Preterism: Challenging the Nero-Antichrist Theory
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 сен 2024
- Take your free gifts here 🎁 because you keep your Bible near📌
www.foundation...
Preterism, a Christian eschatological viewpoint, posits that many prophecies in the Bible, particularly in the Book of Revelation, were fulfilled in the first century AD, largely through the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. This perspective challenges the widely held Nero-Antichrist theory, which identifies the Roman Emperor Nero as the Antichrist mentioned in Revelation.
Proponents of Preterism argue that while Nero’s reign was marked by persecution of Christians and significant turmoil, the prophecies encompass a broader spectrum of historical events and figures. They contend that interpreting Nero as the Antichrist oversimplifies the nuanced and symbolic nature of apocalyptic literature.
Instead, Preterism emphasizes that the apocalyptic visions reflect the immediate context of early Christians, addressing their contemporary struggles and providing hope amidst persecution, rather than predicting distant future events or singular figures like Nero.
#Rapture #DebunkingArguments #ChristianTheology
Stay tuned for more thought-provoking videos that explore the depths of Christian beliefs and practices.
#endtimes
#holySpirit
#biblestudy
#jesus
#FoundationalBibleTeachings
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can also watch the Following Related Videos on Foundational Bible Teachings:
Eternal Security of the Believer
• Eternal Security of th...
Old Testament rules are coming back!
• Old Testament rules ar...
What’s God looking for in the tribulation?
• What’s God looking for...
God’s patience with man
• God’s patience with man
A Reprobate mind -The consequence of ungodly desires
• A Reprobate mind -The...
paypal.me/Found...
music by Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio Do you need a God message today? A prophetic word is what make people believe the Bible is real.
I watched all 12 parts of a series 'Crisis in Eschatology' by RC, on RUclips here. All 12 parts - twice, all the way through and never heard RC say he thought the Anti-Christ was a spirit. He often presents discussion as to what others believe falsely, I can't believe you heard anything otherwise.
Forgot to mention the Herodian kings
Remember herod died , the people claimed he is God and he never denied this
You are right , there were many antichrists as in the epistles of John . But what is a antichrist ? First you have to know who christ is . If you do not know who christ is you can not be his anti . This only applies to Christians who decided not to walk in christ anymore. They gave up the opportunity to be in the presence of christ in his new temple in heaven ( not a literal 3rd temple in Jerusalem) . Also the religious leaders because they knew who christ is . They saw this in scripture. Nero was never a antichrist
It was the tribulation for the jews as that covenant was broken forever unlike the flood where God kept his covenant with man but in this case that covenant between the people of Isreal and God became annulled forever
Well, you might remember that only part of Israel rejected the kingdom, Romans 11:1-2. On the day Of Pentecost 3,000 were saved and many after that. It was years before the gentiles were allowed in. The effort to disenfranchise Israel from the kingdom is from the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). They claim to be Israel exclusively, which they are not. When Jerusalem fell in 70 AD there were 3 groups. The dead, the slaves, and those who fled into the wild. Those of Israel who fled were souls in the kingdom. The Revelation is based on those 3 groups along with Rome and their time after 70 AD.
whoever said the antichrist was human ?
Your videos are very nice but there are very few views on your videos. To increase your videos, you need to do SEO
Email us
foundationalBibleteachings@outlook.com
@@FoundationalBibleTeachings OK
The end ofvthe gentile times ended in 70 AD Where God allowed the gentiles to trample his holy place . This is the 4 beasts from Babylon to Rome . All things ended here and all things in christ was fulfilled
that's quite a stretch, to say the least. The 2nd temple was an Ichabod structure since the veil was torn in two and the covenant law was changed from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. Hebrews makes this crystal clear in chapter 7:
"11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. 13 For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has [b]officiated at the altar."
The priesthood had passed from Levi to Judah at the time of Hebrews being penned, which was before Jerusalem's fall in 70 A.D., and it goes on:
"18 For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, 19 for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God."
The Old Covenant was annulled and done away with at the cross.
"23 Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing. 24 But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood."
The ministry of Jesus was in full effect with this change in the law from the Old/Mosaic Covenant to the New Covenant. Just look at Hebrews 8:6
"But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises."
The tense in the Greek word for 'established' is perfect, and describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past once and for all... without any need for repetition. This fact alone destroys preterism at its core, built on the lie that the Old Covenant was still somehow in effect up until 70 A.D. when nothing could be further from the truth. There was no initial and partial 'inauguration' of the New Covenant at the cross which was to be completed some 40 years later. It was FINISHED. Jesus said as much and not in some future sense of decades away. Now this brings us to the single verse that preterists love to quote which is wildly out of context: Hebrews 8:!3
"In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away."
There's just one tiny, well-- HUGE-- problem here. The preceding verses were quoting Jeremiah 31, a time hundreds of years before Christ was born and in clear reference to an Old/Mosaic Covenant that was becoming obsolete even at the time of Jeremiah's ministry. This was not some reference to a covenant that was still growing old. It was already finished!
"8 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. 10 By that will we have been [c]sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."
In Hebrews 10 we see He removes the first (Old) covenant to establish the second (New), so they could not have existed at the same time up to the 2nd temple's destruction. Read this text from verse 9 again: He takes away the first that He may establish the second.
He takes away the first that He may establish the second.
He takes away the first that He may establish the second.
He takes away the first(Old) that He may establish the second (New).
The 2nd temple had long since ceased operating as the place where sins were forgiven. That ministry had been transferred to Jesus' finished work on the cross. Yet another way we can know it was finished is the fact that there weren't places to sit for the priests in the tabernacle or temples for them to sit because the work was always ongoing. Contrast that with Jesus sitting down after He ascended to the Father. Also from Hebrews 10:
"11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified."
The 2nd temple could not possibly have been considered a holy place, and it doesn't fit with all the references that Revelation makes to a temple. But that's for the next comment...
Preterism has a woefully misinformed view on the temple in Revelation because it fails to take into account the fact that when you look at all of the passages that speak of the temple, there's no possible way this is referring to the 2nd temple.
First off, saying that the temple must have still stood when John was shown Revelation lacks sound reasoning because Ezekiel was also shown a temple starting in Ezekiel 40 after the first temple had already been destroyed, and a temple was also being measured. It clearly wasn't the first temple since it was already destroyed, but applying the the preterist version of reasoning one would have to say that this vision had to have been received while the first temple still stood. This was shown to Ezekiel 25 years into captivity (ch 40, verse 1). He went into exile around 597 B.C., and the first temple was destroyed in 586 B.C.
Instead of viewing the temple in Revelation in a vacuum and in doing so neglect the context, you must take an honest reading of Revelation 3:12, 7:15, 14:15, 14:17, 15:5, 16:1, 16:17.
He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.'- Rev 3:12
Is Jesus saying that those who overcome will literally become pillars in the 2nd temple? Obviously not. What about metaphoric pillars in the 2nd temple? And what about He shall go out no more? New Jerusalem? Clearly this is not set in the earthly Jerusalem.
'“These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night in His temple. And He who sits on the throne will dwell among them.' from Rev 7:14-15
Those who went through the Great Tribulation are all here literally serving God round the clock in the 2nd temple in Jerusalem? Even if they were to all fit, which they wouldn't, you need to take into account just where they all come from as it says in verse 9.
'After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands' Rev 7:9
ALL nations, ALL tribes, ALL peoples, ALL languages. This was not in the first century A.D., because the Neronic persecution was centered in Rome. It did not extend even to all parts of the Roman Empire, let alone outside of it.
'And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, “Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come [j]for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.”' Rev 14:15
Was this angel literally coming out of the 2nd temple? Please look up each reference and study them. How were these definitely not referring to the 2nd temple but in Revelation 11 somehow it was? Have preterists even read chapter 11 in its entirety?
Rev 11:1 "Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, “Rise and measure the TEMPLE OF GOD, the altar, and those who worship there." (emphasis added)
and from Rev 11:19 "Then the TEMPLE OF GOD was opened IN HEAVEN, and the ark of His covenant was seen in His temple." (emphasis added again)
The scene was set in Heaven, not the earthly Jerusalem. The ark of the covenant was lost after the Babylonian destruction of the first temple in 586 A.D., which is enough all by itself to poke a giant hole through this preterist interpretation in Revelation. This was in no way, shape, or form referring to the 2nd temple in earthly Jerusalem.
now look at the math for the gentiles trampling the holy city in Revelation and see how it stacks up with the Roman war machine in the first century. Jerusalem was under siege for about 6 or 7 months in 70 A.D., over in the same year it began! Not even close to 42 months given in Revelation chapter 11. Even if the war itself had been 42 months this wouldn't matter because Revelation 11:2 is not referring to a war but the trampling of a city. And from the start of the Jewish-Roman war in 66 A.D, until the fall of Jerusalem it was over 4 years. No matter how the preterist may attempt to manipulate the math here, it simply doesn't work.
All things have not ended. Not by a long shot. Did you see Jesus return in 70 A.D., or did someone else tell you about His supposed return? I know I sure didn't, and oddly enough the world didn't see it and the church didn't celebrate in 70 A.D. one of the most momentous events in all of human history. Strange. In Matthew 24 Jesus specifically warns against believing any so-called reports of His return!
"If someone has to tell you about it, then it wasn't Him but a false christ. 23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ DO NOT BELIEVE IT. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand. 26 “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ DO NOT GO OUT; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ DO NOT BELIEVE IT. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together." (emphasis added).
In other words, when He actually returns no one will have any question about what is happening. Everyone will know it. The false Jesus of full preterism tries to convince people that the world is full of people who have no idea that Jesus returned. And even more bizarre is the absurd belief that we're already living in the New Heavens and New Earth. And in this supposed New Heaven and New Earth there is still death and pain for believers (despite Revelation 21), murder and sex trafficking and every other evil under the sun are running rampant under Jesus' kingship. This is an extremely grave insult to His character. Jesus is a much better King than that. When He returns He's going to set all the wrong things right.
@@JohnnyDoe1012 when scripture is talking of all nations it is not saying the entire inhabitants of the world. And yes all nations and tongues came out of in that 1st century. This is why scripture uses the word discernment .
@@kellyblakeborough3371 "when scripture is talking of all nations it is not saying the entire inhabitants of the world. And yes all nations and tongues came out of in that 1st century. This is why scripture uses the word discernment"
Every eye will see Him, and no one need to tell anyone else that Jesus returned as it states in Scripture. You didn't address a single point that I brought up here, and so they remain uncontested.
zio prop
It says that there are many Antichrists. "The" Antichrist of the Apostle's time was Titus who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. He was the "Son of Perdition" or son of Caesar. The time of "Jacobs" trouble/trib, was from 70 AD until 1967 when Jerusalem was restored. There will be no future trib like the 70 AD-1967 times of the gentiles, Lk 21:20-24, 24. The statue of Dan 2, the iron nation, is continual from 63 BC until Jerusalem is restored when the toes end, 1967. It proves that the Antichrist can only, only be Roman. This continual Roman iron shows the Roman Empire fell and was replaced by the image Roman Empire, the Vatican, Rev 13.