I do not exaggerate when I say that I’ve never seen the prophetic portions of scripture handled more irresponsibly. This writer distorts and goes beyond the most extreme forms of non-millennial and anti-futurist viewpoints of preterism and / or amillennialism. At least those schools recognize a great tribulation and some form of Antichrist. Even if they interpret this to be Nero, or the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem, still, they understand that any “dominion” that Christ secured at the cross did not mean that the early church would not face a future falling away and Antichrist persecution. Even on amillennial terms, Satan’s “little season” is still future, as this is where many amillennialists locate a future Antichrist, just prior to what they see as a general resurrection, with no millennium to follow.

Even in the view of preterists and amillennialists, the early church is not so completely ‘done with the devil’, as to be exempt from what was certainly to them a future tribulation and Antichrist (2Thes 2:3-4). The “dominion” of the fourth beast was not so completely broken, as to exempt the early church from its expectation of a future tribulation of unequaled severity (Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21; Rev 7:14).