"I don't want to be too sweeping in my statement about this, but, I have yet to see a Preterist interpret this in a non-laugh-inspiring manner. Their system is based on Nero being that man of sin, but Nero did not do anything like what the prophecy requires.
He probably never even journeyed close to Jerusalem. Much less did he take up residence in the temple.I don't believe there's a pre-70 AD referent that can be used to hang this prophecy on Nero, or any of the Roman emperors, for that matter. The closest I've seen anyone come is to point out that Caligula at one point desired to have a bust of himself placed in the Holy of Holies. He thought better of it once he realized he'd surely have a full-scale uprising on his hands if he did. But really, we're supposed to believe that an aborted plan is close enough? Are we playing Horseshoes here?
Additionally, Paul specifies that the man of sin would meet his end by being destroyed by the "brightness" of Christ's coming. (2 Thessalonians 2:8.) What do you think? Will the Preterist try to say that Nero's violent death represents another cloud/judgment coming of Christ? Certainly. So, I guess we've got another cloud-coming every time anyone on the planet dies.
And never mind that nagging detail about the brightness of it, which would seem to refer to something like visible glory.
Bottom line, Nero never claimed to be the God of the Jews. He preferred to be considered as Apollo, if memory serves. Nero never took a seat in the temple of God, claiming to be the God of that temple. He simply cannot be this man of sin, the son of perdition."
http://gordansplace.blogspot.com/2008/07/preterist-problems-11.html
