We Cannot Unjustly ‘Frame’ a Ruler for Crimes in Order
to Prove an Idea to Be True Against All Contrary Facts
by Mark Mountjoy
Preamble
Imagine a politician who has committed terrible deeds, yet in a moment of expediency or perhaps even genuine largesse, has also done something remarkably positive. Maybe they acted out of self-interest, or perhaps they were motivated by a desire to save themselves from perceived threats or to prevent their affairs from spiraling out of control. Now, picture this same ruler being blamed for heinous crimes that a reliable and astute historian has clearly attributed to others. However, because this politician had already been associated with high-profile, unrelated misdeeds, they become the scapegoat – the one who takes the blame and retains the infamy as the perpetrator for all time.
In our quest for truth and understanding, we must ask ourselves: Does the Bible encourage us to make the innocent guilty and the guilty innocent? Is it right to assign blame based on preconceived notions or a desire to fit historical events into a particular narrative? As we delve into the complex history surrounding the Jewish revolt against Rome, it becomes increasingly clear that a simplistic attribution of blame to one individual, such as Emperor Nero, may not paint a complete or accurate picture. By carefully examining the causes, circumstances, and mechanisms behind the revolt, we can begin to unravel the true modus operandi and gain a more objective understanding of what transpired.
This essay invites you to set aside preconceived notions and approach the events described in the Book of Revelation with a fresh perspective. While Nero may have been a flawed and controversial figure, we must be cautious not to let his reputation overshadow the roles played by other significant actors in this historical drama. By subjecting the real "persons of interest" to greater scrutiny and analysis, we can develop a more nuanced and accurate interpretation of the Book of Revelation – one that is grounded in historical facts rather than driven by a desire to fit events into a predetermined framework, such as Preterism.
As we embark on this journey of discovery, let us be guided by a commitment to truth, objectivity, and a willingness to question long-held assumptions. Only then can we hope to unravel the complex tapestry of history and theology that surrounds this enigmatic biblical text.
There was once a Roman emperor named Nero who ruled from 54 to 68 AD. He was known for his cruelty, extravagance, and persecution of Christians. Many people believe that Nero was the evil ruler mentioned in the Bible’s Book of Revelation, and they use this idea to support a belief called Preterism. Preterism is the view that most or all of the prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled in the past, especially during the time of the early Roman Empire.
However, when we look at the actual historical evidence about Nero, we find that he could not have been the person described in Revelation. Here are some important facts:
1. Nero wasn't even in Judea when the Jewish revolt against Rome started in 66 AD. He was surprised by the news and had to send his generals to deal with the problem.
2. There is no proof that Nero ever demanded worship from Jews or Christians, nor did he ever force them to use an identifying mark, image or name as an inscription or number on their right hands or foreheads, nor did he ever intrude upon or damage the Second Temple in any way or at any time. The notion that he did any of these things came much later and has no basis in any facts on the ground.
3. The terrible things that happened to Jerusalem and the Second Temple during the Jewish-Roman War were caused by the Jews and Idumeans fighting among themselves, not by the Romans.
4. Nero died in 68 AD, before the final destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. So, he couldn't have been the leader who caused all the trouble in the Book of Revelation.
Some people use the story of Nero to say that the Book of Revelation has already happened and that Jesus has already come back. However, a fictional narrative with Nero at the center does not represent the truth. The real facts about Nero show that he was not the person described in Revelation, and his life and conduct do not prove that the prophecies have already been fulfilled.
If Preterism, or the idea that the prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled, is true at all, it will need to be supported by different arguments. These arguments must be based on accurate historical information and not on false or misleading facts. Using incorrect information about historical figures like Nero to support Preterism can weaken the argument and lead people to doubt the truth of the Bible's prophecies.
In conclusion, it’s important to study history carefully and not just believe everything we hear. The truth about Emperor Nero shows us that he could not have been the Antichrist or the beast from the sea in the Bible. We should be careful about using Nero as proof for Preterism, because the facts don’t support it. If we want to show that the prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled, we need to use arguments that are based on true information and not on falsified facts.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Q & A
Is there any historicity behind the idea of Nero and magic?
Yes, there are some historical accounts and ancient sources that associate Nero with magic and occult practices. However, it’s important to note that these accounts are often mixed with legends, rumors, and propaganda, so their reliability is sometimes questioned. Here are a few examples:
1. Pliny the Elder, in his Natural History (30.5.14-17), mentions that Nero was initiated into magic and that he even attempted to command the gods during a ceremony.
2. Suetonius, in his work The Twelve Caesars (Nero 34-35), describes Nero’s interest in magic and his association with magicians and astrologers. He also mentions that Nero performed magical rituals to summon the spirit of his deceased mother, Agrippina.
3. Cassius Dio, in his Roman History (63.27.2), reports that Nero used magic to try to find treasure that was supposedly hidden under the theater of Carthage.
4. The apocryphal Acts of Peter, a Christian text from the late 2nd century, portrays a legendary confrontation between the apostle Peter and Simon Magus, a magician who is said to have been supported by Nero.
5. Some modern scholars have also suggested that Nero’s association with magic and the occult may have contributed to the negative portrayal of him in Christian literature, such as the depiction of him as the Antichrist or the “Beast” in the Book of Revelation.
It's important to approach these accounts with caution, as they often reflect the biases and propaganda of the time, as well as the tendency to attribute supernatural powers to historical figures. While there may be some historical basis for Nero's interest in magic and the occult, the extent and nature of his involvement are difficult to determine with certainty based on the available evidence.
Q & A
Are there any stories (or tales) of any collaboration between Emperor Nero and Gessius Florus to perform miracles and force Jews or Christians to take a mark or worship in an Imperial religious way out of constraint, obligation, or on pain of death?
After thoroughly searching through historical records and accounts, I have not found any credible stories or tales suggesting a collaboration between Emperor Nero and Gessius Florus to perform miracles or force Jews or Christians to take a mark or worship in an Imperial religious way under constraint, obligation, or threat of death.
Gessius Florus was the Roman procurator of Judea from 64-66 CE, known for his corrupt administration and his role in the events leading up to the First Jewish-Roman War (66-73 CE). While his actions, such as stealing from the Temple treasury and allowing violence against the Jewish population, contributed to the growing tensions between the Jews and the Roman authorities, there is no reliable historical evidence connecting him to any supernatural acts or religious persecution in collaboration with Nero.
The idea of forcing Jews or Christians to take a mark or worship the Roman Emperor is not substantiated by historical sources from that period. The Roman Empire did have a tradition of emperor worship, but it was not typically enforced through coercion or physical marks, especially not for Jews, who were generally exempted from such practices due to their recognized status as a distinct religious group.
The concept of a “mark of the beast” is derived from the Book of Revelation, which is a highly symbolic and allegorical text. Most scholars interpret this mark as a metaphorical representation of allegiance to worldly powers or a symbol of persecution, rather than a literal, physical mark imposed by Nero or any other Roman ruler.
In conclusion, while Nero and Gessius Florus were both known for their controversial actions and their roles in the events surrounding the First Jewish-Roman War, there is no credible historical evidence to support tales of their collaboration in performing miracles or forcing Jews or Christians to take a mark or worship the Emperor under duress.
Related
[Click the image]
Identified and Discussed (Part One)
Identified and Discussed (Part Two)