The Bible is true, but what you heard about it is not.

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

I find I have to agree with Rev. Hassertt's review - much of which could equally apply to the lamented, and lamentable, abelcainsbrother, aka ACB.

Your two part "letter" - and indeed your claims - is of little value absent a peer-review of what you call "proper preterism" - you first need to submit/publish such a paper for academic examination.

You appear to believe that the bible is the inerrant Word of God, whilst taking translations with a pinch of salt. Your belief that the book of Revelations refers primarily to past - rather than future - events is nothing that a Catholic couldn't have told any (particularly American) Protestant.

Given that your belief in God stems from a belief that "the bible" is the "inerrant Word of God", this leaves you standing on nothing.

I trust that you won't take any of this as an ad hominen but I have the sinking feeling that I'm dealing with a ACB sound-alike whose views on the bible and what it means are pathologically skewed by preconceived notions of some revelatory nature known only to yourself.

Kindest regards,

James

Hassert is a FULL PRETERIST, thus he has made up his mind and won't listen to logic that it is impossible for the remaining events (prophecy) of Rev 20:8ff (and forward) to the end of the book, CANNOT be fulfilled yet. Rev 20:4 BEGAN ca. 70AD (which also began the thousand years) with the destruction of Jerusalem (the great whore) and we are now living in the period after the thousand (Greek plural word -- not a literal thousand but signified by the binding and release of adversary) years and adversary (satan) is now loosed on the world scene wreaking havoc with the gog and magog nations of the middle east coming over here, being deceived and waging war by this adversary (satan).

This is arrant nonsense - there are no prophecies that have not been written into the bible after the fact to make it look like they're prophecies. Revelations is strictly about the past - specifically the events of the first century AD.

You now appear to claim that Gog and Magog are Middle-Eastern countries involved in terrorism plots against the USA?!

Attempting to dismiss Hassertt's review of your book on the basis that he's a "full preterist" does not fly: the points he makes about your misinterpretation of the bible, and particularly your "disturbing" remarks about various people, can not be justified.

I also note you haven't addressed my main points in my previous reply - or the points of others.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Deleted member 619]

In fact, my entrance says GOD (not me) is revealing in our day for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear (not everyone has or will).

That might be what your entrance says, but you're the one here doing all the fucking blathering. Your cosmic masturbation fantasy is very much not in evidence in this discussion. In short, it would be better if you simply admitted that it['s you coming up with all the bollocks, because at l;east then you're not merely accepting us to accept hearsay, which is not even admissible under the pathetically inadequate standard of evidence admitted in legal settings, which are nothing like the rigorous standard you'll be expected to meet if you really want to put the idiotic brainturd you're here to sell on anything like a robust footing.

Second, we do have the original languages, the dead sea scrolls are even available, the texts receipts is easily available, and even if they were imperfect, there is definitely enough there to arrive at the truth if one is diligent.

Wrong. What there are are sufficient data regarding what people believed. There is quite simply no basis on which mere text can be believed in support of a claim, especially a claim such as the existence of magical fucking entities with mutually exclusive and absurd fucking attributes. If you think there is, you're a fucking moron

But you are making a claim people have not so prevalently (maybe in minor circles, but nothing like today) made in millennia. And that is that God does not exist, and/or the Bible is myth. So, where is your proof of that grandiose claim?

The bible is my 'proof' (see previous fucking up the arse of your ignorance regarding misuse of this term), because therein are the alleged attributes of this entity defined, and they cannot coexist (and indeed two of them are self-refuting). Your imaginary friend is a fantasy.

 

[shauk100]

This is arrant nonsense - there are no prophecies that have not been written into the bible after the fact to make it look like they're prophecies. Revelations is strictly about the past - specifically the events of the first century AD.

You now appear to claim that Gog and Magog are Middle-Eastern countries involved in terrorism plots against the USA?!

Attempting to dismiss Hassertt's review of your book on the basis that he's a "full preterist" does not fly: the points he makes about your misinterpretation of the bible, and particularly your "disturbing" remarks about various people, can not be justified

Nonsense, your assertion of everything past is unsubstantiated by scripture itself......

The continuous narrative of Rev 19 and 20 is explained by the lake of fire.

Rev 19:20 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.

The millennial period could not start until AFTER the 2nd advent because of the arrangement of Rev 19 and 20. If 70AD is the destruction of the harlot of Rev 16 and 19, then Satan could not have been destroyed before that in 30AD at Golgotha.

So it is only AFTER the thousand years of Rev 20:4 expires that Satan is cast into the lake of fire, and that the beast and false prophet ARE ALREADY THERE. This makes it impossible for the thousand years of Rev 20:4 to come BEFORE the destruction of the beast and the false prophet, and makes it impossible for it to come AFTER the destruction of Satan in the lake of fire.

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [were], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

So in that sense, the events of Rev 19 precede the events of Rev 20, making it a continuous narrative.

That takes the continuity of events and completely 180s them. Satan is chained after the destruction of the beast and false prophet. There is no way around it.

Satan is cast into the lake of fire, where the beast and false prophet already are, AFTER the thousand years had transpired. The book of revelation was given no sooner than 68AD. If those things were to shortly come to pass (as preterists understand shortly), then there is NO WAY that the beast and false prophet could have been destroyed before the Revelation was given. The events of Revelation must transpire after 68AD.

LAKE OF FIRE (SECOND DEATH) VERSES:
Rev_19:20, Rev_20:10, Rev_20:14, 15, Rev_21:8

Also, I don't know if you noticed, "peoples" (plural) from different nations cause the problems we have in the world all the time! So, your accusation of "and particularly your "disturbing" remarks about various people, can not be justified" has no justification unless you want to blame the world's problems on a fallen angel or something. Is that what you're saying?

Proper Preterism has put the nail in the coffin of Full (and partial) Preterism!

 

[Deleted member 619]

Of course, since your scripture is fantasy from start to finish, and fails even the most basic tests of congruence with reality, all of that is little more than an uninteresting sidebar (even assuming you're correct, which is very much in contention). Even were you to deliver a devastatingly brilliant précis of your hokey blurble, such that even every single one of the world's biblical scholars were in complete agreement that you'd nailed it, you would still be in the situation that the entire book is a puerile fantasy, fit only for the stupid and the terminally credulous, because your magic imaginary friend is no more than the kind of fantasy you jack to in lingerie catalogues, except with far less substance.

For the sake of argument, I will grant that your interpretation of scripture is entirely correct. I still require substantive quantitative evidence that your preposterous cosmic curtain-twitcher has any basis in reality.

Talk fucking shit all you want, and you'll have accomplished exactly fuck all, except to show the entire world what a fucking gullible twat you really are.

You have precisely fuck all to offer here, except a diversion and maybe some mild entertainment for the skeptic here to sharpen their claws on. Even your best, according to most sources on your side of the fence, Kalamity Kraig, is a total fuckwit with nothing of interest to present other than a demonstration in sophistry and, while he might be a loathsome cunt, at least he's almost competent, which you are not.

Proper Preterism has put the nail in the coffin of Full (and partial) Preterism!

While reality has put the nail in the coffin of stupid cuntery aeons ago, yet apologist fuckwits still fail to notice it. Marx was wrong; religion isn't the opium of the people, it's the novocaine of the stupid cunt.

 

[Bango Skank]

hackenslash...

Could you at least try to be more polite?

 

[Deleted member 619]

hackenslash...

Could you at least try to be more polite?

Are you fucking having a giraffe? These morons come here to sell their fucking bigoted, immoral fucking death-cult arse-water, arse-water that, I might add, has held and still holds billions in thrall, and has kept humanity in intellectual and social bondage for millennia and resulted in millions of deaths, and you're fucking worried about fucking politeness? Fuck you, and everybody you ever met or heard of, and all the fucking horses they rode in on.

No, I'm a cunt, and I make no apology for it. I'm being perfectly polite to the poster, even giving hints and tips on forum use, but I have no intention of ever being polite to toxic cuntery. If that offends you in some way or pisses you off, feel free to wait around for the next person who gives a flying fuck what you think of my delivery to chance along and proceed to tell them all about it, because your opinion and its resultant request mean exactly fuck all to me. I'm here to fuck over all stupidity, not to make friends, and I don't fucking care what anybody thinks of my delivery.

Go on, make another fucking comment about my tone, and bear in mind that this post is your one warning.

I have nothing but contempt and demolition for stupid cunts and their stupid cuntishness, and your request just added to it.

Kindly think before you post in future.

 

[Bango Skank]

hackenslash...

Could you at least try to be more polite?

Are you fucking having a giraffe? These morons come here to sell their fucking bigoted, immoral fucking death-cult arse-water, arse-water that, I might add, has held and still holds billions in thrall, and has kept humanity in intellectual and social bondage for millennia and resulted in millions of deaths, and you're fucking worried about fucking politeness? Fuck you, and everybody you ever met or heard of, and all the fucking horses they rode in on.

No, I'm a cunt, and I make no apology for it. I'm being perfectly polite to the poster, even giving hints and tips on forum use, but I have no intention of ever being polite to toxic cuntery. If that offends you in some way or pisses you off, feel free to wait around for the next person who gives a flying fuck what you think of my delivery to chance along and proceed to tell them all about it, because your opinion and its resultant request mean exactly fuck all to me. I'm here to fuck over all stupidity, not to make friends, and I don't fucking care what anybody thinks of my delivery.

Go on, make another fucking comment about my tone, and bear in mind that this post is your one warning.

I have nothing but contempt and demolition for stupid cunts and their stupid cuntishness, and your request just added to it.

Kindly think before you post in future.

Yeah, you are a big man, aren't you? "A warning"...uhh now i'm scared. If i were a creationist (or not) i would not bother to read your post(s) at all. Even if you are right, you are doing no service with that attitude.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Yeah, you are a big man, aren't you?

No, you fucking moron, not big, just not fucking interested in your fucking opinion. Now fuck off, you stupid cunt.

you are doing no service with that attitude.

Who or what do you think I should be serving, you fucking cretin? Are you struggling with the bit about findingt somebody who gives a fuck? You're clearly far too fucking stupid for your opinion to have any relevance to me, you fucking cretin, or you'd have noticed the bit where I don't fucking care, you stupid fucking cunt.

Now fuck off an bother somebody for whom your opinion isn't completely fucking worthless.

 

[Bango Skank]

Yeah, you are a big man, aren't you?

No, you fucking moron, not big, just not fucking interested in your fucking opinion. Now fuck off, you stupid cunt.

you are doing no service with that attitude.

Who or what do you think I should be serving, you fucking cretin? Are you struggling with the bit about findingt somebody who gives a fuck? You're clearly far too fucking stupid for your opinion to have any relevance to me, you fucking cretin, or you'd have noticed the bit where I don't fucking care, you stupid fucking cunt.

Now fuck off an bother somebody for whom your opinion isn't completely fucking worthless.

You should have been banned for a long time ago. Thats all i'm going to say to you. I am ignoring you from now on.

 

[Deleted member 619]

On what basis should I have been fucking banned you moron? Easy for somebody who's been here for about 5 minutes to say to somebody who's been a member since the board began, and you still seem to be missing the bit where I don't give a fuck what you think.

I am ignoring you from now on.

Excellent. I look forward to never hearing your fucking stupid opinion ever again.

 

[tuxbox]

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

NOTE, I DO NOT ENDORSE THISE SITE IN ANY WAY, BUT AGREE WITH THIS ARTICLE.

Okay, so you believe that formation is Noah’s Ark, Noah’s Ark was built before the Great Pyramid of Egypt, and the empirical inch is the same as the pre-Noachian inch. Well, you believe the bible is something special, thus, I was not expecting much.

Read this, then tell me it is not a man-made structure, and it will reveal your true character. ......

It is not a human made structure, but a natural one for reasons I have already pointed out (and you partially quoted in your reply).

Your whole article boils down to these two images:

Samuel R. Windsor[/url]"]

Your article even went out of its way to say this:

These dimensions were "faired" by the computer, not recorded from direct measurement.

Windsor based his drawings (and thus his conclusions) on nothing more than a dream. He knew the answer he wanted to get and plugged in an image to get an answer he wanted.

Above is an image of the actual “Durupınar site” and when I look at it, it does not match what Windsor drew at all. Now, I ask everyone else to look at the image of the actual formation and compare it to the drawings and draw your own conclusions. Again, I do not think it looks like the drawings and I asked my wife as well, and she thought the drawings were not based on the formation in the image. Thus, basically, I conclude your whole article is nothing more than garbage in, garbage out. QED.

Now, that I answered your direct question, would you mine answering the direct questions I posted to you? One of the major ones is where is the archaeology of this “site”? I asked where the timber for this structure is, yet nowhere in Windsor’s article does he refer to any real artifacts found there. His whole thing is based on if we follow his made up outline of the Ark, we can use sacred geometry to fill everything else in. If you need me to, I will quote my questions back at you in my next response.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

You are accusing me of making an argument from authority (using proper terminology in this discussion would go a long way in helping me take you seriously) while also relying on the Galileo Gambit. Please, if you have a problem with logical fallacies, do not rely on them yourself. However, we are arguing on an Ethernet forum, thus citing sources (which are written by authorities) appears to be the only way one is able to provide evidence. Please do inform us on a better way of providing evidence through the Ethernet. If you wish, you could always take me there and have me actually explain this to you in person (however, that would have to be on your dime).

This is not ethernet. Quite possibly most people connecting to the forums aren't even using ethernet hardware.

Ethernet has a meaning and it's not synonymous with the Internet nor World Wide Web.

[/rant]

[sarcasm]Whatever nerds! Ethernet or internet, it is all the same thing to me. Tell you what, win a few "Know Your Bones" challenges and I might take you nerds seriously.[/sarcasm]

:geek:

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

And as predicted. It has just been ignored.

The problems of your advice are several. First, I am not congratulating myself on arguments over everyone's head. In fact, my entrance says GOD (not me) is revealing in our day for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear (not everyone has or will).

It's not God, it's all you, thinking that you speak for God.

Second, we do have the original languages,

But do you have the original text?

the dead sea scrolls are even available,

First of all the dead sea scrolls is only a portion of all the books in the bible.
Secondly not every one of those parchments are in its original language.
Thirdly most of those parchments have bit of text missing, some are in complete fragments.
Fourthly, there are other texts in the same language that contradicts it. If your criteria is "same language" = "perfect copy" = "inerrant" than you have no idea what you are talking about.
A fifthly everything is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is this. Do you think that the dead sea scrolls is inerrant?
Oh sorry, you already answer that.

and even if they were imperfect,

Then you have no point. It's an exercise in futility.

there is definitely enough there to arrive at the truth if one is diligent.

How would you go around deciding which bits are "the truth" and which ones are "imperfections" in the text?
Are you inerrant?

As I have stated, there is nothing there to be had. It is a futile exercise. You will never get anywhere. And the sooner realize that the better for you.

But you are making a claim people have not so prevalently (maybe in minor circles, but nothing like today) made in millennia. And that is that God does not exist, and/or the Bible is myth.

Wrong. I have made no such claim. Go back and read the post again. Can you highlight where I claimed that?
You can't because it isn't there. I don't need to make such a claim to debunk your ideas.

And incidentally, yeah God does not exist and the bible is a collection of mythology.

So, where is your proof of that grandiose claim?

How about the fact that the very definition of God requires her to be able to violate the laws of physics?
There was no garden of Eden, the world wide flood did not exist, Moses did not exist, nor did Egyptians hold slaves to make their cities, nor did those slaves fled in mass to make a new city state in Jerusalem.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

These morons come here to sell their fucking bigoted, immoral fucking death-cult arse-water, arse-water that, I might add, has held and still holds billions in thrall, and has kept humanity in intellectual and social bondage for millennia and resulted in millions of deaths.

No he came here due to an invitation by Aron-Ra, so that a debate could be set up.
Are their points completely arse? Yeah, nobody is putting that into question. But there is no point in being an arse about it right out of the gate, its a common courtesy to give them the benefit of the doubt before you go all guns blazing. Let them give enough rope so that they can hang themselves.

 

[Deleted member 619]

He already did, and I am an arse.

 

[Dragan Glas]

shauk100 said:
========================
Hassert is a FULL PRETERIST, thus he has made up his mind and won't listen to logic that it is impossible for the remaining events (prophecy) of Rev 20:8ff (and forward) to the end of the book, CANNOT be fulfilled yet. Rev 20:4 BEGAN ca. 70AD (which also began the thousand years) with the destruction of Jerusalem (the great whore) and we are now living in the period after the thousand (Greek plural word -- not a literal thousand but signified by the binding and release of adversary) years and adversary (satan) is now loosed on the world scene wreaking havoc with the gog and magog nations of the middle east coming over here, being deceived and waging war by this adversary (satan).
========================

This is arrant nonsense - there are no prophecies that have not been written into the bible after the fact to make it look like they're prophecies. Revelations is strictly about the past - specifically the events of the first century AD.

You now appear to claim that Gog and Magog are Middle-Eastern countries involved in terrorism plots against the USA?!

Attempting to dismiss Hassertt's review of your book on the basis that he's a "full preterist" does not fly: the points he makes about your misinterpretation of the bible, and particularly your "disturbing" remarks about various people, can not be justified

Nonsense, your assertion of everything past is unsubstantiated by scripture itself......

The continuous narrative of Rev 19 and 20 is explained by the lake of fire.

Rev 19:20 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.

The millennial period could not start until AFTER the 2nd advent because of the arrangement of Rev 19 and 20. If 70AD is the destruction of the harlot of Rev 16 and 19, then Satan could not have been destroyed before that in 30AD at Golgotha.

So it is only AFTER the thousand years of Rev 20:4 expires that Satan is cast into the lake of fire, and that the beast and false prophet ARE ALREADY THERE. This makes it impossible for the thousand years of Rev 20:4 to come BEFORE the destruction of the beast and the false prophet, and makes it impossible for it to come AFTER the destruction of Satan in the lake of fire.

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [were], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

So in that sense, the events of Rev 19 precede the events of Rev 20, making it a continuous narrative.

That takes the continuity of events and completely 180s them. Satan is chained after the destruction of the beast and false prophet. There is no way around it.

Satan is cast into the lake of fire, where the beast and false prophet already are, AFTER the thousand years had transpired. The book of revelation was given no sooner than 68AD. If those things were to shortly come to pass (as preterists understand shortly), then there is NO WAY that the beast and false prophet could have been destroyed before the Revelation was given. The events of Revelation must transpire after 68AD.

LAKE OF FIRE (SECOND DEATH) VERSES:
Rev_19:20, Rev_20:10, Rev_20:14, 15, Rev_21:8

Also, I don't know if you noticed, "peoples" (plural) from different nations cause the problems we have in the world all the time! So, your accusation of "and particularly your "disturbing" remarks about various people, can not be justified" has no justification unless you want to blame the world's problems on a fallen angel or something. Is that what you're saying?

Proper Preterism has put the nail in the coffin of Full (and partial) Preterism!

What you've written is nonsense.

I've included your earlier answer where you refer to Jerusalem as "the great whore" - however, this is only one interpretation.

The Great Whore has several interpretations - depending on one's "bias".

Here's a Catholic interpretation.

As for your claims about prophecies in Revelations about the destruction of Jerusalem before the event, scholars agree that:

Early Church tradition dates the book to [the] end of the emperor Domitian (reigned AD 81-96), and most modern scholars agree, although the author may have written a first version under Vespasian (AD 69-79) and updated it under Domitian.[10]

In other words, the "prophecies" were added in after-the-fact of the destruction of Jerusalem in the updated version, written near or during AD 96.

The rest about a thousand years of imprisonment/release/etc, is nonsense - like so many who attempt to equate the events in Revelations with the modern world/times, you are misled/misguided.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Visaki]

Welcome shauk100. I'd like to point out two things;

Firstly you have no oblication to answer all of us. I know it can get a lot overwhelming when you are confronted by half a dozen people all debunking your claims.

Secondly your conversation with Aron can (and probably should) be taken in the debate section where we can limit the people who can post on that thread to you and Aron. The rest us will be commenting in the peanut gallery.

 

[tuxbox]

Welcome shauk100. I'd like to point out two things;

Firstly you have no oblication to answer all of us. I know it can get a lot overwhelming when you are confronted by half a dozen people all debunking your claims.

Secondly your conversation with Aron can (and probably should) be taken in the debate section where we can limit the people who can post on that thread to you and Aron. The rest us will be commenting in the peanut gallery.

Indeed, but it can be a pleasant experience if the person making claims is intellectually honest . I myself had a great experience with Hackenslash and others when I was in the hot seat.

 

[shauk100]

I've included your earlier answer where you refer to Jerusalem as "the great whore" - however, this is only one interpretation.

As for your claims about prophecies in Revelations about the destruction of Jerusalem before the event, scholars agree that:

There may be many interpretations, but only the right one counts! Jerusalem, according to scripture is the great whore, there is no debate about it unless you are blind!! .....

http://thechristianmythbusterseries.com/the-destruction-of-the-harlot/

Early Church tradition dates the book to [the] end of the emperor Domitian (reigned AD 81-96), and most modern scholars agree, although the author may have written a first version under Vespasian (AD 69-79) and updated it under Domitian.[10]

In other words, the "prophecies" were added in after-the-fact of the destruction of Jerusalem in the updated version, written near or during AD 96.[/quote]

The rest about a thousand years of imprisonment/release/etc, is nonsense - like so many who attempt to equate the events in Revelations with the modern world/times, you are misled/misguided.

Nonsense you say? HHhmmmm...... Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are finished, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 and shall come forth to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to the war: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

EXACTLY WHEN REVELATION WAS WRITTEN, ACCORDING TO REVELATION .......

I knew futurists who were continuing to claim historians and disciples like Polycarp who state the Revelation was not written by AD70, but closer to AD95 when Domitian reigned, still were many. I found, however, there's a real problem with that....

The irony and interesting thing about the Revelation is that it tells you almost to the day when it was completed! First thing to consider is the overall theme and context of the book which is the seven seals, seven trumps and seven vials. Now the seven seals, trumps and vials are all addressing the same time periods, viz. the sixth seal covers the same period as the sixth trump and vial. It is the same thing repeated three times from three different perspectives.

Rev 1:1... “show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;” and again at the end of the book Rev 22:6… “show unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.” This is further defined as: Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen (past), and the things which are (present), and the things which shall be hereafter (future);

The six seals, trumps and vial all lead up to the destruction of Jerusalem covering the period of time of the first half of the war AD66 - AD70. The seventh seal, trump and vial covers the period of time from AD70 to the end of the war, starting with AD66 and a brief outline of events after the consummation at the end of the war ca. AD73.

There are several key date metrics for the book. One of the first, is the destruction of Jerusalem itself. In Chapter 11, the temple has not yet been destroyed because everything in the whole book of Revelation is focused on the events leading up to the seven years’ war with the five seals, trumps, and vials. The Focus of the book is on the 6th seal, trump and vial when Jerusalem is destroyed and the old heaven and earth pass away ( 6th, 6th, 6th, after 666 years) and the heralding in of the new heavens and new earth with the 7th seal, trump (last trump) and vial (7th, 7th, 7th). The seven year war is the focal period of time, with the fulcrum point between the old and the new surrounding the 6thand 7th. The end of the 6th seal, trump and vial, is also the beginning of the 7th seal, trump and vial and is the middle of the war or AD70. The temple is measured in Ch. 11 because it is to be destroyed, for John is writing during the period of the 6th seal, trump and vial, but it is not destroyed until the end of the 6th and the beginning of the 7th.

The other key metric in the book is the fact that everything is leading or focusing on this destruction in the middle of the week AD70 and the kings listed in Rev 17: 6. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus:…10And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. 11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. This period of these kings ends, it does not Begin, but ENDS with the same last king of the ten kings mentioned in Dan 11:44 and the same last king of 11 kings mentioned in Dan 7:20. This last king under whose purview Jerusalem was destroyed by his son (Titus) the prince was Vespasian. He was the king that in Dan 7:20 diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings (Galba, Otho, Vitellius). He is the beast that was Nero and is not and yet is, because he finishes a process that Nero started. All of the kings prior to Vespasian were of the Julian/Claudian Dynasty. However, Vespasian was diverse because he begins the Flavian Dynasty. Rev 17 has 8 kings because it begins the count with the kings under who were "the Martyrs of Jesus" which began under Tiberius. The three kings he subdued is also what gives us the date for the book of Revelation because each of these kings reigns in succession for a short period of time, and we know the dates for each!

The Destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 is the pivotal point of the book. It is with the destruction of the city at the end of the 6th seal, 6th Trump, 6th Vial after 666 years (see Man of Sin and 666 Identified for a more detailed proof of the 666 years) that the old heavens and earth pass away and the new begin. The 6th ends with the destruction of Jerusalem and the 7th begins with that event. There are 3.5 years or 1260 days in the first half of the war and 3.5 years or 42 months for the last half of the war. The book is pointing to, highlighting that fulcrum point, and then looking onward to the consummation at the end of the war (ca. 73AD) and eventually the end of humanity on earth.

Beginning with Tiberius, there are seven kings (because the eighth is diverse from the others) 1. Tiberius, 2. Caligula, 3. Claudius, 4. Nero, 5. Galba, 6. Otho, 7. Vitellius… but Five have fallen, "one IS” (Rev 17:10)… This king is the 6th or Otho. We know exactly when he reigned; he reigned for only about 3 months. The book of Revelation was completed on March 1st AD69 + 45 Days—we can know this for sure because the context is 'the martyrs of Jesus (Rev 17:6) that began under Tiberius' (5 have fallen, ONE IS) during the reign of Otho! This is almost exactly 18 months prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. The beast that was (Nero) and is not, and yet is himself the 8th or Vespasian who subdued and undermined through intrigue all three of his predecessors (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius).

Now, some have scoffed that much of what the apostles and disciples of Christ were to be forewarned, would have been already over in AD69, but that's not true. (1) The war and consumation of the reward they were told they would receive if they were faithful to the end, even unto death, would not both be over until ca. AD73 [about 4 years still in their future]. (2) Parts of the scrolls are said to have already been circulating prior to the time it was completed. Jesus, in the gospels even gave warnings, "When you see these things flee to..." (3) The reason the kings all begin with a different one (Tiberius instead of Julius) is that the focus is on the END not the beginning, for the very reason that no one would be able to know the certainty of who the king was until AFTER the events happened. Otherwise, if they knew what king to start counting forward from then they could all know before the event took place... but no one knew, not even the angels in heaven until AFTER most of the events happened. Also, the Revelation was coded so that the enemies of the gospel could not decipher it, i.e. the mystery. There are 8 kings mentioned and that 8th last king is/must be the king during AD70 and identical to the 10 kings of Daniel two, seven and eleven. They all end with the same king Vespasian. Thus, there is no point or reason for a earlier date then AD69.

To summarize, with this new knowledge, Domitian is either the tenth, eleventh or twelfth ruler of Rome—depending on how you count. There is certainly no legitimate way to make him the sixth ruler as Rev. 17:10 necessitates.