You're correct. You also hold the historical Christian position, not the recent view of reading the book of revelation as something that didn't already happen around 70ad.
Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.
1 John 4:3
and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
1 John 2:18
Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.
2 John 1:7
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
I believe there’s is an ultimate power, Creator, God.
That said,, after years of being here and learning how to search, research, use my noggin to discern, I’ve come to a place where scripture can and should be questioned. If for any reason, then for the fact that what we have been given as The Word of God was put together by an institution that was more interested in power and control than it was / is truth.
*I did not come to this way of thinking easily. It was painful, scary and whatever other adjective you might come up with to describe the feeling one gets when they question the foundations they built their life on.
Oh cool so you're a preterist too. Theonomy AND preterism. You got the whole Reformed bingo card filled out don't you. What's next, you gonna tell me the great tribulation was just a bad week in Jerusalem.
The Nero thing. Yeah I've heard this one. You take a Greek name, transliterate it into Hebrew, use one specific spelling to make the numbers work, and then act like first century Christians were all just nodding along like it was obvious. If it was "clear as day" then why did Irenaeus, your boy that you love to quote when it's convenient, suggest completely different interpretations? He threw out Lateinos and Teitan. Not Nero. Weird thing for a guy who supposedly understood it "clear as day."
And "let the reader understand" is not an invitation to do math homework in a different language. That's you reading your conclusion into the text and working backwards.
You know what's funny though. You spent half this thread telling everyone that words and themes don't equal fully developed systems. Remember that whole speech about oikonomia? But now a gematria trick that only works with one specific Hebrew spelling is "clear as day." So which is it. Are we being careful with historical claims or are we not. Because you keep switching the rules depending on which argument you're making.
You're correct. You also hold the historical Christian position, not the recent view of reading the book of revelation as something that didn't already happen around 70ad.
Nero was the antichrist.
I once heard someone theorize that the antichrist isn’t just one person, but could be many over time. It’s an interesting exercise in thought🤔
1 John 2:22
Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.
1 John 4:3
and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
1 John 2:18
Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.
2 John 1:7
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
I believe there’s is an ultimate power, Creator, God.
That said,, after years of being here and learning how to search, research, use my noggin to discern, I’ve come to a place where scripture can and should be questioned. If for any reason, then for the fact that what we have been given as The Word of God was put together by an institution that was more interested in power and control than it was / is truth.
*I did not come to this way of thinking easily. It was painful, scary and whatever other adjective you might come up with to describe the feeling one gets when they question the foundations they built their life on.
Multiple antichrists, seems like. Nero likely was one, though.
"And the number of the beast shall be 666, let the reader understand. "
Nero Cesar written in Hebrew letters which were also numbers = 666
Christians at this time understood this clear as day
Oh cool so you're a preterist too. Theonomy AND preterism. You got the whole Reformed bingo card filled out don't you. What's next, you gonna tell me the great tribulation was just a bad week in Jerusalem.
The Nero thing. Yeah I've heard this one. You take a Greek name, transliterate it into Hebrew, use one specific spelling to make the numbers work, and then act like first century Christians were all just nodding along like it was obvious. If it was "clear as day" then why did Irenaeus, your boy that you love to quote when it's convenient, suggest completely different interpretations? He threw out Lateinos and Teitan. Not Nero. Weird thing for a guy who supposedly understood it "clear as day."
And "let the reader understand" is not an invitation to do math homework in a different language. That's you reading your conclusion into the text and working backwards.
You know what's funny though. You spent half this thread telling everyone that words and themes don't equal fully developed systems. Remember that whole speech about oikonomia? But now a gematria trick that only works with one specific Hebrew spelling is "clear as day." So which is it. Are we being careful with historical claims or are we not. Because you keep switching the rules depending on which argument you're making.
This is getting embarrassing.