Nero is NOT the Beast or 666

[Waiting on him]

The same Herod that was ruling at Jesus birth? It says he died in 39 AD

I’ll have to do some research, I believe he was eaten of worms in the acts? good question.

 

[Heart2Soul]

I’ll have to do some research, I believe he was eaten of worms in the acts? good question.

Ok...I was just reading there were like 3 different Herod's mentioned between Matthew and Acts.

 

[Waiting on him]

Acts 12:21-23 KJV
[21] And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. [22] And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. [23] And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
I would assume this Herod was some form of diplomat of Rome, given he had power to perform any type of capital punishment?

 

[Heart2Soul]

Acts 12:21-23 KJV
[21] And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. [22] And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. [23] And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
I would assume this Herod was some form of diplomat of Rome, given he had power to perform any type of capital punishment?

The one in Acts is Herod Agrippa I.

 

[Waiting on him]

Ok...I was just reading there were like 3 different Herod's mentioned between Matthew and Acts.

The one in Acts is Herod Agrippa I.

You’ve been really busy.

 

[Waiting on him]

Good job!!!!

 

[Heart2Soul]

You’ve been really busy.

I had to make a long trip to get my neighbor who got stranded. Now we are heading back and I am making him drive so I can just play on my phone...so I already had the site open.

 

[Waiting on him]

I had to make a long trip to get my neighbor who got stranded. Now we are heading back and I am making him drive so I can just play on my phone.

Be safe, it’s crazy out there!

 

[Marty fox]

The same Herod that was ruling at Jesus birth? It says he died in 39 AD

No a different Herod

 

[Marty fox]

So maybe Nero was indeed one of the first antichrist who had power over the people to invoke persecution against them for following the teaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Not quite if you look at the definition of the antichrist that John teaches in his epistles you will see that apostate Israel was the first antichrist and the very definition of antichrist. Nero was the main beast of revelation incarnated in man as John’s description of the beast is very different from John description of the antichrist

Look up the only four times the term antichrist in mentioned in the bible. They were all by John who also wrote revelation but John never used the term antichrist in revelation there is a reason for that as they are not described by John as the same

 

[Marty fox]

Sometimes I believe the beast is merely any collective effort of men to thwart Gods plan of salvation.

That’s more of a definition of the spirit of antichrist than the beast the beast was more of a one time purpose but antichrist was many and not at one time

 

[Truth7t7]

Well did Jesus use symbolically in the verse I provided?

Yes or was He actually going to strike someone with a literal sword coming out of His mouth?

Then I made perfect sense then didn’t I?

Jesus word is his weapon which is all powerful and saves or condemns

Is Jesus Christ going to literally return as seen in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 below "Yes" and it didnt take place in 66-70AD

2 Thessalonians 2:3-9KJV
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;
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.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

 

[Truth7t7]

Well I don't know about who or what is the beast in Revelation...I am simply referring to the "antichrist" which scripture says there will be many.

Of course the "spirit" of Antichrist is taught in the epistles of John

However (The Antichrist) is a catch all phrase for the future bad guy as seen below

(The Antichrist) = Daniel's (Little Horn), Paul's (Man of Sin) John's (The Beast)

I believe your well aware of this catch all phrase, that is a commonly used in eschatology, correct me if I'm wrong?

 

[Marty fox]

Is Jesus Christ going to literally return as seen in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 below "Yes" and it didnt take place in 66-70AD

2 Thessalonians 2:3-9KJV
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;
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.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

You didn’t answer the questions

 

[Heart2Soul]

Not quite if you look at the definition of the antichrist that John teaches in his epistles you will see that apostate Israel was the first antichrist and the very definition of antichrist. Nero was the main beast of revelation incarnated in man as John’s description of the beast is very different from John description of the antichrist

Look up the only four times the term antichrist in mentioned in the bible. They were all by John who also wrote revelation but John never used the term antichrist in revelation there is a reason for that as they are not described by John as the same

I was specifically pointing to a political leader who would have the power to persecute Christians who followed the teachings of Jesus....so basically anyone after Jesus .

 

[Truth7t7]

You didn’t answer the questions

Absolutely "Sword" is symbolic of the Lords word

The word "Coming" in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 is "Literal" and represent the future second coming of Jesus Christ, and (the man of sin/the beast) of Revelation 13 will be present at this "Future" event

 

[Truth7t7]

Nero was the main beast of revelation incarnated in man as John’s description of the beast is very different from John description of the antichrist

Look up the only four times the term antichrist in mentioned in the bible. They were all by John who also wrote revelation but John never used the term antichrist in revelation there is a reason for that as they are not described by John as the same

Pretty hard to have Nero as (The Beast) of Revelation, when the book was written roughly 30 years after his death

The book of Revelation was written in 95-96 AD, long after Neros death and the many claims of 66-70AD fulfillment

Emperor Domitian sentenced John to prison on Patmos and his reign was 81-96AD

When Was the Book of Revelation Written?
By Wayne Jackson

Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96. Some writers, however, have advanced the preterist (from a Latin word meaning “that which is past”) view, contending that the Apocalypse was penned around A.D. 68 or 69, and thus the thrust of the book is supposed to relate to the impending destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70).

A few prominent names have been associated with this position (e.g., Stuart, Schaff, Lightfoot, Foy E. Wallace Jr.), and for a brief time it was popular with certain scholars. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.D. 96 (1939, 2584). In fact, the evidence for the later date is extremely strong.

In view of some of the bizarre theories that have surfaced in recent times (e.g., the notion that all end-time prophecies were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70), which are dependent upon the preterist interpretation, we offer the following.

External Evidence
The external evidence for the late dating of Revelation is of the highest quality.

Irenaeus
Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30). The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

Even Moses Stuart, America’s most prominent preterist, admitted that the “tyrant here meant is probably Domitian.” Within this narrative, Clement further speaks of John as an “old man.” If Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, it would scarcely seem appropriate to refer to John as an old man, since he would only have been in his early sixties at this time.

Victorinus
Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

When John said these things, he was in the island of Patmos, condemned to the mines by Caesar Domitian. There he saw the Apocalypse; and when at length grown old, he thought that he should receive his release by suffering; but Domitian being killed, he was liberated (Commentary on Revelation 10:11).

Jerome
Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,

In the fourteenth then after Nero, Domitian having raised up a second persecution, he [John] was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse (Lives of Illustrious Men 9).

To all of this may be added the comment of Eusebius, who contends that the historical tradition of his time (A.D. 324) placed the writing of the Apocalypse at the close of Domitian’s reign (III.18). McClintock and Strong, in contending for the later date, declare that “there is no mention in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place” (1969, 1064). Upon the basis of external evidence, therefore, there is little contest between the earlier and later dates.

Internal Evidence
The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.

The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.

The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).

Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.

Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).

Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.

The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.

Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).

 

[Heart2Soul]

No a different Herod

Yes, I read that, thank you.

 

[JohnPaul]

Absolutely "Sword" is symbolic of the Lords word

The word "Coming" in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 is "Literal" and represent the future second coming of Jesus Christ, and (the man of sin/the beast) of Revelation 13 will be present at this "Future" event

This is what I believe.

 

[Heart2Soul]

Of course the "spirit" of Antichrist is taught in the epistles of John

However (The Antichrist) is a catch all phrase for the future bad guy as seen below

(The Antichrist) = Daniel's (Little Horn), Paul's (Man of Sin) John's (The Beast)

I believe your well aware of this catch all phrase, that is a commonly used in eschatology, correct me if I'm wrong?

Anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus is an antichrist so yes it is a catch all phrase in a sense but as to referring to ones who order the believers to be killed or imprisoned is one of power.
This position can do so much more against believers than just someone who is an unbeliever.