Correct.
But method is as important as content and one of the measures Dispensationalists are constantly using is the fallaciously post hoc response, "When did that happen?" so I'm applying that concept as it should be applied. If Dispensationalism
and its adherents repeated claim the Dispensational view is ten years away (or five, or 20) then
that is a valid means of measurement. The intrinsic relationship between false teaching and false teachers is something scripture mentions quite often in regard to eschatology. The great irony is at the time of the tribulation "Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many" (Mt. 24:11). The only eschatology that foments these false teachers is Dispensationalism.
It is good and valid and will prove veracious to point this out with any eschatological prognostication brought to bear on contemporary Christians.
You're not just a futurist, Douggg. All who look to a future return of Christ are futurists, me included. Similarly, all who accept Jesus as Messiah are preterist to one degree or another. One of the problems revealed in this discussion is you deny these things.
I'd like to give you credit for early-dating the book of Revelation but I can't do that because you deny the preterism of asserting Nero as the sixth king. In other words, the position asserted in this op has an
internal discrepancy.
If (and when) I read an acknowledgment of the logically necessary implications of Nero as the sixth king then I will move one with greater hope because then you will have conceded a very important first century context. As I have already shown you and all the readers, reading the prophesies as written, properly exegeted
in context of the first century writer, audience, and intent is
necessary for proper understanding.
You claim Nero is the sixth king but resist the implications of that position.
It is not person, Douggg. It may feel personal because you got caught in a contradiction. That is textbook Jon 3:20.
"Everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come into the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
So it's not personal, Dougg. This is a problem inherent with the eschatology to which you subscribe. This problem is a reason for you to re-examine your affinity and affiliation with this eschatology and be more critiqual and more critical of what you read and hear when preachers teach on the end times. This problem has existed since the beginning of ever-imminent far-futurism, especially in its Premillennial Dispensational iteration. Darbyism fails for many reasons but this is an important one: it makes its adherents false prognosticators. False, unaccountable, unrepentant, and disobedient false prognosticators.
"Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment."[/i]
So I exhort you to think about the content, the method, and the consequences of this op.
Nero is the sixth king, placing Revelation prior to 70 AD but for someunexplained and therefore unjustified position there is this huge gap between Daniel's 69th and 70th week that absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the original audience of the pre-70 AD Christian but this unjustified gap is going reach fulfillment in the next ten years.
This is what you are telling Christians here to believe.
The solution is simple: Yes, Nero was the sixth king and the seventh king also existed during the first century and therefore had relevance for the original writer and the original readers of Revelation. Whether Galba or not the seventh "king" was tied to the Roman Emperors
of the first century.
There's no need to prognosticate a far-futurism.
