But I take it from your posts that you are a preterist or partial-preterist so there’s really no point, is there?
Worse, I came from decades of Dispensationalism into the light of Amillennialism. Theology by Prooftext can lead a person anywhere, a comprehensive and holistic view of Scripture leads to the Truth.
Nero was the Antichrist, there’s no 7-year Tribulation and today’s Israel isn’t significant in Bible prophecy?
John talks about antichrists so I am not so quick to look for one real bad guy. There are interesting arguments for and against Nero, I'm not going to say that he wasn't a Man of Sin since he certainly did fill many of the requirements, then again so have many other historical leaders and popes. Will there be a future "Man of Sin"? There could, but I don't see the mechanism that would lead to the one the Futurists describe. In fact, I don't think that the Futurists have a consistent definition to even know who to look for so trying to play Where's Waldo even with the assumption that there is a future über Man of Sin is futile.
For the record, I won't break bread with a Full Preterist who doesn't believe in a future Parousia. The Post-Mills have an interesting argument that unfortunately collapses on a late dating of Revelation and other arguments that the Futurist can't use. Which leaves the Amillennial position, and other than drive-by heckling, I have yet to see any assaults on view.