Why Is/Isn't Nero The Beast (Preterism vs. Futurism)

[Servant89]

Claiming it without providing support for your position doesn't help a discussion, nor does it prove your side. It's tantamount to saying, "My position is right, yours is wrong, and that's that."

You are correct. However the last time I tried that, I was kicked out of this message board. We can badmouth anyone except the true antichrist, all hell breaks lose when that happens. Do not ask me, ask google and google will tell you that there is someone that beats Nero by far, I mean by far. Or just read Foxes Book of Martyrs.

God bless you markedward

Shalom

[DurbanDude]

You are correct. However the last time I tried that, I was kicked out of this message board. We can badmouth anyone except the true antichrist, all hell breaks lose when that happens. Do not ask me, ask google and google will tell you that there is someone that beats Nero by far, I mean by far. Or just read Foxes Book of Martyrs.

God bless you markedward

Shalom

I hear you Servant89, you know the old saying "all roads lead to Rome", well in prophecy many signs lead to Rome.

Preterists would agree that Rome is significant, however I believe the historical approach to Rome fails to explain many characteristics of this "beast" empire with its final ruler commonly known as the antichrist.

Some of the arguments have been mentioned in this forum, eg the fact that the iron Roman Empire of Daniel 2 becomes divided (Daniel 2:41) is obviously referring to when the Roman Empire did become divided into East and West. Preterists regard Daniel 2 as previously fulfilled before the great divide.

Another fact is that the beast empire of Rome is supposed to break the earth (or the Meditteranean) into pieces according to Daniel 7:23, but the Rome of old had a consoladating effect on the region. This breaking of the earth into pieces fits in more with the more recent conquest of South America and Africa by Europe, whereby entire continents were split into smaller countries during the colonisation phase of earth.

[kay-gee]

Preterists would agree that Rome is significant, however I believe the historical approach to

Rome fails to explain many characteristics of this "beast" empire with its final ruler commonly known as the antichrist.

This is the down fall of the prophecy buffs right here.

Commonly known as the anti-Christ??

Where does scripture denote anyone, political figure, or otherwise, as the anti-Christ?

Anti-Christ appears twice in scripture. (1John 4:3) (2John:7) Neither time does it indicate a man. It appears to be a teachng and a spirit.

The doctrine of Anti-Christ, as a future world ruler, is not biblical and clearly mans invention.

all the best...

[Cyberseeker]

There is no reason that Nero can not be a 'type' of the beast.
... I have no problem with there being 'levels' of fulfillment.

Exactly. Just as Antiochus Epiphenes was a 'type' of the beast before Nero and Diocletian was a 'type' of the beast after Nero.

"This is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come."
1 John 2:17-19

[Beckrl]

Exactly. Just as Antiochus Epiphenes was a 'type' of the beast before Nero and Diocletian was a 'type' of the beast after Nero.

"This is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come."
1 John 2:17-19

Cyber,

In your opinion what does "This is the last hour" mean?

Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

If then was the last hour what is today in reference to an coming of antichrist?

[Servant89]

I am not ignoring you, I will post something soon. Good conversation going on. I call it cross pollination.

All the best to you all!

Shalom

[DurbanDude]

Preterists would agree that Rome is significant, however I believe the historical approach to

This is the down fall of the prophecy buffs right here.

Commonly known as the anti-Christ??

Where does scripture denote anyone, political figure, or otherwise, as the anti-Christ?

Anti-Christ appears twice in scripture. (1John 4:3) (2John:7) Neither time does it indicate a man. It appears to be a teachng and a spirit.

The doctrine of Anti-Christ, as a future world ruler, is not biblical and clearly mans invention.

all the best...

I said there is a biblical figure that is commonly known as the antichrist, I didn't call him that myself. I agree that the bible does not refer to him as the antichrist, so I had that point all covered in my careful wording

This person is mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2,

2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
The bible describes him as a man. some may regarded this as symbolism, I don't, I believe there will be a literal "man of sin".

He is also mentioned in Daniel 11:
11:36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
11:37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.Some regard this man of Daniel 11 as an historical figure, however then we would have the strange situation that every event from 11:1-35 is precisely fulfilled in a literal historical manner, and then from verse 35 (which mentions the time of the end) we have no historical figure that precisely fits the prophecy.

This man is also mentioned in Rev 13. Beast are symbols of empires if we look at the biblical symbolic precedent set in Daniel 7 and 8. Yet this beast is given personal traits which is a sign that the prophecy is no longer referring to the empire as such, but to the leader of that empire (the precedent of this is also found in Daniel 7 and 8 where sometimes beasts or horns are no longer referring to the country, but refer to its leader)
13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

So there is consistent biblical reference to this "man of sin", and you are right , I shouldn't refer to him as the "antichrist", that word is not necessarily correct.

[kay-gee]

Are we not all men of sin? (Romans 3:23)

At any rate...I believe that the person or "office" spoken of here is past history, not future.

all the best...

[Servant89]

Are we not all men of sin? (Romans 3:23)

At any rate...I believe that the person or "office" spoken of here is past history, not future.

all the best...

I am with you Kay gee

:-)

Peace

[Stormcrow]

You do know that is this kind of line is not a proper Biblical test - that any "wisdom" a person receives which is positive towards your position is self-serving? How about those who pray and receive wisdom on this which points away from your position? Does their "wisdom" invalidate the material you have provided? Do you know that this approach for positive prayer guidance is also used by the Mormons to hook new recruits?

Furthermore, the "soon" your video witnesses talk about, doesn't mean in the Greek what he wants it to say from the English.

"'Engys' is used twice in the book of Revelation. In fact, the word 'engys' bookends Revelation in 1:3 and 22:10. The apostle writes, "Blessed in he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things that are written in it; for the time is 'near' (1:3). At the end of the book an angel speaks to John and says, "Do not seal up the words of this prophecy of the book, for the time is 'near'...

"In the original Greek text, both Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 read nearly the same way. The verses do not say the kingdom of God (or heaven) is at hand, but 'the season (kairos) is sure'. Here in Revelation, why did John not use the Greek word 'kronos', which would have indicated a nearness in a certain chronological sense? Also, why in these verses did he not use the verb 'engyzo' (with the perfect sense), but instead, simply the noun 'enbys'? John is simply focusing on the fact of the certainty about the season someday coming, and is not emphasizing the closeness of the events." (p. 293)

"This family of Greek words (engys, engizo) is a compound with a preposition and a noun meaning "in (the) hand". As an adverb, it carries the thought that something "is certain, it is a sure thing", "one has it in his hand". The 'Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament" Greek lexicon gives the meaning of the related word 'engyos' as "standing as surety, guaranteeing... In other words, 'certainty' is one of the most compelling meanings for the word..." (p. 285)

- The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack by Tim F. LaHaye (Editor), Thomas Ice (Editor)

Well we're in luck, then, because the verses in chapters one and 22 aren't the only ones that speak to the imminence of Christ's return:

^{7} "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write...

{10} ~'Because you [not us] have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you [not us] from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those [not these] who dwell on the earth. {11} ~'I am coming quickly; hold fast what you [not us] have, so that no one will take your [not our] crown. Revelation 3:7a,10-11 (NASB)

Why would the risen, glorified Christ tell John to write something to a church that He knew wouldn't happen in their lifetimes?

[dan]

I'm just now getting into the whole eschatology thing so forgive my ignorance on this issue

I'm familiar with the Nero=Best argument, and I was just reading a preterist article on the subject

Details.

No evidence exists, to my knowledge, that the details of Revelation are fulfilled in the past, therefore, they must be futuristic.