Full-Preterist Challenge

[Osgiliath]

Since this question is conveniently being lost (and avoided) in the midst of other threads, I'll pose this challenge in a thread of its own. This question is intended for full-preterists who claim Nero Caesar was "the beast".

*If Revelation was written during Nero's reign as some claim (ruled 54 AD - 68 AD); and Nero was the sixth ruler of Rome ("there are also seven kings, five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come" - Revelation 17:10 - i.e. Nero was the one that "is" when John wrote Revelation); it is NOT possible (Biblically) for Nero to be the beast. Notice that the beast was to be an "eighth ruler" who was and "is not" when Revelation was written ("The beast that was and is not, is himself the eighth."). Nero cannot be BOTH the sixth AND eighth king. He cannot be both the one who is, and also be the one who is not. Some claim the beast (Nero) was cast into the lake of fire in 70 AD, yet Nero was not destroyed by Christ’s parousia in 70 AD; he committed suicide in 68 AD. So the question is:

*If Nero was the SIXTH king, and it is written that the beast will be the EIGHTH king, who was the beast?

Revelation 17:10 "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space."

Revelation 17:11 "And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth"


*If Nero was the sixth (who is), who was the eighth (who is not)?

 

[Osgiliath]

Notice how quiet the full-preterists are when there is no wiggle room for twisting Scripture. Putting pride above Biblical truth is the hallmark of false teachers.

 

[parousia70]

Notice how quiet the full-preterists are when there is no wiggle room for twisting Scripture. Putting pride above Biblical truth is the hallmark of false teachers.

I'm silent BECAUSE it's directed toward FULL preterists only.

Why, I have no idea though.
Partial preterists recognize Nero as the Beast of Revelation as well.

Regardless, as Has been shown throughout this board, this all amounts to an ongoing Futurist attempt to find a way to assert Jesus FAILED to Fulfill His Promise to come to the FIRST CENTURY PEOPLES to whom the promise to come TO, was given.

 

[Osgiliath]

Well, partial-preterist or full preterist - answer the question. There is no attempt at anything but Biblical exegesis. I thought you guys liked this kind of thing. Also, I am well aware of the fact that Jesus keeps His promises, so there is no need to keep reminding me. So, dissect the question and give it a shot at least. And don’t diminish the importance of the passage as if it’s some futile attempt at proving some point. This happens to be the very passage that explains the mystery of the beast, so I would treat this pivotal passage with a little more respect if I were you. If you believe the Scripture above to be true, then you know as well as I do that Nero cannot be the beast. If you can analyze the passage and prove otherwise, I’m all ears.

 

[parousia70]

OK Os,
Throughout Revelation, the Beast is depicted as one 7-headed monster. The 7 heads symbolize the line of successive emperors who "headed up" the Roman Imperial Beast. The Beast is routinely said to be a SEVEN headed monster.

So why then does John tack on some "eighth" that operates after the seven? What does this eighth do after the seven kings/heads are past?

The answer to this riddle is found in the clue that this "eighth" is a beast that "was and is not" (v. 17:11). This clue refers readers BACK to 17:8 and ultimately 13:3.

So what is this "beast who was and is not"? In chapter 13, The Beast who was, then is not, but then is again describes a moment in Rome's history when one of the seven heads is wounded and yet the Beast somehow lives on, and everyone marvels at this. This speaks of Roman Empire itself moving on despite the turmoil of having one of its heads (Nero) killed off. The Roman Empire went into a near collapse after Nero died---civil war broke out in Rome because there was no heir after Nero and the Julian family line of Emperors was gone. Roman history confirms that the years 68-70AD was a near fall of the Roman Empire, and the book of Revelation confirms this history of the composite Imperial beast moving ahead despite the great confusion and turmoil.

The meaning of the 17:10-11 passage is that the whole Empire moving on is "an EIGHTH," after the 7 are past. Despite Rome's turmoil at the loss of its Julian line of emperors, the empire beast continues on and the world is amazed. Nevertheless, the comforting promise to St. John would be that this empire would eventually see its perdition (destruction).

Why do you find this unsatisfactory?

 

[parousia70]

I am well aware of the fact that Jesus keeps His promises, so there is no need to keep reminding me.

Excellent.
Why don't you finally explain to us how Jesus kept His promise to "Come as a thief" the The 1st Century Church at Sardis:

Rev 3:3 NKJ:
If you [1st century Church at Sardis] do not watch, I will come to you [1st century Church at Sardis]as a thief and you [1st Century Church at Sardis] will not know what hour I will come upon you [1st Century Church at Sardis]

 

[Matthew24:34]

Notice how quiet the full-preterists are when there is no wiggle room for twisting Scripture. Putting pride above Biblical truth is the hallmark of false teachers.

Again, you are wrong! I am breaking my silence just this once to again correct your false accusations. I ceased answering you, Osgiliath, because of your arrogance and your rudeness. I will gladly present what I believe to those who are willing to dialogue respectfully.

Osgiliath, I wish, for your own sake, you would take caution to stop accusing others of things for which you are guilty! Be careful lest you find that it is YOU who is putting pride above biblical truth and lest you be found the false teacher and guilty of twisting the Scriptures. Do you even consider yourself capable of such things? Let us examine ourselves!

Do you want to openly study the word without posting lists of verses without putting them in their context? That is not Bible study, my friend. I have taken great care to concentrate on a limited number of verses so that I could present them in their contexts. What do I get from you in respsonse? You accuse me before others of NEVER presenting Scripture. With as much love as I can portray be words only, Osgiliath, that is a complete misrepresentation. I do not believe that it was a lie, because I think that you actually believe the things you accuse others of! Again, I caution you to be careful. I have presented much Scripture--your accusation is false! Would you like to actually do exegesis of passages and accept what they clearly say in spite of your preconceived ideas? If you do, I will re-engage communication with you.

I see that Parousia70 continues to communicate with you. Under present conditions, I will not. You can consider that whatever you want, but I wish to do serious Bible study and not the sharing of opinions and the demonizing of others who disagree! You are as stubborn and unbendable in your beliefs as you accuse others of being, my brother in Christ.

It is you, Osgiliath, who refuses to look at a simple verse of Scripture and accept what it says.

Who is twisting the Scriptures, Osgiliath? Jesus said, "THIS generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things take place." You and those like you are twisting the Scriptures when you refuse to take those words of Jesus at their face value--when you give the words of our Lord a meaning He NEVER elsewhere gave them!

Who is twisting the Scriptures, Osgiliath? John was clearly shown those things which were in his day to "shortly" take place because the time was "near." Preterists take that at face value--we don't twist it; we accept. Some of us have suffered the loss of friendships and have been branded as heretics for such literalism! By accepting the CLEAR, undeniable timing indicated in the Revelation itself, we understandably and justifiably see NERO as the Beast. You, however, who claim to be such a biblicist and literalist twist the clear meaning of shortly and near and force the Revelation far into the distance. Who is twisting the Scriptures, Osgiliath?

Jesus said directly to His disciples standing right there with Him--"When YOU see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet . . . (Mat. 24:15). Preterists take that to mean that those disciples of Jesus' day were to see it. You are still looking for this abomination of desolation. Yet it is preterists who twist the Scriptures!

Jesus told the Twelve as He was sending them out to the lost sheep of Israel--"YOU will not finishing going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes? (Mat. 10:23)! How does one mistake the clear meaning here? But preterists "twist" this passage by actually believing Jesus' words and thinking that Jesus was saying to those disciples that they would not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man came! How silly of those literalist preterists! Again, who is twisting the Scriptures to his own end?

Again, Jesus said to His disciples standing right there with Him--"There are some standing HERE who will not taste death till THEY see the Son of Man COMING in His kingdom" (Mat. 16:28). Hmmmm? Those foolish preterists--they actually understand Jesus to say that some of those very disciples would live to see Him coming in His kingdom? Oh how those preterists do twist the Scriptures! :rolling

What about Jesus standing before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin after they had charged Him with blasphemy. He looked straight at THEM and said, "YOU will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and COMING on the clouds of heaven" (Mat. 26:64). Preterists take those words at their face value. Jesus was telling that very flesh-and-blood Caiaphas that HE and the SANHEDRIN were to see Him coming on the clouds of heaven! Is this twisting the Scriptures? According to you it is!

I could go on and on but you will not listen to the plain words of the Bible. You are proud to be a dispensationalist. You have been taught a certain system of eschatology and nothing--not even the simple truths of the Word of God--will allow you to even consider anything else. You are right and preterists are wrong. Period. You don't want to be confused with the facts!

I have no time for such nonsense. Let's study the Word and accept the Word as it is clearly presented! If we cannot do that, why bother?

Again, Osgiliath, I caution you to be careful of what you accuse others. Remember, when the finger of accusation points out at others, three fingers are pointing back at the accuser! Let us be cautious and be sure our accusations are justified and established in truth!

Matthew24:34

 

[parousia70]

I see that Parousia70 continues to communicate with you.

Well, I suppose my unanswered challenges to Osgil could be broadly considered "communication between us", but I think you are being a liitle generous with the term Matt ;)

 

[Matthew24:34]

I see that Parousia70 continues to communicate with you.

Well, I suppose my unanswered challenges to Osgil could be broadly considered "communication between us", but I think you are being a liitle generous with the term Matt ;)

 

[Osgiliath]

Originally posted by Matthew24:34
Osgiliath, because of your arrogance and your rudeness

Take it easy Matthew. I haven't accused you personally of anything, only the tripe that you teach, so be careful with the personal attacks. You can call my belief nonsense all you want, but don't be attacking me personally. You don't know anything about me other than the fact I strongly disagree with your teaching; a teaching I see as being absurd and unbiblical, hence the term "false teacher". But I haven't stooped to insulting your character personally, so why don't you relax.

Also, your completely evading the question, so there is no need to comment there.

Originally posted by parousia70
So what is this "beast who was and is not"? In chapter 13, The Beast who was, then is not, but then is again describes a moment in Rome's history when one of the seven heads is wounded and yet the Beast somehow lives on, and everyone marvels at this.

So the beast was not cast into the lake of fire in 70 AD. OK, so you have a partial-preterist viewpoint. Fair enough. What about you Matthew?

This speaks of Roman Empire itself moving on despite the turmoil of having one of its heads (Nero) killed off. The Roman Empire went into a near collapse after Nero died---civil war broke out in Rome because there was no heir after Nero and the Julian family line of Emperors was gone. Roman history confirms that the years 68-70AD was a near fall of the Roman Empire, and the book of Revelation confirms this history of the composite Imperial beast moving ahead despite the great confusion and turmoil.

The meaning of the 17:10-11 passage is that the whole Empire moving on is "an EIGHTH," after the 7 are past. Despite Rome's turmoil at the loss of its Julian line of emperors, the empire beast continues on and the world is amazed. Nevertheless, the comforting promise to St. John would be that this empire would eventually see its perdition (destruction).

So the beast was not cast into the lake of fire in 70 AD, still exists, and is presently continuing to astonish people until this "empire" eventually sees its perdition (destruction). OK, so you have a partial-preterist viewpoint. Fair enough. If this "empire beast" continues on (as you say), when do you think this "beast" will eventually see its perdition? Or has he/it already? If so, how? When?

 

[parousia70]

So the beast was not cast into the lake of fire in 70 AD, still exists, and is presently continuing to astonish people until this "empire" eventually sees its perdition (destruction).

Where did I say that?

 

[Osgiliath]

Originally posted by parousia70
Where did I say that?

Don't play coy with me. If the beast (as you say) "continues on and the world is amazed" , how could it have been cast into the lake of fire? So what is it? Does the beast continue; or is it long gone?

 

[parousia70]

Originally posted by parousia70
Where did I say that?

Don't play coy with me. If the beast (as you say) "continues on and the world is amazed" , how could it have been cast into the lake of fire? So what is it? Does the beast continue; or is it long gone?

Would you have felt better if I had said "continued"?... of course the Roman Empire is long gone

Show me how or where my position mandates it's the corporate-nation beast and not the man beast that gets cast into the LOF.

 

[parousia70]

Oh... still waiting for you to show me how Jesus fulfilled his promise to come as a thief to the 1st century Church at Sardis....

Your silence on that is quite telling, (so far)
The death knell to Futurism that is Revelation 3:3 is indeed insurmountable for futurists, so I understand why you are less than eager to attack that one in public, but I'll keep prodding.

 

[sheshisown]

Gentlmen~

Sound argument always has at least one premise and a conclusion. I see a stated premise and conclusion that this thread is operating under.

*Os=If Nero was the sixth (who is), who was the eighth (who is not)?

*Parousia= The meaning of the 17:10-11 passage is that the whole Empire moving on is "an EIGHTH," after the 7 are past. Despite Rome's turmoil at the loss of its Julian line of emperors, the empire beast continues on and the world is amazed. Nevertheless, the comforting promise to St. John would be that this empire would eventually see its perdition (destruction). Why do you find this unsatisfactory?

*Os=If the beast (as you say) "continues on and the world is amazed" , how could it have been cast into the lake of fire? So what is it? Does the beast continue; or is it long gone?


The OP is to be adhered to~ that's our TOS... deviations including challenges can be dealt with in new threads if you wish. :yes For instance your challenge Parousia=

Why don't you finally explain to us how Jesus kept His promise to "Come as a thief" the The 1st Century Church at Sardis:

A reminder~ let's refrain from making either direct or inferrencial comments regarding one another's attitudes, actions, or in-actions, please. There is no where to go with this kind of frail human banter, except down. :help

Hey I am reading along here, and I am sure others may be as well. SO...

Okay~ totopic :D

sheshisown (moderator)

 

[parousia70]

The OP is to be adhered to~ that's our TOS... deviations including challenges can be dealt with in new threads if you wish.

Fair enough.
Since the OP was clear that this is a FULL preterist challenge, I shall refrain for posting on this thread further, so as not to be in violation of TOS.

 

[Osgiliath]

Huh?

Wait a minute, what's going on? I missed something here. Was a post deleted or something? What happened?

What's TOS?

 

[sheshisown]

:gah

Nothing was deleted...Osgiliath, I was simply reading the arguments thinking... it was just getting pretty interesting~ :eyebrow

So~ I re-stated the Op to keep the topic focused... I was only asking Parousia to go ahead and open a new thread if he decided to... for his challenge to you, Osgiliath.

If you still want to discuss this and include both topics ~ or whatever ~ it's okay by me, just let him know. I won't say anything... the TOS can be sustained in that case... :shades

I am just reading along cause I'm interested in the differing views... :

bonnie

 

[Osgiliath]

Hi Bonnie,

What's TOS? The only TOS I know is Star Trek: TOS (The Original Series) . Anyway, maybe I should have said "Preterist Challenge" instead of "Full-Preterist Challenge". But partial-preterists have many different theories regarding the identity of the beast, whereas most full-preterists insist Nero was the beast; which was my primary focus. As you can see, the full-preterists are completely stumped. Their belief-system is false. A house built upon the sand can never stand; even if it looks like a mansion from the outside. One wave comes in, and it falls......and Revelation 17 just sent them a Tsunami :D.

 

[turnorburn]

What's a Full-Preterist Challenge? :naughty


turnorburn