70 A.D. ‘ism and the Date of Revelation

by Carl A. Allen

The doctrine of "70 A.D.'ism" demands that all the writings of the New Testament books be before 70 A.D. There is no way the books could be after that date. Their doctrine holds that the "Second Coming of Christ" occurred in 70 A.D. If there are books after 70 A.D. that teach about the second coming of Christ, then their doctrine could not be true — they have to argue that all the books written before 70 A.D. harmonize with their doctrine. It is not that some of the books could have been written after 70 A.D., but rather that all of the books of the New Testament had to have been written before 70 A.D. This is why I argue for an early date for the book of Revelation, before 70. A.D.

There are some facts that need to be addressed by those who believe Jesus' second coming was in A.D. 70.

1. Doctrines taught in Revelation after 70 A.D. that were not taught before 70 A.D.
   1. Nicolaitains, Revelation 2:6, 15;
   2. Jezebel, Revelation 2:20.
2. There was no time for the spiritual decline in Ephesus, Sardis, and Laodicea as is described in the book of Revelation.
3. There is strong evidence that the church at Smyrna did not exist in A.D. 70.
4. Laodicea experienced an earthquake in A.D. 60 and was destroyed by the same. It would have taken time for the church to become rich again, and thus, this material could not have been written before 70 A.D.

When those who defend the 70 A.D. doctrine are confronted with these facts, they just close their mouth about this subject and pass on to another thought. To say the least, this doctrine is based on many assumptions that do not match the facts.