Emma,
The thing that holds me back from what I call Neo-Preterism (because Classical Preterism didn't try and fit every little thing before 70 ad - read J.S. Russell) is trying to fit the Millennium in basically a 40 year span.
How can the ones who refused the mark of the beast reign with him from 30 ad to 70 ad when the beast and it's mark didn't even come around until probably the late 60s?
That's just one thing that holds me back.
Seeker
Personally I believe that the mark of the beast was there before the late 60's. Perhaps began shortly after the Holy Spirit filled them in the upper room.
The problems with the traditional view of the mark of the beast.
The first thing one must understand about Revelation is that it is a book composed almost entirely of symbols that a first century Jew would have found immediately recognizable. These symbols were used before in such books as Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Zechariah.
When a mark is spoken of, it should bring to mind a previous reference to a mark, found in another place in the Old Testament. The mark received upon the right hand or the forehead, is a Jewish typological picture (as is virtually all of Revelation), not to a physical mark on a persons body, but to the fact that in Jewish thought form (which is where John was coming from).
But how did one, receive the mark and what did it mean in Jewish thought?
It means that those who took the mark willingly, on their right hand (the Jewish picture of action and power), did whatever they did willingly for Rome, and they acted in accordance with that ungodly religious system (Pantheism).
The mark on the foreheads, was referring to the fact that Rome and their ideologies/ religions etc, were controlling their minds and thoughts of those who willingly followed this mind set, like we see in (Luke 19:14) But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
And in (John 19:15) But they cried out, Away with Him, away with Him! Crucify Him! Pilate said to them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar! And in (John 11:47-48) Then the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, What shall we do? For this Man works many signs. If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation. The original audience factor cannot be overlooked.
Every emperor represented the beast while in power, and, therefore, demanded allegiance (taking the mark, symbolically). Apostate Judaism enforced allegiance to Rome as John later stated: We have no king but Caesar! Those who did not bow to this evil alliance are those who, rather, received the mark of the Spirit of Life.
It is a perfect picture of this action as seen above. in John. This is the biblical meaning of the mark of the beast. Those who took the mark in the foreheads, were referring to the fact that Rome and their ideologies/religions etc, were controlling the minds and thoughts of those who willingly followed this mind set. All the Jews understood this typological picture.
Since John was a Jew he used numerous Jewish allusions out of the Old Testament in his book of Revelation. John writes in Greek, he thinks in Hebrew, and the thought has naturally affected the vehicle of express. The same language of Johns Revelation when a mark is spoken of, should bring to mind a previous reference to a mark found in Ezekiel 9:3-6. In that context, Jerusalem was also about to be besieged and destroyed (by the Babylonians). The Lord commanded an angel to place a mark on the foreheads of those that lamented the wickedness of the city. This angel is described as having a writers inkhorn at his side (9:3), with which he was to mark the righteous.
It is clear from the context that this was not to be taken literally, as if an angel needed to carry a pen around with him and an inkhorn in which to dip it. This was a figurative (symbolic) way of showing that there was a specific class of people within the doomed city that were being set apart for preservation (9:6).
In Revelation, a similar mark is placed on those whom God wishes to preserve (7:3, 14:1). A mark is also received by those loyal to the beast, one which sets them apart for destruction (14:9-11). The mark is an emblem of ownership (John 19:14-15.) When interpreting any book of the Bible, it is important to ascertain the audience to which it was originally directed.
First, in Revelation we have clear evidence that John is writing to particular, historic, individual churches that existed in his day. Revelation 1:4 provides a common salutation: John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace [be] unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come. In verse 11 he specifically names the seven churches to whom he speaks: What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea. We know these names to be those of historical cities containing literal churches existing in the first century.
Second, we learn that John wrote to those churches in order to be understood. The first sentence of Johns prophecy has become the title of the entire work. And from that title we are clearly told that his work was to be a revelation. The Greek word for revelation is apokalupsis, which means an opening up, uncovering. John intended his book to be an opening up of divine truth for his original audience. He wrote to reveal, not to conceal truth.
And we must allow Scripture to interpret itself whenever possible.
Daniel describes the four beasts (Babylon, Greece, Medo-Persia, and Rome) as the beasts of the sea: And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. (Daniel 7:3) It was during the time of this fourth empire that Gods eternal kingdom was to be established (Daniel 7:18,22,27).
By the way the mark of the beast was the mark of a certain individual (Rev. 13:18) not just the Roman Empire in general. The mark of the beast was to happen right before AD 70 The first clue for us to examine is Revelation 13:18, which says: Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.
We must remember that John is writing from the isle of Patmos, where he has been imprisoned. John wrote his message in code lest his captors understand his reference to the emperor. Instead of openly stating who the Beast was, he left the original audience a clue that every Hebrew could easily discern.
In ancient times, alphabets served a two-fold purpose. Letters functioned not only as phonetic symbols, but as numerals, as well. The Arabic numeral system, which we use today, was a later development.
Throughout the ancient world, we find the practice of using the numerical value of a name, as a sort of cryptogram.
The Hebrew spelling of the name Nero Caesar was NRWN QSR (represented here by English letters). The sum of these numbers, which match each Hebrew letter, add up precisely to 666 as follows:
N = 50 R = 200 W = 6 N =50 Q = 100 S = 60 R = 200
Is this a coincidence? Or was John sending a message to his readers, which they could have calculated with relative ease? Another interesting factor to consider is what is called the textual variant. If you consult a Bible with marginal references you will find something quite intriguing. Regarding Revelation 13:18, your reference may say something to the effect: Some manuscripts read 616. The fact is that the number 666 in some ancient manuscripts is actually changed to 616, but why? Was it changed by accident or intentionally? The numbers 666 and 616 are not even similar in appearancewhether spelled out in words or written in numerals. As textual scholars agree, it must be intentional by an early copyist.
John, a Jew, used a Hebrew spelling of Neros name in order to arrive at the number 666 with fits (John 19:15) The second major clue John gives us is found in Revelation 17:9-10, which declares: Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits, and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while.
Most New Testament scholars recognize that the seven mountains represent the famous Seven Hills of Rome. The Seven Hills of Rome are mentioned time and again by both ancient pagan and Christian writers.
The ten horns, with the crowns, are in reference to the ten empirical provinces of Rome. In Revelation 13:1 John notes that he saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads. Revelation 17:10 specifically notes that the seven heads represent seven kings. Thus, the Beast is generically portrayed as a kingdom.
Who was this sixth king? Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian of that period, clearly points out that Julius Caesar was the first emperor of Rome, and that he was followed in succession by Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius. The sixth was none other than Nero (see Antiquities, books 18 & 19). This is also confirmed by Roman historians, Suetonius (Lives of the Twelve Caesars) and Dio Cassius (Roman History V).
In addition, John states, the other has not yet come (the seventh), and when he comes, he must remain a little while. Following Nero came Galba, who reigned less than seven months.
Now here are my new questions. (1) Were in the book of Revelation does John say his mark of the beast was to take place pass the individual who was the sixth or seventh Caesar in his day?
(2) Where is the scripture were John says his mark was not a Jewish typological picture of the Jews in his day previous reference to a mark found in Ezekiel 9:3-6.
(3) John tell us the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits, and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while.
Who are these seven kings buy these names today? Julius Caesar was the first emperor of Rome and that he was followed in succession by Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius. The sixth was none other than Nero (see Antiquities, books 18 & 19). This is also confirmed by Roman historians, Suetonius (Lives of the Twelve Caesars) and Dio Cassius (Roman History V).
In addition, John states, the other has not yet come (the seventh), and when he comes, he must remain a little while. Following Nero came Galba, who reigned less than seven months.
Just who in our day are these seven kings buy these names?
I looked up those words in greek and these are the definitions that i got: 
