Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No, he was a type of the future Antichrist still yet to come.We've been discussing this in several threads. Thought I'd elicit the opinions of others on this question.
We've been discussing this in several threads. Thought I'd elicit the opinions of others on this question.
Final Antichrist has not yet appeared in world history, as that awaiting the time of the Second Coming itself!If you'd included 'maybe' I'd 'maybe' vote that.
Nero was 'maybe' the PERSONIFICATION of the sixth head of the beast which was the Roman Empire, at the time the book was written. At that time the seventh head was yet to come, the five prior heads were past (Egyptian Empire, Assyrian Empire, Babylonian Empire, Medo-Persian Empire, Grecian Empire). Antiochus Epiphanes would most likely 'maybe' have been the 'personification' of the Grecian Empire (as concerning the persecution of the Woman of Gen 3:15 & Rev 12), Ahasuerus may have been the personification of the Persian Empire, Nebuchadnezzar perhaps was the personification for Babylonian Empire, Sennacherib would most likely qualify for the Assyrian Empire, and the Pharaoh of the Exodus would be the personification of the Egyptian Empire. The ten Germanic kings of the seventh head is anyone's guess, but I would identify Hitler as filling the bill for one of them.
Final Antichrist has not yet appeared in world history, as that awaiting the time of the Second Coming itself!
Nope, as the Resurrection of the Body of Christ , His Church, never happened yet!'Second coming' dunn 'come and gone'.
Nope, as the Resurrection of the Body of Christ , His Church, never happened yet!
'Second coming' dunn 'come and gone'.
Yep. "For yet a very little while, He that cometh shall come, and shall not tarry" does not mean thousands of years and still waiting.
28 so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation. Heb 9
37 For yet a very little while, He that cometh shall come, and shall not tarry. Heb 10
His 'second coming' was upon that generation that murdered Him:
38 But the husbandmen, when they saw the son, said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and take his inheritance.
39 And they took him, and cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him.
40 When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those miserable men, and will let out the vineyard unto other husbandmen, who shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, The same was made the head of the corner; This was from the Lord, And it is marvelous in our eyes?
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
44 And he that falleth on this stone shall be broken to pieces: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust.
45 And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. Mt 21
Oh, REALLY?
Then, when did Jesus rule the world from Jerusalem for 1K years? And how come the saints that died are still dead?
Again, Nero was a bad boy, but so were Caligula, Domitian, etc. followed by many as bad or worse, from Attila to Genghis Khan to Tamerlane to several Chinese warlords, to Napoleon, to Hitler & Stalin, to Idi Amin and Pol Pot to El-Baghdadi. But "the" antichrist/beast will be worse than all of them together, ruling most of the world, as Rev. 13 says. That's never happened before.
20 And being asked by the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God cometh, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Lu 17
18 For ye are not come unto a mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, and unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
22 but ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, Heb 12
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Jn 18
The antichrist that you imagine is just that, a fictional character inspired by the sensationalism of Dispensationalism.
I'm beginning to think that you have 'antichrist on the brain'. Ultimately the beast is also spiritual, he too cannot be seen with the eye or touched with the hand:
12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Eph 6
I voted "No" for a couple of reasons. You equate "The Beast" with "the Antichrist". I don't believe in "the Antichrist". The popular view has "the Antichrist" as a combination of the Beast of the Sea, the Man of Sin, and possibly others. The Man of Sin was probably Titus, not Nero. I believe the Beast was 1st Century Rome, and largely personified by Nero (666).
Actually, there are several good reasons to believe that Rome / Nero fits the Beast. The 7 kings of Rev 17 were: 1. Julius Caesar; 2. Augustus; 3. Tiberius; 4. Caligula; 5. Claudius; 6. Nero; and 7. Galba, who only reigned a short while (6 months). Nero was emperor when John wrote Revelation. Then there is 666. It doesn't make sense that John's original 1st century audience could have calculated the Number of the Beast to be someone in their distant future. On the other hand, it makes perfect sense that John tells them to use wisdom to calculate the identity of the Beast as someone they would be familiar with. The whole political setting fits perfectly with the prophecies in Revelation and the Olivet Discourse. Nero did have authority to make war with the saints and to overcome them. This is not about a future "Antichrist" taking over the whole world, but about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.Well, neither Nero nor Titus was the beast/ MOS. While "beast' refers to both the antichrist & his kingdom, it's plain no old Roman nor the Roman empire was either one.
While Nero didn't fulfill too many of the Scriptural criteria for the beast/MOS, Titus fulfilled even fewer. That automatically excludes them. And Rome didn't rule nearly all the world known to John at the time as the MOS & his empire will. While the Mediterranean was a Roman lake at that time, Rome did NOT rule the Germans, Parthians, Gauls, etc.
This Scripture makes it plain: Rev. 13:[color] 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.[/color]
This disqualifies the old Roman empire & the Holy Roman empire both. Some day, you'll learn not to believe the garbage of those pret quacks! I hope you don't learn it the hard way!
Actually, there are several good reasons to believe that Rome / Nero fits the Beast. The 7 kings of Rev 17 were: 1. Julius Caesar; 2. Augustus; 3. Tiberius; 4. Caligula; 5. Claudius; 6. Nero; and 7. Galba, who only reigned a short while (6 months). Nero was emperor when John wrote Revelation. Then there is 666. It doesn't make sense that John's original 1st century audience could have calculated the Number of the Beast to be someone in their distant future. On the other hand, it makes perfect sense that John tells them to use wisdom to calculate the identity of the Beast as someone they would be familiar with. The whole political setting fits perfectly with the prophecies in Revelation and the Olivet Discourse. Nero did have authority to make war with the saints and to overcome them. This is not about a future "Antichrist" taking over the whole world, but about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.