There is no such thing as a "partial" preterist, by definition of the word preterist. While we are on this subject, which you seem to be obsessed with, you may want to reconsider your misspelling of preterist.
>>>To have a consistent hermeneutic you would then have to explain for example how Nero was thrown in the lake of fire and how his victorious (not defeated) army became worm and fowl food after the Army of Christ crushed them.<<<
Are you referring to the Army of Christ that was fighting from heaven? Maybe you can explain to us how an army in heaven fights on the earth.
While you are at it, maybe you can explain how anyone is thrown into the lake of fire. I am not burdening you with the restriction of a particular individual. I am asking, how do we know when anyone is thrown into the lake of fire?
And how do you know it was Nero's army that became worm and fowl food? History has recorded that there was no one left to bury the 1.1 million Jews killed in Jerusalem; so many of them became the "feast" of the buzzards, eagles and wild dogs. Moses, himself, mentioned that would happen during his Deuteronomy 28 prophecy on the future siege and destruction of Jerusalem:
"And thy carcase shall be meat unto all fowls of the air, and unto the beasts of the earth, and no man shall fray them away." (Deu 28:26 KJV)
To maintain a consistent hermeneutic, shouldn’t you allow for the fact that there was no mention whatsoever that Nero's army became worm and fowl food? One could make an uneducated guess that Nero's army was part of the "remnant" mentioned in Rev 19:21; but are we not bound by consistent hermeneutics?
"And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great. And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh." (Rev 19:17-21 KJV)
redleghunter, your arguments are very difficult to follow without scriptural support. All I see are your unsubstantiated opinions. It would be helpful if you cite biblical verses for your arguments. Even better, if you would quote the scripture and highlight the parts (bold, underline, …) supporting your arguments. Otherwise, I just don't have enough time left in this life to figure out what you are trying to say.
>>>Of course you would have to shift to an allegory to explain that away as would every eye would see Christ come again.<<<
Do you think that is literal, in light of all the old testament documentation associating the Lord coming in clouds, dating all the way back to Moses?
Also, when referring to "those who pierced him," who also saw him coming with clouds, are you literally interpreting "those" to mean the Roman soldier who speared him, or the Jews who had Christ condemned (where the judgement actually lay?) Or are you spiritualizing the scriptures so that statement means some future group of Jews? Which is it? Literal or Spirtual?
>>>The Scriptures are clear Christ is coming to defeat the armies of the beast. Not help the beast destroy Jerusalem. <<<
It is not clear at all. You made that up, or someone did. It is quite a stretch to assume that the gathering together of those in opposition to Christ-- the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies--are the armies of the beast. Your statement is in no way fact, but is rather a clear case of spiritualizing the scriptures to maintain your bias that the "beast" is some "all-powerful," modern-era creature.
>>>Plus Nero was no where near Jerusalem and led no armies there.<<<
No, he was only torturing and murdering the early Christians in horrendous ways, up until the time of this death. No big deal.
>>>In summary the cold hard historical facts we all know to be accurate do not match your interpretation of Revelation. <<<
I would recommend you read Ken Gentry's book, Before Jerusalem Fell, before making again such a brash, uneducated statement.
Frankly, I am, at this point, unimpressed with your understanding of the scriptures. If you care to cite scriptural references to support your claims, I will be happy to evaluate them.
Philip
Ah yes! Gentry the Preterist.
Kenneth Gentry [http://www.theopedia.com/Kenneth_Gentry]
Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. (b. 1950) is a pastor and theologian ordained in the Reformed Presbyterian Church, General Assembly. He has written numerous books and articles, most notably on preterism and postmillennialism in eschatology, and the Book of Revelation. He has also written on ethics, particularly from a theonomist view. Gentry is a graduate of Tennessee Temple University (BA), Reformed Theological Seminary (MDiv), and Whitefield Theological Seminary (ThM, ThD).
Theonomy – aka Christian Reconstructionism [http://carm.org/christian-reconstructionism-theonomy]
Recent advocates are Gary North, Gary DeMar, Kenneth Gentry, Larry Pratt, Greg Bahnsen.
Teachings:
Christian Reconstructionism (also known as theonomy) is a highly controversial movement within some conservative Christian circles. It maintains that the world should be brought under (reconstructed) the lordship of Jesus Christ in all areas: social, moral, political, judicial, military, family, art, education, music, etc. Christian Reconstructionism advocates the restoration of Old Testament civil and moral laws in order to reconstruct present American society into an Old Testament type Mosaic form and that the three main areas of society - family, church, government - should all be biblically modeled, the Bible being the sole standard. This would include severe punishments for law breakers. Some Christian reconstructionists would advocate death for adulterers, abortionists, idolaters, murderers, homosexuals, rapists, etc.
Reconstructionts maintain a strong belief that the Bible is true and inerrant. Generally postmillennial 'that through the preaching and teaching of the gospel, the world will be converted to Christianity and that Christ will return after a period of time after the world is converted.
Christian reconstructionism advocates removing prisons and and replacing them with the practice of restoration of damages done. Christians are the new chosen people of God, replacing national Israel. Other religious systems would be strongly resisted.
There is a debate among some Christian reconstructionists on whether or not slavery should be reinstituted; not all are in agreement.
Opposes evolution. Teaches Jesus will physically return to Israel.
Christian reconstructionism began with the publication of the Institute of Biblical Law by R. J. Rushdoony in 1973. This 800 page work expounded on the 10 Commandments. After Rushdoony's death in 2001, his son-in-law Gary North took the reins and has become a prolific writer, further advocating Christian Reconstructionism.
I’ve got lot’s of stuff on Gentry’s buddy Rushdoony. Of course old scary Gary North Rushdoony’s son in law was gem also. Want me to go on?
I did quote scriptures. I posted clearly from Revelation 19 which is the run up and description of the second coming of Jesus Christ. You responded the the battle was fought in Heaven which implies there was not or will not be a second literal coming of Christ. Therefore your position as I read it was the second coming was not literal but allegory.
Then you stated Nero was the beast of Revelation, and by stating so shift to a literal fulfillment of a world leader as the beast. But when we get to Revelation 19 you shifted back to allegory or symbolism when it came time for the defeat of the beast and his armies.