Poll: Was Nero the "beast/antichrist"?

[Lodic]

First, do you know the history of the city of Rome & the Roman empire? It existed long before Julius Caesar came along, having kings & Caesars long before Julius. Next, the Rev was given during the latter years of DOMITIAN'S reign, not Nero's. Nero simply killed those he didn't like, while Domitian exiled many to various nearby islands such as Patmos. (Patmos is not a "desert island". While ancients had to "hardscrabble" to survive there, but they managed.)

The very nature of Preterism means that history and Scripture support this view. This is not about a worldwide event, but was localized to Jerusalem and the surrounding area. Nero didn't simply kill those he didn't like. Domitian may have exiled people to nearby islands, but that doesn't mean that Nero didn't also send people into exile. I did know that Patmos wasn't a desert island, but I'm glad you brought that up for the sake of other readers.

The long history of Rome has no bearing on this issue. BTW, Julius was the first Caesar. This is about the specific history of the Jewish Wars from AD 66-70. There is plenty of strong evidence that John wrote Revelation during Nero's reign, where the evidence for the later date writing is very weak.

The 666 thing is no big deal. Many Roman names added up to 666, by various systems of geometrics. And, as Nero's name was well-known, it didn't take much wisdom to use the right system of geometrics to get 666 outta his name.

The "666 thing" was a very big deal. Otherwise, John wouldn't have brought it up in the first place. The history of the events described in Revelation fit the Jewish Wars perfectly. Don't you find it more than coincidence that the Jewish Wars lasted 42 months? While you could associate 666 with other guys throughout history (e.g. Mussolini, Hitler, even Reagan), this specifically pointed to Nero. On the one hand, you say that many Roman names added up to 666, but then you say that it didn't take much wisdom to use "the right system of geometrics" to get 666 to make it point to Nero. Your statements contradict each other. Anyway, John didn't say it took a lot of wisdom. He said "This calls for wisdom." Big difference.

And there were many prophesied events that did NOT occur during Nero's reign, such as the mark of the beast, the beast from the earth, the great trib, the two beasts being cast alive into the LOF.

The mark of the beast was during Nero's reign. However, it wasn't a physical mark like a tattoo. The Beast from the earth was Apostate Israel. The "great tribulation" was the Jewish War. I believe the events from Rev 20:7 onward, including the two beasts being cast into the Lake of Fire, are future events.

REMEMBER, THE BEAST WILL BE IN POWER WHEN JESUS RETURNS! As Jesus hasn't returned, something with which you agree, the beasts haven't yet come, either!
Your case still loses!

The Beast was in power when Jesus "came" in judgment in AD 70, but this is not the same as the 2nd Advent. To reiterate what I said earlier, the Beast of the Sea was Rome, and the Beast of the Earth was Apostate Israel. Since you haven't disproven anything I've said, you can't make the claim that the Partial Preterist case has ever lost - except to your own satisfaction.

 

[1689Dave]

Many Reformed, Lutheran, English Baptist. Methodists believe the papacy is the Antichrist. Also Calvin and Luther included Islam. Clarence Larkin says the Jesuits launched "futurism" that placed a gap between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks to make Antichrist yet future, to take the heat off of the pope which happened as planned with the advent of Dispensationalism.

 

[Lodic]

Many Reformed, Lutheran, English Baptist. Methodists believe the papacy is the Antichrist. Also Calvin and Luther included Islam. Clarence Larkin says the Jesuits launched "futurism" that placed a gap between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks to make Antichrist yet future, to take the heat off of the pope which happened as planned with the advent of Dispensationalism.

I knew that the view that the papacy is the Antichrist was popular centuries ago, but didn't know it's still a popular view. What I really enjoy about this forum are the people you "meet" and the things you learn. Was this a different type of "futurism" than that which was promoted by Darby in the 1830s?

 

[1689Dave]

I knew that the view that the papacy is the Antichrist was popular centuries ago, but didn't know it's still a popular view. What I really enjoy about this forum are the people you "meet" and the things you learn. Was this a different type of "futurism" than that which was promoted by Darby in the 1830s?

Larkin (Dispie Yoda) says Darby got it from the Jesuits.

The Jesuit Origins of Futurism

“The “Futurist School” interprets the language of the Apocalypse “literally,” except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet “future” and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of “Daniel's Seventy Weeks.” This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century, with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the “Antichrist,” and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as fore shadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the “Type” of those great “Anti-Types” yet future, the “Beast” and the “False Prophet.” The “Futurist” interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book.” Dispensational Truth; pg. 5 Clarence Larkin

 

[Lodic]

Larkin (Dispie Yoda) says Darby got it from the Jesuits.

The Jesuit Origins of Futurism

“The “Futurist School” interprets the language of the Apocalypse “literally,” except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet “future” and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of “Daniel's Seventy Weeks.” This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century, with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the “Antichrist,” and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as fore shadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the “Type” of those great “Anti-Types” yet future, the “Beast” and the “False Prophet.” The “Futurist” interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book.” Dispensational Truth; pg. 5 Clarence Larkin

Thank you very much. I appreciate that you provided such a detailed history. As they say, "the more you know, the more you know that you don't know."

 

[robycop3]

ROFL!
You just won't give up that unprovable false view! You're fighting Scripture & history, not me. I don't make that stuff up; I present it as written

The very nature of Preterism means that history and Scripture support this view.

MMRRPP ! WRONG !
As a partial pret, you agree Jesus hasn't yet returned. Well, that means the beast hasn't come either, as Scripture says he will send his army to fight Jesus. Thus, Jesus will return when the beasts are here, simple as THAT!

This is not about a worldwide event, but was localized to Jerusalem and the surrounding area.

Since we all have Bibles, there's no need to post the Scriptures concerning the 7 seals & trumpets which will be part of the trib same as the 7 bowls. The events they describe will be worldwide, such as the death of a third of all sea life.

Nero didn't simply kill those he didn't like. Domitian may have exiled people to nearby islands, but that doesn't mean that Nero didn't also send people into exile. I did know that Patmos wasn't a desert island, but I'm glad you brought that up for the sake of other readers.

Now, Nero mighta sent a few Romans into exile, but the records show he whacked just about every non-Roman who displeased him. OTOH, Domitian hoped to "rehabilitate" some people, so he exiled them for awhile,believing they'd fall in line afterwards. (BTW, Patmos has been inhabited since C.3000 BC.)

The long history of Rome has no bearing on this issue. BTW, Julius was the first Caesar.

Well, actually it DOES, as there were many kings of Rome before Julius, regardless of what titles they were called.[/quote]

This is about the specific history of the Jewish Wars from AD 66-70. There is plenty of strong evidence that John wrote Revelation during Nero's reign, where the evidence for the later date writing is very weak.

Well, actually, the OPPOSITE is true. Remember, Bo knows football; robycop3 knows history. Those early church fathers/historians who said it was near the end of Domition's reign (96AD) were Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Victorinus, & Jerome. Also, several of the churches to whom Jesus sent messages thru John were not too-developed in 70 AD. None were then large & wealthy, as mentioned by Jesus.

The "666 thing" was a very big deal. Otherwise, John wouldn't have brought it up in the first place. The history of the events described in Revelation fit the Jewish Wars perfectly. Don't you find it more than coincidence that the Jewish Wars lasted 42 months? While you could associate 666 with other guys throughout history (e.g. Mussolini, Hitler, even Reagan), this specifically pointed to Nero. On the one hand, you say that many Roman names added up to 666, but then you say that it didn't take much wisdom to use "the right system of geometrics" to get 666 to make it point to Nero. Your statements contradict each other. Anyway, John didn't say it took a lot of wisdom. He said "This calls for wisdom." Big difference.

Sorry, but guesswork won't make your case. And that's what you're using! First, several systems of gematria were in use then. John doesn't specify one. And again, using the system of numerals being represented by letters, many names added up to 666. No getting around it. No contradiction there except in your guesswork. And no, it didn't point to Nero. JESUS DIDN'T THEN RETURN & CAST NERO INTO THE LAKE OF FIRE!

The mark of the beast was during Nero's reign. However, it wasn't a physical mark like a tattoo.

Well, then, how can one get it in the right hand or forehead??????????????

The Beast from the earth was Apostate Israel. The "great tribulation" was the Jewish War.

MMRRPP ! WRONG !
The beast from the earth plainly will be a MAN. How can a nation perform miracles? And JESUS said the trib will be the worst disaster in history. The 66-70 AD war is minor compared to the NAZI HOLOCAUST!

I believe the events from Rev 20:7 onward, including the two beasts being cast into the Lake of Fire, are future events.

How can that be? Again, you contradict yourself! Scripture says they'll be cast ALIVE into the LOF. If they've already come & gone, that'd be impossible!

The Beast was in power when Jesus "came" in judgment in AD 70, but this is not the same as the 2nd Advent. To reiterate what I said earlier, the Beast of the Sea was Rome, and the Beast of the Earth was Apostate Israel. Since you haven't disproven anything I've said, you can't make the claim that the Partial Preterist case has ever lost - except to your own satisfaction.

Actually, I've disproven your whole spiel, and I'll disprove the above! If the beasts were nations, HOW COULD THEY BE THROWN ALIVE INTO THE LOF?????????????
Nations are NOT living things! THEY'RE ORGANIZATIONS MADE BY MEN, a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular territory. And God certainly isn't gonna destroy ISRAEL any more! (Nor was old Israel cast into the LOF, as is quite-obvious!)

Can't you see the contradictions in your stuff? It simply doesn't make sense, & all the other readers except what few prets are here can see them as well! Seems that reading too much pret garbage has warped your thinking so you don't apply COMMON SENSE to your doctrine now! I hope to give you some eye-openers, & that the HOLY SPIRIT steps in!

 

[robycop3]

Larkin (Dispie Yoda) says Darby got it from the Jesuits.

The Jesuit Origins of Futurism

“The “Futurist School” interprets the language of the Apocalypse “literally,” except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet “future” and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of “Daniel's Seventy Weeks.” This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century, with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the “Antichrist,” and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as fore shadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the “Type” of those great “Anti-Types” yet future, the “Beast” and the “False Prophet.” The “Futurist” interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book.” Dispensational Truth; pg. 5 Clarence Larkin

Actually, "futurism" comes from COMMON SENSE. It was around long before the jeezits, back when men believed God's word as written. The creeds of most quasi/pseudo-Christian cults have come from reducing many Scriptures to "symbolic" status with no basis to do so, or inventing new meanings for certain Scriptures.

 

[Lodic]

You just won't give up that unprovable false view! You're fighting Scripture & history, not me. I don't make that stuff up; I present it as written

The way that I see it, you are the one fighting Scripture and history. Then again, as we've discussed before, this really comes down to how we interpret the Scriptures.

MMRRPP ! WRONG !
As a partial pret, you agree Jesus hasn't yet returned. Well, that means the beast hasn't come either, as Scripture says he will send his army to fight Jesus. Thus, Jesus will return when the beasts are here, simple as THAT!

You are only half right. Both beasts came in AD 70.

Since we all have Bibles, there's no need to post the Scriptures concerning the 7 seals & trumpets which will be part of the trib same as the 7 bowls. The events they describe will be worldwide, such as the death of a third of all sea life.

Again, it's a matter of interpretation. You over-literalize the seals, trumpets, and bowls. You insist that the judgement on Jerusalem was just a historical event, and that there MUST be a future fulfillment. You are simply wrong.

Now, Nero mighta sent a few Romans into exile, but the records show he whacked just about every non-Roman who displeased him. OTOH, Domitian hoped to "rehabilitate" some people, so he exiled them for awhile,believing they'd fall in line afterwards. (BTW, Patmos has been inhabited since C.3000 BC.)

There is no denying what Domitian did. However, that doesn't mean that Nero did not send John into exile to Patmos. The Bible doesn't specify how or why John was on Patmos. While the most likely reason is exile, he may have been there for another reason - maybe to witness to their inhabitants.

Well, actually it DOES, as there were many kings of Rome before Julius, regardless of what titles they were called.

[/QUOTE]
The only history that has any bearing on this is specifically the Jewish Wars of AD 66-70. We know Rome and Jerusalem are at the center of the prophecies. We know the events of AD 70 fit perfectly with what has been prophesied.

Sorry, but guesswork won't make your case. And that's what you're using! First, several systems of gematria were in use then. John doesn't specify one. And again, using the system of numerals being represented by letters, many names added up to 666. No getting around it. No contradiction there except in your guesswork. And no, it didn't point to Nero. JESUS DIDN'T THEN RETURN & CAST NERO INTO THE LAKE OF FIRE!

And neither will your guesswork make your case. It's very clear that 666 was Nero. Rev 20:10 tells us that the Devil, the False Prophet, and the Beast will all be thrown into the Lake of Fire at the same time. We agree that this hasn't happened yet.

Well, then, how can one get it in the right hand or forehead??????????????

As I just stated, this was NOT a literal mark. The Mark of the Beast is contrasted to God's mark. Rev 15:2 tells us that to keep the Word of God is to overcome and be victorious over the mark, or name, of the Beast. The Mark is a symbolic term used to denote a position of power. The right hand also denotes work, and the power of man. Only those Jews who aligned with the Old Covenant system were "marked" for access into the Temple.

The beast from the earth plainly will be a MAN. How can a nation perform miracles? And JESUS said the trib will be the worst disaster in history. The 66-70 AD war is minor compared to the NAZI HOLOCAUST!

The Beast from the earth is very clearly Apostate Israel, who had partnered up with Rome. Jerusalem is the Great Harlot of Rev 17, which fits with Israel being the "land beast". A thorough study of Rev 17 will clear up a lot of your misconceptions. The "worst disaster" type phrases were used commonly by prophets.

Nations are NOT living things! THEY'RE ORGANIZATIONS MADE BY MEN, a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular territory. And God certainly isn't gonna destroy ISRAEL any more! (Nor was old Israel cast into the LOF, as is quite-obvious!)

Can't you see the contradictions in your stuff? It simply doesn't make sense, & all the other readers except what few prets are here can see them as well! Seems that reading too much pret garbage has warped your thinking so you don't apply COMMON SENSE to your doctrine now! I hope to give you some eye-openers, & that the HOLY SPIRIT steps in!

Absolutely NO contradictions from the Partial Preterist view. Revelation is filled with more prophetic symbolisms than any other book in the Bible. You can't read it as though it's a history book. It is in using my common sense that I see this makes perfect sense.
To repeat what we've said before, we will not come to an agreement because we take completely different approaches to our understanding of End Times prophecy.

 

[1689Dave]

Actually, "futurism" comes from COMMON SENSE. It was around long before the jeezits, back when men believed God's word as written. The creeds of most quasi/pseudo-Christian cults have come from reducing many Scriptures to "symbolic" status with no basis to do so, or inventing new meanings for certain Scriptures.

The Jesuits knew it was false doctrine so they used it to deceive protestants. Which they did quite successfully.

 

[Yeshua1]

The Jesuits knew it was false doctrine so they used it to deceive protestants. Which they did quite successfully.

Prermil was the prominent position held in the Church before Augustine, so its the Church of Rome that moved us away from that!

 

[robycop3]

The way that I see it, you are the one fighting Scripture and history. Then again, as we've discussed before, this really comes down to how we interpret the Scriptures.

And YOU'RE interpreting them incorrectly by reducing many of them to "symbolic' status.

You are only half right. Both beasts came in AD 70.

MMRRPP! WRONG !
Neither one has come yet.

Again, it's a matter of interpretation. You over-literalize the seals, trumpets, and bowls. You insist that the judgement on Jerusalem was just a historical event, and that there MUST be a future fulfillment. You are simply wrong.

No, YOU are. I have the weight of Scripture and history behind my view; you only have the quackery of the pret authors, along with your own imagination and guesswork.


There is no denying what Domitian did. However, that doesn't mean that Nero did not send John into exile to Patmos. The Bible doesn't specify how or why John was on Patmos. While the most likely reason is exile, he may have been there for another reason - maybe to witness to their inhabitants.[/quote]
More guesswork. Several Jewish authors, as well as several Christian ones, said John was exiled there.

The only history that has any bearing on this is specifically the Jewish Wars of AD 66-70. We know Rome and Jerusalem are at the center of the prophecies. We know the events of AD 70 fit perfectly with what has been prophesied.

There were several prophesied events NOT fulfilled in that war.

And neither will your guesswork make your case. It's very clear that 666 was Nero. Rev 20:10 tells us that the Devil, the False Prophet, and the Beast will all be thrown into the Lake of Fire at the same time. We agree that this hasn't happened yet.

The guesswork is YOURS. I showed you the Scriptures that say the beasts will be cast alive into the LOF at Jesus' return, but Satan won't be cast there til the millenium is over.

As I just stated, this was NOT a literal mark. The Mark of the Beast is contrasted to God's mark. Rev 15:2 tells us that to keep the Word of God is to overcome and be victorious over the mark, or name, of the Beast. The Mark is a symbolic term used to denote a position of power. The right hand also denotes work, and the power of man. Only those Jews who aligned with the Old Covenant system were "marked" for access into the Temple.

Complete nonsense! How could someone be prohibited from doing business by a "symbolic" mark? No, it'll be LITERAL, and most likely be a microchip.

The Beast from the earth is very clearly Apostate Israel, who had partnered up with Rome. Jerusalem is the Great Harlot of Rev 17, which fits with Israel being the "land beast". A thorough study of Rev 17 will clear up a lot of your misconceptions. The "worst disaster" type phrases were used commonly by prophets.

More nonsense. The "beasts" will be the antichrist, the beast from the earth, and their empire. Rev.17 plainly shows that the harlot is the city of Rome, Italy. And it was JESUS who said the trib would be the worst disaster ever to hit mankind. So, of course, prophets reflected the words of the greatest Prophet of all.

Absolutely NO contradictions from the Partial Preterist view. Revelation is filled with more prophetic symbolisms than any other book in the Bible. You can't read it as though it's a history book. It is in using my common sense that I see this makes perfect sense.
To repeat what we've said before, we will not come to an agreement because we take completely different approaches to our understanding of End Times prophecy.

Evidently, YOUR "common sense" is quite-UNcommon. You cannot explain why, if the trib has already occurred, why Jesus hasn't returned, as He said "IMMEDIATELY after the trib..." You can't tell us that, if Nero was the beast, when he received a head wound that shoulda killed him, but he survived, causing many to worship him. And you can't explain why, if Nero was the beast, that he DIED, rather than being cast alive into the LOF. There are more open ends in your stuff than there are in a sieve. You REALLY need to quit reading that pret garbage!

 

[robycop3]

The Jesuits knew it was false doctrine so they used it to deceive protestants. Which they did quite successfully.

But it's quite-onvious that futurism is correct, as the prophesied eschatological events simply haven't yet occurred.

 

[1689Dave]

But it's quite-onvious that futurism is correct, as the prophesied eschatological events simply haven't yet occurred.

Or, you failed to see them. Looking for the symbol instead of what the symbol represents.

 

[1689Dave]

Prermil was the prominent position held in the Church before Augustine, so its the Church of Rome that moved us away from that!

Not so fast. Jesus is Amillennial.

 

[Lodic]

@robycop3 , rather than re-hash every point, I will give a simple response to all of them. It comes down to our hermeneutical method. You see many things as literal which I see as symbolic. We interpret these prophecies from entirely different perspectives.

I'm happy to discuss other topics with you, and I appreciate your insight on other questions. However, when it comes to "end times" prophecy, the only thing we agree upon is that Christ's 2nd Coming is still in our future. Unless you have something new to bring up, I am moving on. Besides, I will be out for several days after today.

 

[robycop3]

Or, you failed to see them. Looking for the symbol instead of what the symbol represents.

I know history quite-well, & those events are simply not found in it. Had they already occurred, the future world would already be here.

 

[1689Dave]

I know history quite-well, & those events are simply not found in it. Had they already occurred, the future world would already be here.

You are looking for symbols to appear and missing what they represent throughout history.

 

[robycop3]

@robycop3 , rather than re-hash every point, I will give a simple response to all of them. It comes down to our hermeneutical method. You see many things as literal which I see as symbolic. We interpret these prophecies from entirely different perspectives.

I'm happy to discuss other topics with you, and I appreciate your insight on other questions. However, when it comes to "end times" prophecy, the only thing we agree upon is that Christ's 2nd Coming is still in our future. Unless you have something new to bring up, I am moving on. Besides, I will be out for several days after today.

I see them as literal cuz they ARE literal. Jerusalem & the temple were LITERALLY destroyed. There was, and is, LITERAL war/rumor of war. There was & is LITERAL persecution of Christians, with decapitations. Jerusalem was, & is, LITERALLY trod underfoot by gentiles. So, why should we not believe the rest of Jesus' Olivet Discourse prophecies to be just-as-literal?

As for Rev, it's largely a supply of the details for Jesus' other prophecies, such as that of the great trib. Yes, there's new material as well, such as the beast from the earth who will be the main beast's sidekick, the marka the beast, the two witnesses, etc. But we have the advantage of hindsight to see what symbolism there is in it represents. And it's all LITERAL things.

I will never, EVER, agree the eschatological prophecies are symbolic, especially the Olivet Discourse. Again, I have history shaped by Scripture behind my view. And Matthew 24:29-30 stand as proof texts that partial preterism is as false as full preterism!

 

[Lodic]

I see them as literal cuz they ARE literal. Jerusalem & the temple were LITERALLY destroyed. There was, and is, LITERAL war/rumor of war. There was & is LITERAL persecution of Christians, with decapitations. Jerusalem was, & is, LITERALLY trod underfoot by gentiles. So, why should we not believe the rest of Jesus' Olivet Discourse prophecies to be just-as-literal?

As for Rev, it's largely a supply of the details for Jesus' other prophecies, such as that of the great trib. Yes, there's new material as well, such as the beast from the earth who will be the main beast's sidekick, the marka the beast, the two witnesses, etc. But we have the advantage of hindsight to see what symbolism there is in it represents. And it's all LITERAL things.

I will never, EVER, agree the eschatological prophecies are symbolic, especially the Olivet Discourse. Again, I have history shaped by Scripture behind my view. And Matthew 24:29-30 stand as proof texts that partial preterism is as false as full preterism!

For my part, I simply cannot go back to the futurist view when so much of prophecy (in both testaments) is written in symbolic terms. We agree that a lot of prophecies were fulfilled literally, but there is still a lot of symbolism (especially in Revelation). Each of us can use the same passages as proof texts, but we have different methods of interpretation. Since neither of us will convince the other, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[robycop3]

For my part, I simply cannot go back to the futurist view when so much of prophecy (in both testaments) is written in symbolic terms. We agree that a lot of prophecies were fulfilled literally, but there is still a lot of symbolism (especially in Revelation). Each of us can use the same passages as proof texts, but we have different methods of interpretation. Since neither of us will convince the other, we will have to agree to disagree.

It simply ISN'T symbolic!
God's word is mostly LITERAL. If it wasn't, there'd be no standards of faith/worship! More men would do what the authors you read did-make new definitions of Scriptural meanings to fit THEIR agendas.
Just because certain prophesied events haven't yet happened doesn't mean they WON'T happen!
We could dismiss preterism as mere ignorance if it didn't cheapen Jesus' return. Full preterism, of course, stupidly says He has already returned, but can't explain the absence of all the prophesied events accompanying His return. And partial preterism stands in defiance of Matther 24:29-30, JESUS' OWN WORDS, in which He says He will return immediately after the great trib. So, if the great trib has already occurred, WHERE'S JESUS??????
Now, I'm not trying to prove "I'm smarter than you" or anything such, but I AM trying to show you that most Scripture is LITERAL, not symbolic, and why. Knowing that fact is essential for understanding what Jesus wants from you, and being better-equipped to present the Gospel to others, and causing the skeptics among them to accept it when shown the proofs that Scripture is completely true. All that Preston, Gentry, etc. wanna do is sell boox & make $$ while tossing God's truth aside.