The Narrow Path Ministries

The destruction of harlot Babylon is the culmination of the judgments of Revelation. Preterists say this is talking about the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. This may sound crazy, but becomes much less so when one actually looks at Scripture.

To find the meaning of the images shown in Revelation one needs to look at the rest of Scripture—especially the Old Testament. Looking at the OT, the motif of harlot (with only two minor exceptions) is used to represent God’s old covenant people going after the gods and ways of other nations: Lev 17:7; 20:5-6; Num 14:33; 15:39; Deut 31:16; Judg 2:17; 8:27; 1 Chr. 5:25; 2 Chr 21:11; Ps 73:27; Hosea 1:2; 2:4; 4:15; 9:1; Jer. 2:20; 3:2,9,13; 5:7,11; 13:27; Ezek. 6:9; 16:26, 28, 29-30, 32; 23:2-3; 43:7, 9.

When Revelation was written (c. AD 65) the other nation was Rome; this is the beast the harlot is riding on. God’s covenant with Israel was liked to a covenant of marriage (Ezek 16:32), thus God’s old covenant people going after other gods is likened to an unfaithful or harlot wife. God went so far as to have Hosea marry a harlot to let his unfaithful people know what it was like to be in a covenant relationship with them (Hosea 1:2). When God established the Mosaic covenant, He told Moses the following.

“Behold, you will rest with your fathers; and this people will rise and play the harlot with the gods of the foreigners of the land, where they go to be among them, and they will forsake Me and break My covenant which I have made with them. Then My anger shall be aroused against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured . . . .
Deuteronomy 31:16-17

Revelation 17-18 is showing this prophesied destruction of harlot Israel. She will be devoured by the Roman beast (cf. Dan. 9:26-27).

The book of Revelation is structured on the covenant curses that were to come on God’s old covenant people when they broke the covenant—something they did in the ultimate sense when they had Jesus killed (cf. Matt. 21:33-45). God said He would bring four sets of sevenfold punishment on Israel for breaking the covenant (Lev. 26:18, 21, 24, 28).

I. Leviticus 26:18: “And after all this, if you do not obey Me I will punish you seven times more for your sins.”


II. Leviticus 26:21: Then, if you walk contrary to Me, and are not willing to obey Me, I will bring on you seven times more plagues, according to your sins.


III. Leviticus 26:23-24: And if by these things you are not reformed by Me, but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you, and I will punish you yet seven times for your sins.


IV. Leviticus 26:27-28: And after all this, if you do not obey Me, but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.

This pattern of Israel’s covenant punishments—four sets of punishments, each having a sevenfold fulfillment—provides the structure the plagues and punishments found in the book of Revelation. The four sets of sevenfold punishment in Revelation are:

I. The seven seals (Rev. 6:1-17; 8:1)


II. The seven trumpets (Rev. 8:2-10:7)


III. The seven thunders (Rev. 10:3-4)


IV. The seven bowls (Rev. 16:1-21)

For more on this see my article "The Covenant Judgments of Revelation". See here http://planetpreterist.com/content/c...nts-revelation

Revelation is showing God’s anger being poured out harlot Israel (the dwellers on the Land) as she is devoured at the end of the old covenant age (cf. Dan. 11:40-12:7). God had said He would punish His unfaithful old covenant people at this time by bringing back on them the plagues of Egypt (Deut. 28:58-61); this is why a number of the punishments in Revelation are patterned after the plagues of Egypt (7 of the 10 plagues are represented, Rev. 9:2-3; 16:1-4, 8, 10, 13, 21). This background of the covenant curses forms the context in which one finds the judgment and destruction of harlot Babylon. The destruction of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 forms the climax of these covenant curses that were coming on the unfaithful dwellers on the Land (cf. Rev. 11:15-18).

Two Women Who Represent the Two Covenants
Revelation is a tale of two cities. It is a book about two women/cities (harlot Babylon and the New Jerusalem bride) that are two wives (the bride is a betrothed wife, Rev. 19:7; the harlot is a widowed wife, Rev. 18:7). The unfaithful widowed wife (who became a widow when she had Jesus, killed, cf. Matt. 21:5) is destroyed, while the betrothed wife becomes married (Rev. 19:1-11). This subject of two women/cities is the same as that of Galatians 4:21-31.

Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written:
“Rejoice, O barren, You who do not bear! Break forth and shout, You who are not in labor! For the desolate has many more children than she who has a husband.” Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.’” Now we brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.

In Galatians 4 we are also shown two women/cities that are two wives; like Revelation, one is cast out while the other receives her inheritance. In Galatians the two women/cities are the Jerusalem from above and earthly Jerusalem. We are told that these “things are symbolic, for these are the two covenants” (Gal. 4:24). It is exactly the same in Revelation. Revelation presents us with two women/cities which are symbolic of the new and old covenant communities. It is obvious (or should be) that the Jerusalem from above of Galatians corresponds to the New Jerusalem of Revelation (which comes down out of heaven, Rev. 21:2). It should be equally as obvious that Revelation’s Babylon corresponds to the earthly Jerusalem of Galatians 4:24-25. Babylon is called “the great city” in Revelation (Rev. 17:18); the first time we are introduced to “the great city” we are told it is where Jesus was killed (i.e., Jerusalem, Rev. 11:8).

Revelation is showing the exact same thing that Galatians is, the contrast between the new covenant (which would be fully established at the AD 70 coming of God’s kingdom, cf. Mark 8:38-9:1) and the demise of the old covenant (which would go up in flames with the burning of the Temple in AD 70, Rev. 17:16). This is why the marriage of the bride happens right after the destruction of the harlot.

After these things I heard a loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying “Alleluia! Salvation and glory and honor and power belong to the Lord our God! For true and righteous are His judgments, because He has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication; and He has avenged on her the blood of His servants shed by her.” Again they said, “Alleluia! Her smoke rises up forever and ever!” . . .
“Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.”
Revelation 19:1-3, 7

This contrast between the destruction of faithless Israel and then marriage of the new covenant bride is found in Matthew 22. Those who rejected the invitation to the wedding of a king’s son are destroyed and then the wedding goes forward with a new people.

And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. Again, he sent out other servants, saying ‘Tell those who are invited, See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.’ But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murders, and burned up their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.”
Matthew 22:1-10

This parable is so obviously speaking of the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem that skeptics say it must have been written after AD 70. This story of the burning of a wicked city followed by a marriage parallels the narrative of Revelation 17-19. The city of God’s unfaithful old covenant people (harlot Babylon) is burned (Rev. 18:8) and then a wedding happens as the new covenant bride becomes married (Rev. 19:1-9). God destroys His unfaithful old covenant wife (cf. Ezek. 16:32) and then marries His new covenant bride.

This was the time that the kingdom of God was taken from God’s old covenant people and fully given to His new covenant people—the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. 21:33-45).

Here another parable: There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower. And he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit. And the vinedressers took his servant, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. Again he sent other servants more than the first, and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, “They will respect my son.” But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves “This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.” So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him.Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers? They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.” Jesus said to them . . . “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.”
Matthew 21:33-43; cf. Is. 5; 1 Peter 2:9-10

The Attire of the Harlot
The harlot is arrayed in the colors and materials of the Temple and the priesthood (Rev. 17:4; 18:6; cf. Ex. 28:3-39). Anyone familiar with the Temple could not miss the allusion to the giant (approximately 82 ft. high and 24 ft. wide) “Babylonian tapestry embroidered with blue, scarlet and purple and fine linen” that covered the entrance to the sanctuary (Josephus, The Jewish War, 5, 5, 4). The merchandise of Babylon (Rev. 18:11-13) is the merchandise used in the building and ceremonies of the Temple (cf. 2 Chron. 2:12, 14; Ezek. 16:10-19). Babylon is accused of the same commercialism that the Temple was (Rev. 18:7-11; cf. Matt. 21:12-13). Like the leaders of Israel, harlot Babylon is guilty of the blood of God’s true people (Rev. 17:6; 18:24; cf. Matt 23:29-38; 1 Thess. 2:14-16). Just as the Temple was the gathering place for worldwide Jewry (Acts 2:5-11), so harlot Babylon is associated with diverse nationalities of the world (Rev. 17:15). Just as Jesus had warned would happen to the generation that rejected him (Matt. 12:43-45), so harlot Babylon had become the dwelling place of demons (Rev. 18:2).

The plagues of Babylon (“pestilence and mourning, and famine and she will be burned up with fire,” Rev. 18:8 NASB) are exactly what happened to Jerusalem at AD 70. When the Romans finally entered Jerusalem they found the houses full of the bodies of starvation victims. Josephus writes the following on this.

They [the Romans] found the conclusion of the war much easier than the beginning; they could hardly believe that they surmounted the last wall without bloodshed and were amazed at seeing none to oppose them. They poured into the alleys, sword in hand, massacring indiscriminately all whom they met, and burned the houses with all who had taken refuge inside. In the course of their raids, as they entered houses for loot, they found whole families dead and rooms full of victims of starvation; horrified by such sights, they retired empty-handed. Yet pity for those who had thus perished was matched by no such feeling for the living, but, running through everyone they met, they choked the alleys with corpses and deluged the entire city with gore, so that many fires were quenched by the blood of the slain. They ceased their slaughter at dusk, but fire gained the mastery in the night, and dawn of the eighth day of the month of Gorpiaeus [Aug./Sept. AD 70] rose over Jerusalem in flames—a city that during the siege had suffered such disasters that if it had enjoyed as many blessing from its foundation, it would have been the envy of all—a city that deserved such terrible misfortunes on no other account than that it produced a generation such as brought about her downfall. [The Jewish War, 6, 8, 5]

It should be noted that burning was the prescribed punishment for a harlot of priestly descent (Lev. 21:9).

The kingdom of God was not put on hold when the Jews rejected it. To the contrary, Jesus had said that the Jews (“the sons of the kingdom”) would be cast out of the kingdom at its full establishment.

And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Matt. 8:11-12

Jesus would be the cause of “the fall and rising of many in Israel” (Luke 2:34). Harlot Babylon would be destroyed and the New Jerusalem bride (Rev. 21:9-10) would become married.

This pattern of Israel’s covenant punishments—four sets of punishments, each having a sevenfold fulfillment—provides the structure the plagues and punishments found in the book of Revelation. The four sets of sevenfold punishment in Revelation are:







I appreciate your throughness and i agree that Rev was written around 65AD and that there are four judgments on Jerusalem. However the whole premise that the first three were past events and the last is in 70AD just seems like such an overkill on 70AD. Jerusalem was attacked again and again after 70AD and the way politics are shaping up , it seems likely it will again be attacked in the future. I think it's likely the 70AD destruction was first in Rev and then the muslim invasion and then an attack during the crusades were in view with Rev 17 being the future and final attack. The beast in Rev 17 comes out of the pit and in the OT the nations that went into the pit are now on muslim land so i think the beast that emerges will be muslim nations. So obviously i see the historicist view covering the church age as making sense to me and unveiling the prophetic events at the end of this age.

steve7150 wrote:This pattern of Israel’s covenant punishments—four sets of punishments, each having a sevenfold fulfillment—provides the structure the plagues and punishments found in the book of Revelation. The four sets of sevenfold punishment in Revelation are:

I appreciate your throughness and i agree that Rev was written around 65AD and that there are four judgments on Jerusalem. However the whole premise that the first three were past events and the last is in 70AD just seems like such an overkill on 70AD. Jerusalem was attacked again and again after 70AD and the way politics are shaping up , it seems likely it will again be attacked in the future. I think it's likely the 70AD destruction was first in Rev and then the muslim invasion and then an attack during the crusades were in view with Rev 17 being the future and final attack. The beast in Rev 17 comes out of the pit and in the OT the nations that went into the pit are now on muslim land so i think the beast that emerges will be muslim nations. So obviously i see the historicist view covering the church age as making sense to me and unveiling the prophetic events at the end of this age.

Hi Steve,

Babylon is no more a literal city than the New Jerusalem bride is (the New Jerusalem is not a cube shaped city that we will live in in the future, Rev.21:16. She is a symbol of the bride). Saying Babylon is Jerusalem is like saying Uncle Sam is Washington DC. Uncle Sam is a personification of America. He is seated in Washington DC, but represents much more than just that city. It is the same with Babylon. She was seated on God's holy mountain in Jerusalem, but represents all of unfaithful old covenant Israel, not just Jersualem.

God said that Babylon would never rise again (Rev. 18:21). He does not say she would keep rising throughout history. It does not matter how many times Jerusalem is rebuilt, as long as the Temple is not rebuilt Babylon has not risen again. When God tells his people to come out of Babylon (Rev. 18:4) he is not telling them to come out of Jerusalem (they lived in Asia not Jerusalem) he is telling them to make the break with the old covenant temple system.

As for the beast, he was about to come when John wrote.

The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who dwell on the earth, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was and is not and will come. 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. The beast which was and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction.
Revelation 17:8-11 NASB

This is not a vague statement that the Antichrist could come soon; it is a clear declaration that he was about to come (Gr. mellei). John has already told his first century audience that the one with the required knowledge would be able to calculate the number of the individual beast (Rev. 13:18). This is consistent with what Scripture says elsewhere. John wrote that it was the “last hour (1 John 2:18) and that the spirit of Antichrist was “already in the world” (1 John 4:3). If the individual beast was about to come, then the Second Coming (when his is defeated) was about to happen (Rev. 19:11-21).

God said that Babylon would never rise again (Rev. 18:21). He does not say she would keep rising throughout history. It does not matter how many times Jerusalem is rebuilt, as long as the Temple is not rebuilt Babylon has not risen again. When God tells his people to come out of Babylon (Rev. 18:4) he is not telling them to come out of Jerusalem (they lived in Asia not Jerusalem) he is telling them to make the break with the old covenant temple system.






Exactly yet after 70AD, Babylon (false belief systems) have kept rising again and again. There have been different Babylon's and different beasts throughout the church age so that's why to me it makes sense that Babylon falls at the end of the church age. BTW i'm not expecting a single -anti-Christ figure or a 1,000 year milleneum after Christ's second coming.

steve7150 wrote:Exactly yet after 70AD, Babylon (false belief systems) have kept rising again and again. There have been different Babylon's and different beasts throughout the church age so that's why to me it makes sense that Babylon falls at the end of the church age. BTW i'm not expecting a single -anti-Christ figure or a 1,000 year milleneum after Christ's second coming.

Yes false belief systems are still here, but Revelation is not talking about false belief systems throughout history. It is talking about two women/cities that are two wives. As Galatians 4:24 puts it so well "which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants" Revelation is showing the AD 70 destruction of the old covenant order and full establishment of the new covenant order (see Isaiah 65-66: Gods old covenant people are destroyed and then his faithful people are established in a new heaven and earth.) The harlot is destroyed and the bride becomes married.

As for a single Antichrist figure, do not get me started on that (too late ). I am just finishing twelve years of work on a two volume set (a humble self published work that comes in at 1,000 pages!) Volume one is out http://www.amazon.com/Antichrist-Second ... ewpoints=1 Volume II should be out in about 4 or so months. Volume I looks at Daniel and 2 Thessalonians. Volume II looks exclusively at the book of Revelation. Here is something from vol. I on the Antichrist.

THE ANTICHRIST
It is somewhat surprising that a term as well known as Antichrist is found only four times in the entire Bible. These references occur in the books of 1 and 2 John:

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us. But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things. I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth. Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.
1 John 2:18-22 (underlined emphasis mine)

By this you know the spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
1 John 4:2-3 (underlined emphasis mine)

For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
2 John 7

John (c. AD 60-65) was telling his first-century readers that the Antichrist was about to appear.20 He makes a distinction between “Antichrist” and “antichrists” (1 John 2:18). John uses the term “antichrists” to describe those who deny that Jesus was the Christ come in the flesh (1 John 4:3). He cites the fact that many antichrists had come as an indication that it was the “last hour” and that the Antichrist was about to come. It should be noted that John is mostly focusing on these “antichrists” in his epistles not the “Antichrist.”

Some would disagree with my position and say there is no such thing as an individual Antichrist, that there are only antichrists.21 Preterists especially have been attracted to this line of thinking because they have failed to produce a unified picture of Antichrist in one historical figure. If one cannot unify the Scriptures related to Antichrist, it is a clever defense to maintain there is no single Antichrist. One cannot be faulted for not coming up with an answer to a problem that does not exist! This sidestepping of the issue does not work, however; the problem does not go away. Whether one calls him “Antichrist” or not, the Bible consistently shows an opponent of God/Christ who is defeated by the coming of God (see below). To say there is no individual Antichrist does not get around this fact.

THE OPPONENT OF GOD/CHRIST
Looking at Scripture, one does not have to dig too deep to find the opponent of God/Christ who appears at the last hour (of the old covenant age; cf. 1 Cor. 10:11). Looking at Daniel 7, the little eleventh horn makes war against the saints and is defeated by the coming of God:

I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.
Daniel 7:21-22

Notice that the little eleventh horn has three horns pulled out before it (Dan. 7:8), making him an eighth horn (i.e., ruler), which is exactly what the beast of Revelation is (Rev. 17:11). Just as with the little horn of Daniel 7, the beast of Revelation is defeated by the coming of God. Revelation reveals this as the coming of Jesus, the coming of the Word of God:

Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war . . . He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God . . . Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword . . . And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. Then the beast was captured . . . [and] cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.
Revelation 19:11, 13, 15, 19-20

Consider some of the connections between the little horn of Daniel 7 and the beast of Revelation:

1. The little horn/beast is an eighth ruler (Dan. 7:8; Rev. 17:11).

2. The little horn/beast speaks great blasphemies against God (Dan. 7:8, 11, 20, 25; Rev. 13:5-6).

3. The little horn/beast wages war against the saints and overcomes them (Dan. 7:21; Rev. 13:7).

4. The little horn/beast has a three-and-a-half-year reign of terror (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5).

5. The little horn/beast is defeated in AD 70 by the coming of God/Christ (Dan. 7:21-22; Rev. 19:11-20).

6. The little horn/beast is thrown into the lake of fire at the time of the Second Coming (Dan. 7:11; Rev. 19:19-21).

7. The kingdom of God is established (what the NT shows as the beginning of the millennium) at the AD 70 defeat of the little horn/beast (Dan. 7:7-11, 21-27; Rev. 19:11-20:4).

There are too many specific correlations between the little horn and the beast for Daniel and Revelation to be talking about different rulers. These links also rule out the proposition that Revelation is retelling a second-century BC (pseudo) prophecy of Antiochus IV. It is the same ruler being shown in Daniel and Revelation, not two different rulers. The little horn/beast is the opponent of God/Christ who overcomes the saints for three-and-a-half years and is defeated at the parousia, ushering in the worldwide establishment of God’s kingdom at AD 70 (cf. Rev. 11). The little horn/beast is the Antichrist.

In Paul’s discussion of the man of lawlessness (the one who captures the Temple and is worshiped there; 2 Thess. 2:1-4), this theme of the opponent of Christ who is defeated by the Second Advent is found again:

For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.
2 Thessalonians 2:8

Note the connection between Revelation 19:15 (“Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword”) and 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“the Lord will consume [him] with the breath of His mouth”). The Antichrist is defeated at the parousia by the sword/breath that comes out of Jesus’ mouth. These two sections speak of the same event and the same opponent; both speak of the Antichrist and the Second Coming. Note also that Paul draws from Daniel 11:36-12:13 in his discussion of the man of lawlessness. He is thus linking the king of the North with the man of lawlessness. The Antichrist was the opponent of God who would seek to exalt himself above God (cf. 2 Thess. 2:4 with Dan. 11:36-37).

Looking at the king of the North, he is defeated at the end of the old covenant age (Dan. 11:40-45), at the AD 70 destruction of the Jewish nation (Dan. 12:7). While the Second Coming is not shown explicitly in Daniel 12, the events associated with the Second Coming (e.g., the great tribulation, Dan. 12:1, cf. Matt. 24:21; the abomination of desolation, Dan. 12:11, cf. Matt. 24:15; and the resurrection and judgment, Dan. 12:2-3, cf. Matt. 25:31-32) are shown as happening at the defeat of the king of the North at the end of the age.

In the king of the North, we again we have the opponent of God who is defeated at AD 70 after a three-and-a-half-year reign of terror (Dan. 12:7; cf. Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5). As I mentioned earlier, Titus’ campaign against Israel took exactly three-and-a-half years, from March/April of AD 67 to August/September of AD 70.22 Whether one wants to use the term Antichrist or not, the Bible clearly shows an opponent of God/Christ who appears at the last hour of the old covenant age and is defeated by the Second Advent. To merely assert that there is no individual Antichrist does not change the facts of Scripture.

The Antichrist and the Second Coming: A Preterist Examination volume I, 23-28.

Yes false belief systems are still here, but Revelation is not talking about false belief systems throughout history. It is talking about two women/cities that are two wives. As Galatians 4:24 puts it so well "which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants" Revelation is showing the AD 70 destruction of the old covenant order and full establishment of the new covenant order (see Isaiah 65-66: Gods old covenant people are destroyed and then his faithful people are established in a new heaven and earth.) The harlot is destroyed and the bride becomes married.

As for a single Antichrist figure, do not get me started on that (too late ). I am just finishing twelve years of work on a two volume set (a humble self published work that comes in at 1,000 pages!) Volume one is out http://www.amazon.com/Antichrist-Second ... ewpoints=1 Volume II should be out in about 4 or so months. Volume I looks at Daniel and 2 Thessalonians. Volume II looks exclusively at the book of Revelation. Here is something from vol. I on the Antichrist.






I hope your book does well although i see Rev differently. I have two books on Rev by historicists who in great detail match up the symbolisms with actual historical events over the church age. I'm sure you also see the symbolisms come alive matched up against the OT judgments and 70AD.
My difficulty with your view is, to me the premise does'nt make sense in that you have the three Olivet Discourses in the synoptics already predicting the destruction of Jerusalem 70AD and the other judgments already described in detail in the OT. Why take the entire book of Rev to again repeat with great symbolism things already plainly spelled out earlier. The NT itself actually s/b called "The New Covenant" so this is not something veiled that needs unveiling and Rev itself is about the "Unveiling of Jesus Christ." An unveiling is about something previously not known therefore the fact that it covers the church age and his second coming and the end of "this present evil age" and judgment of the world by Christ makes much more sense to me.
I do agree with you however that there is no Anti-Christ coming.

steve7150 wrote:
I hope your book does well although i see Rev differently. I have two books on Rev by historicists who in great detail match up the symbolisms with actual historical events over the church age. .

Steve,
I would be interested to hear an example or two of these interpretations. One problem with historicism is that it changes over the years (as there is more and more historical events). Thus, the historicism of 500 AD would be different from that of 1500 AD which would be different from 2000 AD

Steve,
I would be interested to hear an example or two of these interpretations. One problem with historicism is that it changes over the years (as there is more and more historical events). Thus, the historicism of 500 AD would be different from that of 1500 AD which would be different from 2000 AD






Good point but it may be that this unveiling is progressively unfolding over the church age and it tells us that there will be an end to the age at his second coming. Another words a prophetic book in progress , actually can be quite interesting.
I'll try to answer your request ASAP.

Steve,
I would be interested to hear an example or two of these interpretations





OK Duncan here is one from "The Revelation Decoded and Explained" by R.L. Jones

"And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed" Rev 13.15

Commentary - Henry the 8th had established an "image", a duplicate arrangement of the first beast which was the Papacy. A new church state situation now existed in England. It's name was "Ecclesia Anglicana" with Henry as it's Pope. All civil and ecclesiastical power was vested in Henry. He dictated the rule of the sermons in the pulpit as well as the enactments of Parliament. He declared what was truth and what was heresy. He appointed and removed Archbishops and Bishops at his pleasure. Henry caused Sir Thomas More and Bishop Fisher to be beheaded for high treason because they would not acknowledge the King to be the head of the Church in England , this was in 1535 AD.


Anyway the commentary keeps going on but you get the idea that the Papacy is the big beast in the church age and Henry was an image of that beast, Is this provable? Obviously not but i can't think of a more appropriate beast for the dark ages & middle age period then the Papacy.