Revelation 17:8

[DialecticSkeptic]

Could it be a future reference?

It could, which my response took into account. I said that "the beast in Revelation 17:8 represents not just Rome but a pattern of oppressive, anti-Christian regimes throughout history. ... While the specific historical referent may be Nero to Domitian, the broader message applies to any governmental or cultural system that sets itself against Christ." At the time when it was being written, those anti-Christian regimes throughout history were future.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

It could, which my response took into account. I said that "the beast in Revelation 17:8 represents not just Rome but a pattern of oppressive, anti-Christian regimes throughout history. ... While the specific historical referent may be Nero to Domitian, the broader message applies to any governmental or cultural system that sets itself against Christ." At the time when it was being written, those anti-Christian regimes throughout history were future.

I see again the beasts being gentile kingdoms which opress jerusalem.

that is why their appears to ne a GAP and the kingdoms since rome are not included.

 

[TMSO]

I appreciate you taking the time to consider this.

I believe it is the antichrist systems throughout this church age since the time of Christ.

Look at it like this. The antichrist and the beast are one and the same. The beast has his image, which is like God and Jesus the Son of God, who is the image of the invisible God. The mark is a mark of ownership, just as the Holy Spirit is our seal and spiritual mark of God's ownership. (Well our down payment of the inheritance until we take material possession. (Ephesians 1))

As far as Nero and the beast, that whole 666 thing is completely wrong. It is his name, not title that is important. Caesar Nero isn't his name. His last name is rather... LONG. Consider that John lived until about 100AD, and didn't mention the name of the beast to ANYONE in coversation. One reason could be that the beast had not been born/come into existence yet. John had no way of explaining who it is.

I still consider Romans 9-11 perhaps 12 to be important in understanding, when you take the Old Testament, such as Zechariah into account. Jesus was sent by the Father to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. NOT to the Gentiles. He was clear when He stated that to the Cushite woman. It is true. At that time, that was where we were in God's plan of redemption. The Jew first, then the Gentile. The Jews rejected the Messiah and He was "cut off with nothing" (Daniel 9); crucified. God said that Israel became disobedient (this speaks of the rejection of the Messiah). By this disobedience, the gospel went out to the Gentiles who became obedient. At the end of time, when the world reaches its end, God will finally come back to Israel and deal with Israel. The remnant that remains within Israel will be saved. By the obedience of the Gentiles, the disobedient Israelites will become obedient again, but only the remnant. If we go with Zechariah, 2/3rds of the people will perish, while 1/3rd will be purged and purified.

Even Jesus spoke of the time of the Gentiles in Luke.
""But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. 21 Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. 23 Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

From the rejection of Israel of the Messiah until now, Israel has been under a partial hardening/blindness by God. Evidence of this? Jews are individually being saved today, so salvation is not cut off completely from Israel. Paul says that this hardening/blindness continues UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles has come in. That sounds very much related to "the times of the Gentiles" Jesus speaks of. Jerusalem is still not under Israel's control.

Watch what is happening today. If you really want to know if things are going to get really crazy, see if Israel gets the right to rebuild the temple. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump somehow managed to get that connected to ending the war. Perhaps part of adding other nations to the Abrahamic Accords? Granted, that would make Trump the antichrist, but I wouldn't be surprised... Consider he survived an assassination attempt, which to someone who didn't understand may appear to be fatal. It doesn't mean anything, it is just something to add to all the other observations of the day.

 

[Josheb]

Even Jesus spoke of the time of the Gentiles in Luke.
""But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. 21 Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. 23 Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

From the rejection of Israel of the Messiah until now.............

That assumes the times of the Gentiles continued on past the time when the Gentiles first trampled Jerusalem.

Watch what is happening today.

We do. Every day we read about Jerusalem being (re-)inhabited by Jews, not Gentiles. The times of the Gentiles' trampling is long gone.

 

[Hazelelponi]

..

 

[TMSO]

A few reasons are

Nero Cesar comes out to 666 (rev 13)

Which isn't his actual name so the 666 does not matter. Also, Irenaeus said that John never named this "beast" even when speaking to people long after his exile was over. If He knew, and it was coded in this way so that no one would read and know what he was saying and attack him for it, then why didn't he tell people in one on one conversations? "Oh yeah, well... it really is Nero." He never named him. One reason could be that he was still to come, and giving his name would mean nothing to anyone alive at the time. However, he could give spoilers to those alive in the future as to who it could be.

Rome almost collapsed before it was revived just before 70AD (the fatal wound that healed rev 17)

Except that Revelation is clear that it speaks of a person, as the other horns did. You can't change the meaning of a symbol given that that has not happened in any other prophecies God has ever given, unless you are making the argument that God's nature changes.
"The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits, 10 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. 11 The beast which was and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction." He is an eighth king, yet one of the seven. Perhaps that is an allusion that this eighth king is of Rome, either actual Rome or a revived Rome. (One which was, was not, and is to come out of the abyss.) Rome was, was not, and will come again. A revived Rome. So, a king of a revived Rome. This is reaching, however, there is rationality there, while we can't say right or wrong.