Mike, I'm so glad that you took the time to write all of this! Now I don't feel like I'm the only one that has to clarify every point; I see that you do it too! This is great, because it is always good to know WHY you believe the way you do.
So, let me start by saying that I'm not trying to change anyone's mind; I'm trying to explain the Scriptures that are in front of us by backing them up with other Scripture. The entire theme of the Bible is not about God vs. Satan or good vs. evil. It is about man's relationship to God and how it ought to be. This has remained the case from Moses first five books to David's works to the prophets to the gospels to the epistles. The Bible exhorts, edifies and reproves. It uses history, prophecy, poetry, proverb, parable and epistle to expound on God, His character and man's attitude toward Him. Please keep this in mind as you read.
You asked me "since Revelation was written to instruct a specific generation in a specific time in future history, what does your understanding suggest that generation do?
For starters, there's no evidence that Revelations was written for a specific generation in a specific time in "fuure history." Chapter 1-3 are written to the 7 churches - Laodecia, Smryna, etc. These were alive and well at the time. Why would John then go on for 19 more chapters of a bunch of stuff that had no application to them? Senseless. Now, of a surety there are still SOME parts of Revelations that have not yet happened - even today. But there are also many parts of Revelations that have already happened and/or are still current (namely, the beast.) Fact is, there is much of Revelations that was pertinent to the churches at that time and would continue to be pertinent until the "day of the Lord."
What do I suggest that generation do? I suggest that they understand that the "son of perdition" will continue to wax stronger and "wear down the saints" but to "overcome" as was the constant warning to ALL 7 churches because Jesus would finally return with power and glory.
"I'm not sure I understand why, in your opinion, John would have called that endtimes system "Nero Caesar" specifically". Actually, I didn't say that. I didn't call it Nero, nor a system. First, let's clarify that "endtimes" to me means as soon as Christ ascended. Second, I deny that Nero is the beast. I do not deny that in some way he is part of the beast. Having said that, I mean only that he was an antiChrist (for definition of antiChrist read 1 Jn. 2:22) AND he was a Roman dictator and the Roman Empire is one of the heads of the beast. Third, I deny that the beast is a system. Let's look at the verses that explain the beast... I've already posted those in the last post... There is no way a SYSTEM can live throughout millenia, throughout kingdoms and throughout cultures. As I've stated before, the beast is a multi-faceted being. Heads are kings. Horns are kings. The body is a conglomerate of ancient empires. Are those kingdoms connected? No. EXCEPT IN ONE WAY - the spirit of antiChrist. All deny God and Jesus. All will/have persecuted Christianity.
"About Daniel's vision compared with John's description of the beast, I think everyone reading these texts knows these are symbolic representations of real events and people as revealed by God (because He wants His people to recognize what will be happening at the time). Many of the symbols have been examined by biblical scholars and kooks over the centuries, each having their interpretations. This is the danger of overspiritualizing Scripture that has very practical purpose. It opens the door to individual interpretation. That is contrary to the nature of TRUTH. Truth is not "open to individual interpretation"."
First, I totally agree that individual interpretation is not truth. My insights are Biblically-based; nothing more. I disagree with many mainstream lines of thought on the subject of Revelations because the mainstream does not adequately identify Scripture in their thought-processes. In other words, if the beast is an individual, show me how all of the above-posted Scripture identify the beast as a man. It's impossible to do so. Therefore, the idea must be rejected. If Scripture seemingly contradicts Scripture, it is not Scripture that is at fault; it is man's interpretation. So, I make the case: how is the beast a man? How is the beast a system? Not conjecture; Scripture!
"This world will come to an end. But before it does, humanity will develop a global governmental/economic system that is godless." The world will come to and end - that is written in Scripture. Don't know about that last part. The only thing that MAY allude to that is the ten horns being of one mind (17:13). Other than this, there's no evidence of a "one-world government" before Christ's 1000 year reign. Again, where's the Scripture to support this?
"This world system will seem to bring utopia, to recapture Eden (paradise on earth). But this earth, while it is good in many ways, is not intended to be paradise, and its God who forbade re-entrance into Eden." Where is this in Scripture? Jesus said in Mt. 21:26 "Men's hearts failing them for fear and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth for the powers of earth shall be shaken. 27) AND THEN THEY SHALL SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING IN A CLOUD WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY." Hardly sounds liek a utopia before his coming. 1 Thessolonians 5:3 says "For when they shall say, Peace and safety (sound familiar?) then sudden destruction cometh upon them as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape." Doesn't sound like paradise to me.
"We know for certain that this system will "be given power to make war with the saints" for 3 1/2 years. " i could take way too long on the 3 and half year thing, but the fact is, the 42 months cannot be literal; why? For starters, everything else surrounding "42 months" is symbolic. For seconds, the beast has just been described as a multi-faceted, millenia-living creature; how can it reign only 42 months suddenly? And don't we see in Rev. 17:12 that the ten horns have only "one hour" as kings with the beast - and yet the ten horns are part of the beast? Makes no sense to me if we're still talking literally. But then, why is it that we keep shifting from symbolic to literal and back again? I have much more to say on this subject, but will desist.
"God allowed the Roman empire to persecute the church, killing multitudes of followers of the Way, and causing the faithful to scatter. That was the method of reaching out to the lost world of that time: God kicked the church out of their comfort zone (I'm convinced that's the most destructive place Christians can be), and they took their faith with them. Many reading this forum post would not be Christians, if not for that time of Roman persecution causing the church to scatter." - I 100% concur.
I agree with your conservative stance on Christianity and the need to get "out of our comfort zones." I think that you are very mindful of your duty to God. As I've stated before, I don't seek to change minds - I seek to challenge perspective of prophecy (not doctrine, of which I have no argument) if it's not Scripturally sound. I invite you to show me in Scripture what you believe prophetically.
Thanks again for your response and God bless you!