Just because Justin Martyr didn’t mention it doesn’t mean he didn’t hold the viewpoint. It is just a likely that Justin Martyr believed that it was such an obvious point that it didn’t need to be stated. It would go hand-in-hand with the “a thousand years in Jerusalem” statement and anyone reading it in context and contemporaneously would understand his viewpoint.
What I find interesting that the first person to outspokenly argue against a premillenial position was the heretic Marcion.
How would you know he held that viewpoint, or how could you claim he held that viewpoint, is he never mentioned it?
It is just a likely that Justin Martyr believed that it was such an obvious point that it didnt need to be stated.
Thats not an argument, it just presumption.
What I find interesting that the first person to outspokenly argue against a premillenial position was the heretic Marcion.
And one of the first to argue for the premil view the heretical sect of the Ebionites, and Cerinthus, who was a Gnostic, that even before Marcion. Thats called guilt by association, BTW.