It started with a game of Risk. I suppose it’s only appropriate that my rethinking of matters related to the victorious dominion of the King started with the game of global domination.

Fall, 2003. A group of guys from church were gathered together on a Friday evening for an intensely brutal Risk tournament. The stakes were high. A crude homemade three dollar trophy. Only one would emerge victorious and leave with the prize.

Don’t think ill of me for this, but despite knowing my Bible, I didn’t start in Jerusalem and spread out to Judea, Samaria, and then to the uttermost parts of the earth. I started in South America. (Only because another guy was dead set on Australia.)

In our school age Bible classes, we followed a curriculum where we teach the Bible through from beginning to end over a period of three years. We were at the end of year two, and the deacon who scheduled the teachers had just finished the assignments for year three which was coming up. “You’re going to teach the high school class on Revelation” he told me as we rolled the dice. My mouth dropped. I was daunted, but excited. Like most Christians, I had avoided that crazy book at the end of our Bible. I had once sat through a short class on it (taught by the preacher where I was attending at the time, Bob Archer, in which he leveraged material from Homer Hailey and Robert Harkrider) but had never really studied it for myself. Thus my excitement – nothing forces you to study something like being assigned to teach it.

Being a fourth generation member of the Church of Christ, the first thing I did was secure a copy of Homer Hailey’s commentary. I noticed he spent a considerable amount of time defending the “late date” of the book (~AD95, during the reign of Domitian), but also noted that many respectable scholarly Christians hold to the early date (~AD65, during the reign of Nero) and see the book as describing events surrounding and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

In the aforementioned class, Bob Archer had mentioned in passing that some believed the book was about the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. I remember thinking how ludicrous that sounded. How could this book describing such great cataclysmic events on a cosmic scale be about the destruction of a single city?

Nevertheless, I thought I might as well at least acquaint myself with the view. So, being a fourth generation member of the Church of Christ, I picked up the commentary by Foy Wallace who taught the early date and the A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem view. I also came across another guy I had never heard of but who had written some things on the A.D. 70 view that sounded most compelling and demanded a closer look: Arthur Ogden. Particularly influential was a piece he wrote called “Dating the Apocalypse”, which I found online at a site called The Preterist Archive; a site I would frequent in the months and years to come. (Hey Todd.)

I printed out “Dating the Apocalypse” and gave it a careful thorough reading two or three times over. Little by little, the evidence for the early date was piling up, and the evidence for the late date was looking less and less convincing. The strongest argument for the late date seemed to be a single quote from second century church leader Irenaeus of Lyons, which upon closer examination was quite obscure. Meanwhile, I was becoming more and more convinced that (to quote Robert Young of “Young’s Analytical Concordance” and “Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible”) “the internal evidence is wholly in favor of the early date.” The last straw was the identity of Babylon in chapters 17 and 18. Arthur Ogden systematically showed in painstaking detail how there were too many things said of Babylon to prevent it from being Rome, but how every detail fit Jerusalem.

I remember slapping my hand on the table and proclaiming “that’s it!” I was sold on the date and theme of Revelation.

To summarize a few of the arguments which convinced me of the early date:

Obviously, there’s a lot more to these arguments, as well as counter-arguments which I’m quickly passing over but will be happy to address in more detail should anyone be interested.

These were my main arguments at the time. Now, 15 or so years later, I am still an advocate of the early date as I believe the evidence leans slightly in that direction, but several of these arguments I now find less convincing. Perhaps a future installment on that when we get to the point of debunking full preterism in this series. (I know many are anxiously waiting for that part. Patience.)

Fall, 2004. Having been consumed with studying Revelation for the better part of a year, it was now time for me to teach the class. When I looked at the agenda, however, it actually wasn’t supposed to be a full course on Revelation. It was supposed to cover the latter part of Hebrews through Revelation, meaning the Apocalypse would only get a brief mention.

Doh!

I guess I had misunderstood. Instead of “hey Jarrod, you’re going to have to teach a full class on Revelation” it was meant as “hey Jarrod, the material you’ll be teaching will briefly include Revelation”. It’s funny to consider what an impact that little misunderstanding has had!

Thankfully, my labor was not in vain. Having spent so much time in preparation, I asked the elders if I could do the full class on Revelation, and they obliged. In the class I presented a diplomatic case for both positions and focused the class mainly on the principles and lessons we can all take from the book. At least I tried to be diplomatic. They saw right through me.

By this point it was apparent that A.D. 70 was a far more significant event and played a far more significant role in scripture than I had realized. Previously obscure passages were coming to light, and with it the Bible was coming alive in a whole new and exciting way.

Anyone spending significant time in the book of Revelation will find themselves frequenting the Olivet Discourse as well (Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, Luke 21). My granddad, Jesse Jenkins, knew I was studying these things and handed me an article Homer Hailey had written on Matthew 24. “That’s the best thing you’ll ever read on Matthew 24” he said.

We’ll pick up there next time.

And by the way, since you’re surely dying to know, yes, I won the risk tournament that night!

---

What do you think? When do you believe Revelation was written? What do you believe it is mainly speaking about? What aspects of it have been fulfilled? What aspects of it are awaiting fulfillment? How do you discern between the two? (This the second installment of an ongoing series which can be viewed here: If you would like to be notified of future installments, message me or comment below.)