespread acceptance of the fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse in the first century. There appear to be no extant writings which forward an exclusively future fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse before the turn of the millennium (the Archive curator does not claim to have read every available work).

     The first such paradigm to make this assertion came from a growing sentiment that the events and signs of the Olivet Discourse are relative to cosmological eschatology, as opposed to the historic belief in its relation to covenantal eschatology. Therefore, the 19th century scholarship can be seen as (though is not necessarily) greatly in response to the futuristic, cosmological claims. The authors represented here did not all agree with the strictly preterist interpretation of the Olivet Discourse (See Spurgeon, who believed in a primary and secondary fulfillment, yet taught that the new heavens and earth are the new covenant), but they each contributed a part of the overall understanding of the language and intent of the Scriptures.

     The “Anti-Preterist” literature which begin in the late 1700’s with Newton, gained a foothold in the 1800’s, showing the strength and reputation the view was gaining.  Benjamin Franklin, a preacher named after the American founding father, commented on the developing Preterist view in his 1869 work: The Second Coming of Christ and the Destruction of the World) “But there is another class of scoffers that this discourse has to do with. They say the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ has long since occurred–that he came the second time at the destruction of Jerusalem; that he there judged the world; separated the righteous from the wicked, and, consequently, argue that the coming of Christ, the judgment, and punishment of the wicked are all long since gone by. This fallacy must now be refuted. It must be shown that the coming of the Lord is yet future.” (The Gospel Preacher, Ch. 18)

     This period produced some of the finest Modern Preterist books to date, led (in my opinion) by Milton Terry’s Biblical Hermeneutics, which teaches the preterist view of Scripture, and is used to this day as a text-book in numerous Christian colleges and universities.     For a good example of the doctrine of this period, as it relates to Preterism, please read The Parousia, by James Stuart Russell, or Apocalypse of the Gospels, by Milton S. Terry.

The Ways of Providence.. The Overthrow of the Jewish Commonwealth by the Romans and the Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus – Robert Roberts (1881) “The survey of the ways of providence would be incomplete without something more than a glance at the events attending the overthrow of Jerusalem and disruption of the Jewish polity over thirty-five years after Christ left the earth. At first sight, it might seem as if this were outside the scope of the work which aims at the illustration of the subject from Biblical narrative alone. On a further consideration, however, the matter must appear otherwise. Although we have no scriptural narrative of the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, yet we have much scriptural forecast of that terrible event, and therefore the particulars of the event are the particulars of a divine work. ” | Holford, George Peter – The Destruction of Jerusalem (1803) | Renan, Ernest – Antichrist (1873) | Terry, Milton S. – Apocalypse of the Gospels (1898) | The Parousia  (1878) | Schaff, Philip – History of the Christian Church (1898)

Though preterist doctrine has been around since the earliest age, it wasn’t until the middle of the 19th century that the term “preterist” was applied to developed systems of fulfilled eschatology.   G.S. Faber is generally credited with coining the term to represent the then-emerging alternative to the prevailing futurist eschatology.   It was the wide publication of Samuel Lee‘s modern preterist viewpoint in the years 1830-1852 that brought about the need for Faber’s defintions, as Lee focused a great deal of attention on the field of study far ahead by presenting the earliest known Modern Preterist view.  The relationship between Faber and Lee is represents a particularly important moment in the history of preterism, as the personal relationship between the two, developed through letter writing, which helped sculpt the definitions which were subsequently used to distinguish between their views. 

“I was fully aware of the difference in our views on Prophecy. You, I know, are a Preterist” G.S. Faber to Lee in 1846

By bringing attention to his preterist view, Lee pushed the study of eschatology into a new field, one which distinguished preterism from futurism in the minds of scholars — particularly as it related to the re-establishment of the nation of Israel.   During the final decades of the 19th century, preterist scholarship developed into two different streams, those which saw all bible prophecy as having been fulfilled in the past, and those who retained an element of futurist expectation. 

At PreteristArchive.com, there are four major views distinguished —

• Futurism – (No Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 & Revelation in 1st C. – Types Only)

• Historical Preterism – (Minor Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 or Revelation in Past)

• Modern Preterism – (Major Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 or Revelation in Past)

• Hyper Preterism – (Total Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 and Revelation – All Full Preterism and “Resurrection Past” Teachings)

Following is a breakdown of the most significant Historical and Modern Preterist scholars during the decades since the turn of the twentieth century. 

HISTORICAL PRETERISM (HP) – A) Umbrella term covering all those who believe that only a slight amount of Bible prophecy was totally fulfilled in the early centuries of the Christian era.   Determined by looking at where authors find a “transition” from the past to the future using the Olivet Discourse of Matthew 24/25 and the Apocalypse of John.     B) This class has roots dating back to the first century, such as in the writings of Barnabus and Clement of Rome, and finds greater development in the writings of Justin Martyr and Eusebius.   The Catholic and Orthodox churches maintained HP through the Middle Ages.  Today’s contemporary forms were largely developed in the writings of Calvin, Luther, Grotius and Lightfoot.    C) Teaches that some of the Bible’s “end times” prophecies were fulfilled by AD70,  but that the substantial portion of prophetic fulfillment is yet to be revealed at the “last day.”   Transitions in the Middle of Matthew 24, or in the Middle of the Apocalypse of John.

MODERN PRETERISM (MP) – A) Umbrella term covering all those who believe that the majority of Bible prophecy was totally fulfilled in the early centuries of the Christian era.  Determined by looking at where authors find a “transition” from the past to the future using the Olivet Discourse of Matthew 24/25 and the Apocalypse of John.   Differs from Full Preterism in that it does not make the Parousia, the General Judgment, nor the General Resurrection events solely of the past.   B) According to known literature, this class emerged during the Reformation or Counter Reformation and can be seen in a fully developed form at the beginning of the 17th century in the writings of the Jesuit Alcasar — although many believe that the “Preterist Assumption” seen throughout church history reveals the ancient and medieval equivalents of the Modern Preterist view. (perhaps systematized the most consistenty in 310 by Eusebius in “Theophany“).   C) Teaches that the bulk of “end times” prophecy  has sole application to ancient Israel, but that some regards the “last day” — sometimes that “end” being personal, not global, in nature.  Transitions somewhere in Matthew 25, or near the end of the Apocalypse of John.

     Finally, it is worthy to note that the current critical review of Christianity’s various end-times systems is right on schedule.   Throughout the centuries, the one theological perspective that has avoided a general ‘reformation’ on a large scale is eschatology.  James Orr, lecturing at the end of the nineteenth century, offers support for this conclusion: 

“Various areas of Christian doctrine had received special attention and development at different periods in the history of the church.  Thus in the second century the church dealt especially with apologetics and the fundamental ideas of Christianity; in the third and fourth centuries, with the doctrine of God; in the fifth century, with man and sin; in the fifth to seventh centuries, with the person of Christ; in the eleventh to sixteenth centuries, with the atonement; and in the sixteenth century, with the application of redemption…  the peculiar interest of the modern age is eschatology, the one remaining undeveloped topic of theology.” (Millard J. Erickson, Contemporary Opinions in Eschatology, A Study of the Millennium, MI: Baker Book House, 1977, p. 11)

     Accordingly, the twentieth century did see a general re-introduction to the beauty and reliability of Preterism among students of the Bible, as the Futurist systems were critically challenged.   

     Obviously, the Preterist view of Bible prophecy has a rich tradition.  It is possibly the richest tradition in all of eschatology, and one which will only continue to grow.   As a side-effect of this growth, people’s lives are being changed – freed from the chains of the mentality of “Armageddon Now!” and the wearying ever-vigilant expectation for reprieve from the responsibilities of this world. The emergence of the 20th Century “Preterist Movement” in America led, surprisingly, to a growth in theological and political power.  This may turn out to be a hindrance more than a help, though, as the Spirit delivers his message through the weak things of the world.

     If the cross-denominational appeal of the Preterist view of Scripture is an indication, perhaps the splintering of the church during the Reformation era will find some healing. There are many different views on any given subject, so it is sometimes difficult for people to maintain charity and tolerance with their brothers. Given the difficulties that lie ahead for “Christendom,” such as reaching the Muslim and Jewish worlds, it is important not to get bogged down with petty disputes out of personal indulgences. By shifting Christian focus from the end of the world to the life in the world, the impact will no doubt be felt in every corner of the globe.

Even though the “prevailing theology” of our era may consider total fulfillment of end-times events heretical, Christian history’s presumption of prophetic fulfillment in the fall of Jerusalem is unequivocally settled as a fact.  The ultimate goal in unearthing these countless testimonies of Historical and Modern Preterism is not about proving “Preterism” to be true, but about defending the power and glory of our King, Jesus. — while at the same time hopefully rehabilitating the reputation of many dear Christians (start with Origen) who were deemed heretics for these views.

    By defending the total veracity of Christ’s Word, we unwittingly become players in a struggle much larger than simply theology.  There are many who, by various misleading methods, attempt to silence the powerful testimony of Jesus as the Spirit of Fulfilled Prophecy.  They despise the dissemination of this information, specifically, and perhaps only, because of how it glorifies Jesus as Lord (cf. Matthew 21:40-43).  Our true battle, therefore, is revealed as a Royal struggle for dynastic progression, complete with its own court intrigue (in the vie for power).  Many people through the centuries have been killed and countless documents destroyed in an attempt to silence these eschatological views, because of how they directly relate to the reign and rule of Jesus.   Therefore, the crux of the matter is not about prophecy, but at issue is our Lord’s authority and divinity.   

“A recognition of past errors can hardly fail to help us in disencumbering from fatal impediments the religious progress of the future.”  (F.W. Farrar History of Interpretation, preface, ix)

    In the future, we will trace the passing of the Preterist torch, from the revival of the last century, into the abuses of that trend in our own time.    In the meantime, let us now face the direction from which we came, and consider the pre-Christian era to see the foundation from which the preterist interpretation arose.  We will see that the exact same Roman-Jewish end-time scenario was taught among the Jews of the first centuries BC/AD!

“And we recognize that some of the blessings and curses have come, (24) those written in the Bo[ok of Mo]ses; therefore this is the End of Days” (4Q397 – 399)

The Dead Sea Scrolls and other archeological finds are pouring light onto the period of time reckoned by Preterists as “the last days”: AD30-70.   When fleeing Jerusalem during the Roman siege, scribes sealed numerous texts into the caves of the southwest Dead Sea area.  A portion of these was first discovered in 1947, with many more finds since then.  Below are excerpts from the various scrolls.  They collectively teach that they lived in “the end of days” and that a ruler was coming out of the East who would rule the world.  Josephus and others reckoned this figure with Roman general Vespasian, who was indeed hailed Emperor by his legions while still in Palestine.   Regardless, the glory of Christ’s throne outshines that of Vespasian to this day, and shows no sign of diminishing.   The “War Scroll” pits the Romans against Israel, using the term “Kittim” or “Chaldea” to refer to the Roman Empire.  The “Roman-Judean” end times view expressed in the Dead Sea Scrolls is also precisely what was taught by Daniel, Jesus, the first century Christians, and is also what is believed by Preterist Christians today.

JEWISH SOURCES – Comments from Josephus, the Talmud, Midrashim, and Apocalyptic Literature, including that found in among the Dead Sea Scrolls.  Contemporary Jewish literature is also collected under the classification. 

PRE-CHRISTIAN PRETERISM: THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND “THE KITTIM”

DEAD SEA SCROLLS – Materials Unearthed From Judean Wilderness  (From roughly second century B.C. to A.D.68 – Color coded with Jewish Soures)

Kittim as Rome – Pre-Christian Preterism

Refugees from Jerusalem’s besiegement stored numerous documents east of the city near Qumran.  Also found are likely Essene sect scrolls (Calvinistic Apocalypticism).    They are all of utmost significance for first century studies, and are highly preteristic — the commentaries (persherim) on Daniel and Habakkuk found among the documents remarkably identify the Romans with the apocalyptic nation referred to as “Chaldea” or “Kittim” in Numbers 24:24 and Daniel 11:30, making it the earliest known Preterist commentary (pre 68 B.C.)

This point is quite important, for if the Kittim of the Dead Sea Scrolls is to be identified with Rome, then according to their interpretation, the full scope of biblical prophecy ends with reference to Rome.   This is pre-christian preterism indeed! 

Numbers 24:24 (Balaam’s prophecy) “But ships will come from the coast of Kittim to subdue Ashur and subdue ‘Ever, but they too will come to destruction. 25 Then Bil’am got up, left and returned to his home; and Balak too went his way..”

Daniel 11:30 (Daniel’s prophecy) “For ships of Kittim shall come against him; therefore he shall be grieved, and shall return, and have indignation against the holy covenant, and shall do [his pleasure]: he shall even return, and have regard to those who forsake the holy covenant. [Rendered In the Latin Vulgate (A.D.405): 11:30 Et veniet super eum Trieres, et Romani: Daniel 11:30 “For the Romans shall come against him]

Habakkuk 1:6 (Habakkuk’s prophecy)  “For, behold, I raise up the Kasdim, that bitter and hasty nation, that march through the breadth of the eretz, to possess dwelling places that are not theirs.” (Jewish Names Bible)

The first scholar to investigate the scrolls seemed likewise excited by this possibility: “The new leather fragment now provided a first-century B.C.-A.D. testimony to the accuracy of the text as it has been preserved – Kasidim was clearly in the text used by the copyist.  The next line, however, begins, “Its interpretation concerns the Kittim….” The modern theory had already been propounded by interpretation by the ancient community two thousand years earlier!” – John C. Trever, The Untold Story of Qumran

• F.F. Bruce: New Testament History (Kittim is Rome) “They believed that the iniquities of the Wicked Priest and his associates would bring the judgement of God upon them.  As time went on, they came to see clearly who would be the instruments of God’s judgement.  God was raising up the ‘Kittim’ for this purpose, and by the ‘Kittim’, as has been said above, they probably meant the Romans.  It was indeed the Romans who, by their occupation of Judaea in 63 B.C., put an end to Hasmonaean domination; but the Qumran community could see the shape of things to come before that date.  They also saw that the Romans would exceed the terms of their commission and incur the divine judgement themselves because of their impiety and rapacity.”

• John Dominic Crosson “The Romans were not singled out as much in their (Essene) secterian documents, although against them, in their so-called War Scroll, they were preparing to fight the ultimate apocalyptic battle.  This was to take place at the end time, when Sons of Light, the members of the group, were to clash with the Sons of Darkness, the Romans, code-named the Kittim.  A battle against Rome did take place eventually, when the Roman general and soon-to-be emperor Vespasian marched through the area on his way to Jerusalem in the early summer of 68 C.E.  But the Qumran Essenes’ final battle did not end as the War Scroll imagined.  What de Vaux labeled and archeologists still call Phase II of the site ended in fiery destruction, with Roman arrowheads scattered around the site.  In their final desperate act, the members took and hid their sacred scrolls in nearby caves, rolled up in storage jars with bowls and lids, and they were not discovered again until a Bedouin shepherd stumbled upon them in 1947.” (Excavating Jesus, p. 158)

• Jones, Robert C. The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity (1999) ““Kittim” Commentary on Habakkuk 1:17: “This means the Kittim, who cause many to perish by the sword – youths, men, and old men; women and little children – and on the fruit of the womb have no mercy.” (Burrows, p. 367) War Scroll: And the dominion of the Kittim shall come to an end, so that wickedness shall be laid low without any remnant; and there shall be no survivor of the sons of darkness.” (Burrows, p. 390)

• On Some Points Connected with the Essenes – Lightfoot

• Dead Sea Scrolls: Reference Materials “It has also been hypothesized that the Qumran scrolls are the secreted library of a community, perhaps Essene, that lived at Qumran, and thus survived the destruction of the settlement in c.A.D. 68. Startling parallels in expression and thought between the Qumran materials and the New Testament have led to speculation as to their influence on early Christianity.” (Kittim: “Term appearing in the Dead Sea Scrolls, used of the Romans. The Kittim are referred to as warriors from the west, who capture Jerusalem.”

• Thanksgiving Hymn (I Cent.)

• Scroll Fragments | Cave Tour

• The Ballad of the White Horse (1911) – G.K. Chesterton “For the White Horse knew England When there was none to know; He saw the first oar break or bend, He saw heaven fall and the world end, O God, how long ago.

For the end of the world was long ago, And all we dwell to-day
As children of some second birth, Like a strange people left on earth, After a judgment day.

For the end of the world was long ago, When the ends of the world waxed free,
When Rome was sunk in a waste of slaves, And the sun drowned in the sea.

When Caesar’s sun fell out of the sky, And whoso hearkened right
Could only hear the plunging, Of the nations in the night.

When the ends of the earth came marching in, To torch and cresset gleam.
And the roads of the world that lead to Rome, Were filled with faces that moved like foam, Like faces in a dream

ADDED ABRIDGED LIST OF BOOKS CITING PRETERISTARCHIVE.COM

• 2000: John MacArthur – The Second Coming (p. 226,227)

• 2000: Raymond Robert Fischer – The children of God: Messianic Jews and gentile Christians (p. 78)

• 2001: Mother Jones: Volume 26 (p. 63)

• 2002: Joey Faust – The Rod: will God spare it? (p. 329)

• 2003: Sung Wook Chung – Alister E. McGrath and evangelical theology: a dynamic engagement (p. 118)

• 2003: Tim LaHaye – The End Times Controversy (p. 441)

• 2003: Ralph Allan Smith – The Eternal Covenant: How the Trinity Reshapes Covenant Theology (p. 24)

• 2003: Regula Grünenfelder – Frauen an den Krisenherden: eine rhetorisch-politische Deutung (p. 59)

• 2004: Buddy Hanson – Thy Will Be Done on Earth

• 2004: Peter J. Leithart – The promise of His appearing: an exposition of Second Peter (p. 4)

• 2004: John MacArthur – La segunda venida (p. 215)

• 2004: Thomas Nelson – The safe sites Internet yellow pages

• 2005: Don Hawkinson – Character for life: an American heritage : profiles of great men (p. 22)

• 2006: Paul Benware – Understanding End Times Prophecy: A Comprehensive Approach (p. 247)

• 2006: Anthony Testa – The Key of the Abyss (p. 103)

• 2006: Victoria Trimondi – Krieg der Religionen: Politik, Glaube und Terror im Zeichen de

• 2007: John Ankerberg – What’s the Big Deal about Jesus?: *Why All the Controversy? (p. 228)

• 2007: John Buckley – Prophecy Unveiled (p. 447)

• 2007: Louis Berkhof – Manual of Christian Doctrine (p. 146)

• 2007: Dillon Burroughs – The Jesus Family Tomb Controversy: How the Evidence Falls Short (p. 129)

• 2007: Robert Michael, Philip Rosen – Dictionary of antisemitism from the earliest times to the present (p. 39)

• 2007: Horner & Clendenen Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged (p. 353)

• 2007: Broadman & Holman – The HCSB Student Bible (p. 1792)

• 2007: Nur Masalha – The Bible and Zionism: invented traditions, archaeology (Vol. 1, p. 328)

• 2008: David Crowe – The Holocaust: roots, history, and aftermath (p. 37)

• 2008: Alden A. Mosshammer – The Easter computus and the origins of the Christian era (p. 366)

• 2008: Kent Stevens – DANIEL: Touchstone of Prophecy (p. 292)

• 2009: Simon Ponsombe – And the Lamb Wins: Why the End of the World Is Really Good News (p. 302)

• 2009: Allen Fuller – The GOSPEL PROPHECY: the Bible as Allegory (p. 145)

• 2009: Michael Ryan, Les Switzer – God in the Corridors of Power (p. 432)

• 2009: Duncan W McKenzie – The Antichrist and the Second Coming: A Preterist Examination (p. 457)

• 2009: Abdu Murray – Apocalypse Later: Why the Gospel of Peace Must Trump the Politics (p. 188)

• 2009: A.T. Steele – The Exegetical Study Guide Series: An Expositor’s Field Manual (p. 47)

• 2010: Paul Benware – Entienda la profecía de los últimos tiempos (p. 359)

• 2010: James R. Johnson – All Power to the Lamb (p. 465)

• COVENANT THEOLOGY: A Critical Analysis Of Current Pentecostal (p. 319)