JERUSALEM; ROME; REVELATION - The Preterist Archive

162. Tacitus (writing probably around 115 A.D.) states 57 that Domitian’s name was
placed at the head of all imperial despatches and edicts issued from Rome during 69 to 71
A.D. Though then but a youth of eighteen years, Domitian’s mind became filled with
ambitious ideas, and, says Suetonius 58 (writing probably around 135 A.D.), the young
Domitian began to use his power arbitrarily. Indeed, Dio Cassius, writing in approximately
220 A.D., states 59 that Vespasian wrote to Domitian from Egypt: “I am much obliged to you,
my son, for letting me still be Emperor - and for not as yet having deposed me!”
163. It is more remarkable still, however, that even after Vespasian’s A.D. 71 return to
Rome, Domitian continued to exercise political rule or archee. 46 Indeed (thus the
Encyclopaedia Britannica), 53 both before and during “his father’s lifetime” as Emperor
Vespasian, even Domitian himself frequently exercised quasi-imperial authority. From A.D.
69 until 71, Domitian “was several times Consul.”
164. After his father’s death in A.D. 79, from that latter year until A.D. 81 Domitian
“was nominally the partner in [ruling over] the Empire with his brother Titus.” 53 Then, from
A.D. 81 to 96, Domitian alone ruled as Emperor - unchallenged. For, as the Encyclopaedia
Britannica again remarks, from then onward “Domitian’s succession (on September 13th A.D.
81) was unquestioned” 53 until the time of his own death as Sole Emperor (in A.D. 96).
165. Clearly, then, there is no necessary irreconcilability at all between Domitian’s two
different periods of imperial rule (on the one hand) and the testimony of Irenaeus about
Domitian (on the other). All that Irenaeus says, 46 is that John was “seen” by men “since” the
time he wrote the book of Revelation (apparently in A.D. 68 to 69?). For Irenaeus’s
statement that John was seen “towards the end of Domitian’s archee” - is equivocal.
166. This may mean that John was “seen” (say in A.D. 71) “towards the end of
Domitian’s rule” from A.D. 69 to 71. Or this could alternatively mean that John was seen at
the beginning or “ archee of Domitian’s rule” - meaning his total “rule” from A.D. 69 to 96.
167. Again, there is no irreconcilability between the circumstances of Domitian’s rule
and Eusebius’s account of Irenaeus’s version of it. For - without specifying whether he
means the first (A.D. 69 to 71) or the second (A.D. 93 to 96) Domitianic persecution - even
Eusebius rather broadly states: “It is said[!] that in this persecution the Apostle and Evangelist
John was on the island of Patmos.” 60 Indeed, as suggested in sections 58 & 59 above, there
could even have been two distinct Domitianic persecutions at two different times - one in the
late sixties and the other in the early nineties of the first century A.D. - with the same Apostle
John involved in both of them.
168. As stated previously, Pre-Irenaean patristic sources (themselves independent of
one another) claim an early date (of A.D. 66 to 69) for the inscripturation of the book of
Revelation. 61 This early date was insisted upon by at least three Early-Church sources before
Irenaeus, 62 and by at least fifty scholars after him. 63
169. For a good modern-day statement of this “early date argument” on the vintage of
the Apocalypse, let us again hear Rev. Professor Dr. Philip Schaff (whose eight-volume
- 29 -