The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 2

I. Alcazar Projects Conflicting Preterist Interpretation

Not satisfied with Futurism’s deflection of Protestant interpretation, and in a further but differing attempt to absolve the Papacy from the stigma of Antichrist, the Jesuit Alcazar was moved to proffer the Preterist theory of counter interpretation. This scheme contended that the prophecies of Revelation were descriptive of the victory of the early church, as fulfilled in the downfall of the Jewish nation and the overthrow of pagan Rome, and in this way limited their range to the first six centuries of the Christian Era, and making Nero the Antichrist. PFF2 506.3

1. LIMITED TO EARLY OVERTHROW OF JEWS AND PAGANISM

Luis DE ALCAZAR, or Alcasar (15541613), Spanish Jesuit of Seville, in order to meet Protestant positions, devoted himself, from 1569 onward, first to the study of philosophy and then to the study of Scripture. Despite his incessant activities his 900 page commentary, Vestigatio Arcani Sensus in Apocalypsi (Investigation of the Hidden Sense of the Apocalypse)—the result of forty years’ study—was published posthumously, in 1614. ¹ In this work dedicated to the Catholic Church, he made a new at tempt to interpret the Apocalypse by this Preterist scheme of exposition, that is, by the thesis that the prophecies were fulfilled in the past. PFF2 507.1

Applying the New Jerusalem to the Catholic Church, Alcazar contended that the Apocalypse describes the twofold war of the church in the early centuries—one with the Jewish synagogue, and the other with paganism—resulting in victory over both adversaries. Revelation 1 to 11 he applied to the rejection of the Jews and the desolation of Jerusalem by the Romans. Revelation 12 to 19 Alcazar allotted to the overthrow of Roman paganism and the conversion of the empire to the church, the judgment of the great Harlot being effected by the downfall of pagan idolatry; Revelation 20 he applied to the final persecution by Antichrist, and the day of judgment; and chapters 21 and 22, referring to the New Jerusalem, he made descriptive of the glorious and endless triumphant state of the Roman church. ² PFF2 507.2

2. SUMMARIZING VIEW OF ALCAZAR’S POSITIONS

In greater detail Alcazar made the seals the early expansion of apostolic Christianity, its vicissitudes, poverty, and persecution; then God’s longsuffering, warnings, and punishments allotted to the Jews; ³ the trumpets, the judgments on fallen Judaism; ⁴ the Two Witnesses, the doctrine and holy lives of the Christians; and after the persecutions Christianity arising with new glory and converting many Jews. ⁵ Revelation 12 was the apostolic church bringing forth the Roman church; the first beast of Revelation 13 was declared to be the persecuting arrogance of pagan Rome, and the second beast, its carnal wisdom; ⁶ Revelation 17, the mystical meaning of idolatrous ancient Rome; and Revelation 18, its conversion to the Catholic faith. ⁷ PFF2 507.3

Picture 1: ANTICHRIST SHIFTED EITHER FORWARD OR BACKWARD
Ribera Thrust Antichrist Into the Future, Confined to Three and One-half Literal Years; Aleazar Pushed Antichrist Back Into the Early Centuries-Both of Them Outside the Middle Ages and the Reformation Period, Designated by All Protestants for Antichrist’s Reign of 1260 Literal Years
Page 508

Revelation 20 presented the era of the peaceful and public exercise of the Catholic religion, with the thousand years as a mystical number—the fullness of time until the coming of Antichrist and Revelation 21, the Roman church or New Jerusalem. ⁸ Thus all except those in the latter part of chapter 20—that is, the events at the end of the millennium—were believed fulfilled in the early ages of Christianity, or by the fifth and sixth centuries. The forty two months, or 1260 days, of the Witnesses’ preaching in sackcloth Alcazar applied to the early Jewish persecution of the Christians, paralleling the former persecution of the jews by Antiochus for three and one half years. In this explanation Alcazar omitted any specific application of the three and one half days’ interval of the Witnesses’ death; ⁹ and he interpreted similar time periods rather vaguely. ¹⁰ PFF2 508.1

Alcazar was the first to apply Preterism to the Apocalypse with anything like completeness, though it had previously been applied somewhat to Daniel. It thus pioneered the way for acceptance first by Hugo Grotius of the Netherlands, and later by the German Rationalists, as will be noted. PFF2 509.1

3. CONFLICT BETWEEN OPPOSING INTERPRETATIONS

Though the Jesuits had laid much stress on minor differences among Protestant expositors as evidence of the unsoundness of their positions, yet these same Jesuits differed and warred even more violently among themselves. PFF2 509.2

Alcazar was fully aware that he contradicted certain of the fathers, differed from the Futurists Ribera and Viegas, and was in conflict with Malvenda. While approving of the concept of the spiritual resurrection held by Augustine, he contended against his view of the binding of Satan, as well as that of Ribera and of Viegas. ¹¹ And he strongly disagreed with Malvenda on the interpretation of the Babylon of Revelation 17 as all the multitude of the wicked, declaring it to be pagan Rome; he also disagreed with Ribera and Viegas over the admission that Babylon might be Rome in the last days, becoming heathen again, and persecuting Christians. ¹² Alcazar made the church’s millennium of rest to date from the downfall of old pagan Rome—his apocalyptical Babylon—with the destruction of Roman idolatry in the spiritual fires of the Catholic religion. ¹³ Such, in brief, was Alcazar’s Preterism. PFF2 509.3