What do you think?
Rate this book
Revelation and the First Century: Preterist Interpretations of the Apocalypse in Early Christianity
The increase in understanding of biblical eschatology in recent decades has brought with it a return to biblical preterism—the view that much of biblical prophecy which we formerly considered to pertain to our future was actually fulfilled in the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Critics of this viewpoint have often accused it of being “novel” in Christian history, and worse, some citing a Jesuit conspiracy in the 1600s for its origin! With Revelation and the First Century Francis Gumerlock has done an invaluable service to everyone interested in prophecy and church history. Dr. Gumerlock provides dozens of citations from early church history proving that many of them held a preterist view from the very first days of Christianity onward.
Among the many new insights gained in this book, you will read from many early and medieval Christians who believed:
John wrote Revelation before A.D. 70
“The hour of testing” (Rev 3:10) occurred immediately after the death of Nero
The Emperor Titus was one of the horsemen of the Apocalypse
The seal and trumpet judgments were fulfi lled in the first century Roman-Judean war
The Roman Emperor Nero was the beast of Revelation 13
Nero’s name was used in calculation of the number of the beast, 666
And much, much, more. . . .
Perhaps even more impressive, Dr. Gumerlock has combed through dozens of ancient manuscripts that have never before been translated into English. Revelation and the First Century will lead to a number of historical reassessments of Bible prophecy.
About the Author: FRANCIS “FRANK” GUMERLOCK (Ph.D., historical theology) teaches Latin and theology in Colorado. His other books on eschatology include The Day and the Hour (2000), The Early Church and the End of the World co-authored with Gary DeMar (2006), and The Seven Seals of the Apocalypse (2009).
Critics of this viewpoint have often accused it of being “novel” in Christian history, and worse, some citing a Jesuit conspiracy in the 1600s for its origin! With Revelation and the First Century Francis Gumerlock has done an invaluable service to everyone interested in prophecy and church history. Dr. Gumerlock provides dozens of citations from early church history proving that many of them held a preterist view from the very first days of Christianity onward.
Among the many new insights gained in this book, you will read from many early and medieval Christians who believed:
John wrote Revelation before A.D. 70
“The hour of testing” (Rev 3:10) occurred immediately after the death of Nero
The Emperor Titus was one of the horsemen of the Apocalypse
The seal and trumpet judgments were fulfi lled in the first century Roman-Judean war
The Roman Emperor Nero was the beast of Revelation 13
Nero’s name was used in calculation of the number of the beast, 666
And much, much, more. . . .
Perhaps even more impressive, Dr. Gumerlock has combed through dozens of ancient manuscripts that have never before been translated into English. Revelation and the First Century will lead to a number of historical reassessments of Bible prophecy.
About the Author: FRANCIS “FRANK” GUMERLOCK (Ph.D., historical theology) teaches Latin and theology in Colorado. His other books on eschatology include The Day and the Hour (2000), The Early Church and the End of the World co-authored with Gary DeMar (2006), and The Seven Seals of the Apocalypse (2009).
243 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 2012
1 person is currently reading
36 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
September 23, 2019
The book accomplishes its purpose of providing quotes from early Christianity that were preterist in nature. The aim was to show that preterism is not a recent understanding of prophecy, but is one that was prevalent among the early church.
January 19, 2014
What a great book! Very similar to the edition the author co-wrote with Gray DeMar (The Early Church And The End Of The World) but with much more content and more recent translated documents.
In a nutshell, this book has one goal - to close the mouths of those who speak as if preteristic understandings were totally absent in all of church history. As the author states in the introduction:
One common criticism against preterist interpretations of the book of Revelation is their alleged lack of representation in Christian history. Oponents of preterist interpretations of Revelation say that such views did not exist in ancient Christianity but were introduced into Christianity in the 1600s by the Jesuit names Luis Alcasar, sometimes spelled Alcazar. This, of course, implies that such interpretations are novel. For Christians, "novel" tends to mean that such interpretations are un-orthodox and not in agreement with the ancient faith handed down to us by the apostles.
What I find really shocking about this, is that many of today's dispensational teachers stand on this understanding too. Yet they seem to be oblivious that their brand of dispensational prophetic scheme has no history in the church until the early 1800's.
Of course, this book shows conclusively that the skeptics wrong as the author uncovers quote after quote from what seems like every century in church history, showing that there were plenty of preteristic interpretations on most all of the major pieces and parts of Revelation. Maybe the dispensationalists can try to do the same for their case.
The author deals with issues like the dating of the book of Revelation, the great tribulation, the identity of the four horsemen, the 144,000, the various seals, the two witnesses, the number of the beast, the kings, the forty-two months, and more. He also looks at Matthew 24, the budding fig tree, Daniel's seventieth week, and more.
While he is not attempting to prove that a solid, consistent preteristic view is necessarily prominent in Church history, he does show, contrary to what the skeptics claim, that many key parts that have been labeled as always related to our future, have in fact been viewed by many in history as pertaining to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and surrounding events of the first century.
Both this book and the aforementioned book with Demar are great additions for reference by any that have an interest is eschatological understandings, especially preteristic ones.
In a nutshell, this book has one goal - to close the mouths of those who speak as if preteristic understandings were totally absent in all of church history. As the author states in the introduction:
One common criticism against preterist interpretations of the book of Revelation is their alleged lack of representation in Christian history. Oponents of preterist interpretations of Revelation say that such views did not exist in ancient Christianity but were introduced into Christianity in the 1600s by the Jesuit names Luis Alcasar, sometimes spelled Alcazar. This, of course, implies that such interpretations are novel. For Christians, "novel" tends to mean that such interpretations are un-orthodox and not in agreement with the ancient faith handed down to us by the apostles.
What I find really shocking about this, is that many of today's dispensational teachers stand on this understanding too. Yet they seem to be oblivious that their brand of dispensational prophetic scheme has no history in the church until the early 1800's.
Of course, this book shows conclusively that the skeptics wrong as the author uncovers quote after quote from what seems like every century in church history, showing that there were plenty of preteristic interpretations on most all of the major pieces and parts of Revelation. Maybe the dispensationalists can try to do the same for their case.
The author deals with issues like the dating of the book of Revelation, the great tribulation, the identity of the four horsemen, the 144,000, the various seals, the two witnesses, the number of the beast, the kings, the forty-two months, and more. He also looks at Matthew 24, the budding fig tree, Daniel's seventieth week, and more.
While he is not attempting to prove that a solid, consistent preteristic view is necessarily prominent in Church history, he does show, contrary to what the skeptics claim, that many key parts that have been labeled as always related to our future, have in fact been viewed by many in history as pertaining to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and surrounding events of the first century.
Both this book and the aforementioned book with Demar are great additions for reference by any that have an interest is eschatological understandings, especially preteristic ones.
May 16, 2016
I bought the pdf version of this book for $8.95 at americanvision.org. They also have Kindle and Epub versions for 9.95. The paperback is 14.95, about half the price of Amazon.
Gummerlock claims the Ascension of Isaiah as a first century reference to Nero because he supposedly murdered his mother.
4.2. After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king.
3. Will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires.
5. And at his word the sun will rise at night and he will make the moon to appear at the sixth hour.
Did the sun rise at night for Nero? Couldn't the mother slayer just as easily be an allusion to Rev 17:16? I understand that this is metaphoric language, but why take one part literally and not the rest? Is there any consistency? Does it make sense to take a speculative reconstruction of a fourth century commentary (Tyconius) and claim that it implies the pre 70 AD writing of Revelation?
It's this sort of over enthusiasm that gives me pause. It would make more sense to search for the apostolic tradition about these things. Why not closely examine early writings like the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas for clues? How about second temple literature like 1 Enoch which speaks of seven mountains and kings of the earth? I don't have a lot of faith in the sort of geo-political allegory of preterism.
Gummerlock finds bits and peaces of preteristic interpretation from the third century to the 15th. After all this he admits Alcasar presents a more consistent, full-scale preterist approach to
Revelation than his predecessors.
Gummerlock claims the Ascension of Isaiah as a first century reference to Nero because he supposedly murdered his mother.
4.2. After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king.
3. Will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
4. This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires.
5. And at his word the sun will rise at night and he will make the moon to appear at the sixth hour.
Did the sun rise at night for Nero? Couldn't the mother slayer just as easily be an allusion to Rev 17:16? I understand that this is metaphoric language, but why take one part literally and not the rest? Is there any consistency? Does it make sense to take a speculative reconstruction of a fourth century commentary (Tyconius) and claim that it implies the pre 70 AD writing of Revelation?
It's this sort of over enthusiasm that gives me pause. It would make more sense to search for the apostolic tradition about these things. Why not closely examine early writings like the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas for clues? How about second temple literature like 1 Enoch which speaks of seven mountains and kings of the earth? I don't have a lot of faith in the sort of geo-political allegory of preterism.
Gummerlock finds bits and peaces of preteristic interpretation from the third century to the 15th. After all this he admits Alcasar presents a more consistent, full-scale preterist approach to
Revelation than his predecessors.
January 18, 2016
The author’s purpose is not necessarily to prove preterism (the belief that most of the prophecies of the book of Revelation were fulfilled in the first century by the year 70 AD), but to demonstrate that, despite arguments to the contrary by modern critics, the 17th century Jesuit, Luis Alcasar, was NOT the first person to make the case for preterism. This is a well-documented, scholarly (though very readable) journey through church history that clearly details preterist beliefs down through the ages. Many of these ancient insights are very interesting and helpful in understanding preterist interpretations of prophetic Scripture passages. Though the main focus of the book is on Revelation, Gumerlock also devotes chapters to other prophetic passages in the Bible such as Matthew 24 and Daniel 9. The price is a bit steep for a paperback of its length ($27.90 on Amazon), but these kinds of scholarly books with limited audiences tend to be a somewhat pricey. I highly recommend this work to anyone interested in serious studies on preterism.
For anyone looking for other helpful resources on partial preterism, may I recommend the following: Before Jerusalem Fell—Dating the Book of Revelation, by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr; The Beast of Revelation, also by Gentry; The Last Days According to Jesus, by R. C. Sproul.
For anyone looking for other helpful resources on partial preterism, may I recommend the following: Before Jerusalem Fell—Dating the Book of Revelation, by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr; The Beast of Revelation, also by Gentry; The Last Days According to Jesus, by R. C. Sproul.
January 7, 2013
This is a really interesting source of Preterist interpretations. It is also very well organized, logical, and gracious to those of an opposite persuasion.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews