Complete bunk.
Ask any historically-aware Jew if he'd rather have been gassed, or crucified.
Tell us what he says.
When was the A.O.D fulfilled?
- Thread starter Stewardofthemystery
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Ask any historically-aware Jew if he'd rather have been gassed, or crucified.
Tell us what he says.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
Dan 12: 1 is global
Matt 24: 21 is global
The only difference is Matt 24: 15 gives us a sign of when the global event of Matt 24: 21 will take place. when an abomination of desolation is placed in the holy place..
I agree
well here is where you get off and make to me a huge mistake. You can not do this with prophesy. Prophesy is God saying what will happen.. So when the people see it literally happen.. They they can Know it came from God. and be watchful for whatever warning God is giving..
What are they going to argue now? That WW1 nor WW2 fit the description of a time of trouble?
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
Nope
All things have to happen. There was no nation of isreal or temple during ww1or ww2 so they could Not be the time
That’s why we have to Literally interpret everything
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
The singular abomination of desolation did not lead to the destruction of the temple or of the city.
The plural abominations did.
You have 2 Thessalonians 2:4 linked to Matthew 24:15 and to the church like I do - so tell me why Daniel 9:26 says "the church" is going to be destroyed, if it's referring to the same thing.
You can't have it both ways. Either the abomination of desolation is associated with the destruction of the temple, or it is not.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
Its not
if the temple is destroyed, their is no abomination of desolation, because there is no holy place to put an idol in
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
The holy place is the church. The church is not going to be destroyed. But it is going to be defiled.
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
The gospels use the word naos in reference to the sanctuary of God in the hieron - the physical temple structure in Jerusalem - until the verses telling about the tearing of the veil - but not after that.
ἱερόν hierón (hee-er-on'):
[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
neuter of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts, whereas 3485 [naós] denotes the central sanctuary itself (of the Temple in Jerusalem, or elsewhere).[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
The New Testament only uses the word naos in reference to the bodies of saints as the temple (naos) of God, the church as the temple (naos) of God, and the heavenly temple in the Revelation after the verses telling of the tearing of the veil.
The naos is the holy place where the man of sin / son of perdition will appear, calling himself God and rising from out of the lawlessness (the lawlessness that Jesus told us will accompany the time of the end).
Paul called that tabernacle the naos - which in the New Testament always refers to the sanctuary of God, and is the word Paul always only used in reference to the bodies of saints and the church as the tabernacle of God (rather than the word hieron which he used in reference to the physical temple in Jerusalem).
After the verses talking about the tearing of the veil in the sanctuary (naos) of God which was contained in the hieron (the physical temple structure) the first time the word is used again in reference to the sanctuary of God is in Acts, where the apostle states that God does not dwell in a sanctuary (naos) made with (human) hands.
There will be no removal of the daily sacrifice again because that was done in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and there is no daily sacrifice in the sanctuary of God today - but there will appear an idol in the naos - New Testament temple - the man of sin himself.
The abomination of desolation placed in the holy place (which the Greek would refer to as the naos) of the 2nd temple did not result in the destruction of either the temple or the city - after Antiochus IV was ousted the temple was cleansed and rededicated to God.
The New Testament Temple cannot be destroyed bu it can be defiled- and it will be.
"And what agreement does a temple [naós] of God have with idols? For you are the temple [naós] of the living God, as God has said, "I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." 2 Corinthians 6:16.
"Do you not know that you are a temple [naós] of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple [naós] of God, God shall destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are." -- 1 Corinthians 3:16-17.
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
Holy Places
THE HOLY PLACE OF THE OLD COVENANT / TESTAMENT (Holy Place and Most Holy Place of the Old Covenant / Testament) THE HOLY PLACE OF THE NEW CO...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Abomination of Desolation
================================= "'Abomination of Desolation' is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with whic...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Last edited:
My point was this. Per your example of WW1 and WW2, even that surpasses in greatness the events pertaining to 70 AD. Therefore, 70 AD can't be meant per Matthew 24:21 because even WW1 and WW2 surpasses 70 AD in greatness and in scale. Yet, WW1 and WW2 are not even meaning what Matthew 24:21 and Daniel 12:1 are meaning. But even so, are they going to argue that WW1 and WW2 doesn't fit the description of a time of trouble, therefore, it's not a valid comparison to 70 AD?
It might look like this, assuming one's position is that Matthew 24:21 is meaning 70 AD, therefore, involving a local event.
Matthew 24:21----For then shall be a time of trouble leading up to and ending in 70 AD, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, nor will anything of this magnitude ever be equalled nor surpassed in the future.
Hmm...so, leading up to 70 AD and ending in 70 AD was a time of trouble like this planet has never experienced before? It was so great in scale that nothing in the future can come close to comparing to it, let alone equalling it or surpassing it? Hmmm...I wonder if any of these interpreters ever took world history classes in school? I wonder if they ever heard of WW1 and WW2, for example? Were those wars a time of trouble? Were they greater or lesser in scale than what happened in 70 AD?
Except even these 2 wars are still not meaning what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24:21. Yet these 2 wars alone already surpass 70 AD in scale and in greatness. How can that be possible? Did Jesus lie to us in Matthew 24:21 where He indicated that this time of trouble can never be equalled nor surpassed ever?
Even though the KJV is the translation I mainly use, the following makes it even clearer as to what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24:21.
The Complete Jewish Bible
21 For there will be trouble then worse than there has ever been from the beginning of the world until now, and there will be nothing like it again!
Matthew 24:21 - Compare Bible Verse Translations
Compare Bible translations of Matthew 24:21 using all available Bible versions and commentary. "For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again"
Except WW1 and WW2, for example, are already involving a time of trouble greater than in 70 AD, and that neither WW1 nor WW2 are meaning what Jesus is meaning in Matthew 24:21. IOW, as bad as 70 AD was, and as bad as WW1 and WW2 was, which was even greater than 70 AD in scale, the world hasn't seen anything yet. Wait until Matthew 24:21 starts getting fulfilled. Then this entire planet has something major to worry about, a time of trouble like none in the past, a time of trouble that won't be repeated in the future, nor equaled nor surpassed.
A side note. Obviously, Jesus added this part to Matthew 24:21 for a reason---no, nor ever shall be. And that is to make certain no one misinterprets what He meant when He said this--For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time. Except some interpreters interpret some Scriptures with doctrinal bias rather than simply sticking to what the text is plainly saying.
There is a huge difference between the following two.
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time
Vs...
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Had He said the former, maybe then it might be a valid argument that 70 AD could be meant. Except He didn't say the former, He said the latter.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
in context, no it is not. there are no sacrifices and burnt offering in the church.
This does not take away the fact. that Jesus said their will be an abomination of desolation standing in THE holy place.. and when the people see it, it is a sign they are to run,, because then their will be great tribulation as never before. or after.. so severe, Jesus will have to return or no flesh would surviveThe gospels use the word naos in reference to the sanctuary of God in the hieron - the physical temple structure in Jerusalem - until the verses describing the tearing of the veil.
The New Testament never uses the word naos in reference to the Jerusalem temple again when speaking about the sanctuary of God -
but only uses the word naos in reference to the bodies of saints as the temple (naos) of God, the church as the temple (naos) of God, and the heavenly temple in the Revelation.
The naos is the holy place where the man of sin / son of perdition will appear, calling himself God and rising from out of the lawlessness (the lawlessness that Jesus told us will accompany the time of the end).
Paul called that tabernacle the naos - which in the New Testament always refers to the sanctuary of God, and is the word Paul always only used in reference to the bodies of saints and the church as the tabernacle of God (rather than the word hieron which he used in reference to the physical temple in Jerusalem).
After the verses talking about the tearing of the veil in the sanctuary (naos) of God which was contained in the hieron (the physical temple structure) the first time the word is used again in reference to the sanctuary of God is in Acts,
where the apostle states that God does not dwell in a sanctuary (naos) made with (human) hands.
There will be no removal of the daily sacrifice again because that was done in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes - but there will appear an idol in the New Testament temple - the man of sin himself.
The abomination of desolation placed in the holy place (which the Greek would refer to as the naos) of the 2nd temple did not result in the destruction of either the temple or the city - after Antiochus IV was ousted the temple was cleansed and rededicated to God.
The New Testament Temple cannot be destroyed bu it can be defiled- and it will be.
"And what agreement does a temple [naós] of God have with idols? For you are the temple [naós] of the living God, as God has said, "I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." 2 Corinthians 6:16.
"Do you not know that you are a temple [naós] of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple [naós] of God, God shall destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are." -- 1 Corinthians 3:16-17.
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
Holy Places
THE HOLY PLACE OF THE OLD COVENANT / TESTAMENT (Holy Place and Most Holy Place of the Old Covenant / Testament) THE HOLY PLACE OF THE NEW CO...
Abomination of Desolation
================================= "'Abomination of Desolation' is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with whic...
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
True, it will be worse than WW1 and WW2 when it happens.
Never heard this interpretation.
I believe it is the time of Jacobs trouble. these are the same eventHmm...so, leading up to 70 AD and ending in 70 AD was a time of trouble like this planet has never experienced before? It was so great in scale that nothing in the future can come close to comparing to it, let alone equalling it or surpassing it? Hmmm...I wonder if any of these interpreters ever took world history classes in school? I wonder if they ever heard of WW1 and WW2, for example? Were those wars a time of trouble? Were they greater or lesser in scale than what happened in 70 AD?
Except even these 2 wars are still not meaning what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24:21. Yet these 2 wars alone already surpass 70 AD in scale and in greatness. How can that be possible? Did Jesus lie to us in Matthew 24:21 where He indicated that this time of trouble can never be equalled nor surpassed ever?
Even though the KJV is the translation I mainly use, the following makes it even clearer as to what Jesus was meaning in Matthew 24:21.
The Complete Jewish Bible
21 For there will be trouble then worse than there has ever been from the beginning of the world until now, and there will be nothing like it again!
Matthew 24:21 - Compare Bible Verse Translations
Compare Bible translations of Matthew 24:21 using all available Bible versions and commentary. "For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again"www.biblestudytools.com
Jeremiah 30:7
Alas! For that day is great, So that none is like it; And it is the time of Jacob’s trouble, But he shall be saved out of it.
I agree. it will be a time like the world has never seen, But remember, Jesus said no flesh would survive if he did not come.. No time in history has this even been possible until recent times.
agreed
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
Of course there are no sacrifices for sin in the New Testament sanctuary of God. The abomination of desolation placed in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes is not the same temple - it's a biblical type. And though you desperately try as you did once again in the above statement to pretend that you do not understand the difference between a biblical type and its antitype, your argument nevertheless fails dismally - because here is the context of the Olivet Discourse:
The 'Olivet Discourse'
LUKE'S GOSPEL vs. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL Below is a comparison of Luke's gospel with Matthew's regarding the location of Jesus at the time He s...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
And here are the rest of the biblical facts that you cannot escape, though you desperately try to:
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
The gospels use the word naos in reference to the sanctuary of God in the hieron - the physical temple structure in Jerusalem - until the verses telling about the tearing of the veil - but not after that.
ἱερόν hierón (hee-er-on'):
[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
neuter of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts, whereas 3485 [naós] denotes the central sanctuary itself (of the Temple in Jerusalem, or elsewhere).[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
The New Testament only uses the word naos in reference to the bodies of saints as the temple (naos) of God, the church as the temple (naos) of God, and the heavenly temple in the Revelation after the verses telling of the tearing of the veil.
The naos is the holy place where the man of sin / son of perdition will appear, calling himself God and rising from out of the lawlessness (the lawlessness that Jesus told us will accompany the time of the end).
Paul called that tabernacle the naos - which in the New Testament always refers to the sanctuary of God, and is the word Paul always only used in reference to the bodies of saints and the church as the tabernacle of God (rather than the word hieron which he used in reference to the physical temple in Jerusalem).
After the verses talking about the tearing of the veil in the sanctuary (naos) of God which was contained in the hieron (the physical temple structure) the first time the word is used again in reference to the sanctuary of God is in Acts, where the apostle states that God does not dwell in a sanctuary (naos) made with (human) hands.
There will be no removal of the daily sacrifice again because that was done in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and there is no daily sacrifice in the sanctuary of God today - but there will appear an idol in the naos - New Testament temple - the man of sin himself.
The abomination of desolation placed in the holy place (which the Greek would refer to as the naos) of the 2nd temple did not result in the destruction of either the temple or the city - after Antiochus IV was ousted the temple was cleansed and rededicated to God.
The New Testament Temple cannot be destroyed bu it can be defiled- and it will be.
"And what agreement does a temple [naós] of God have with idols? For you are the temple [naós] of the living God, as God has said, "I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." 2 Corinthians 6:16.
"Do you not know that you are a temple [naós] of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple [naós] of God, God shall destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are." -- 1 Corinthians 3:16-17.
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
Holy Places
THE HOLY PLACE OF THE OLD COVENANT / TESTAMENT (Holy Place and Most Holy Place of the Old Covenant / Testament) THE HOLY PLACE OF THE NEW CO...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Abomination of Desolation
================================= "'Abomination of Desolation' is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with whic...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
So Jesus told them to run when they see the man of sin appear in the New Testament Temple after rising out of the lawlessness in it (that Jesus told us in Matthew 24:9-14 will accompany the time of the end in the church).
Therefore the saints in Judea must run when they see it happening in the church/es. Because armies will gather once again against Jerusalem.
For some reason only God knows the answer to, though there are many millions of people in the world who speak English, and even more who can speak English, only a very small minority of them do not understand that the word therefore in Matthew 24:15 links what Matthew records Jesus saying about the abomination of desolation to what Jesus had just said about the tribulation of the saints at the end of the age - and though it be rightfully laughable to all the others, that tiny minority happen to all be Christians - making all Christians be laughed at by all the other millions of people who either speak English or can speak English.
Those Christians who refuse to understand that the word therefore that Matthew used, links what Matthew recorded Jesus saying about the abomination of desolation to what He had just said about the tribulation of the saints at the end of the age, do so because they try to assert that Matthew was writing a commentary on what Luke recorded Jesus saying about the wrath of God coming upon Jerusalem,
and they somehow manage to do this despite the fact that Matthew was an eyewitness writing his own record of all the things that Jesus said on the Mount of Olives, Mark was writing what Peter related, and Luke was recording what who knows how many eyewitnesses were relating about all the things Jesus said on the Mount of Olives -
and in Luke's gospel he frequently has Jesus saying the exact same things about the end of the age and His return while still on His way to Jerusalem that Matthew has Jesus saying on the Mount of Olives.
Only because it's convenient to keep their minds and their understanding enslaved to their own chosen eschatology do many Christians refuse to acknowledge the meaning of the word therefore in Matthew 24:15, and to insist on making Luke's record a commentary of what Matthew and Mark recorded, Matthew a commentary of what Mark and Luke recorded, etc.
Last edited:
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
lol. You keep hurting yourself
Jesus said we will see it. You say we will not. I will take Jesus at his word ok??
I can't continue with the refusal of people to see the literal word.The 'Olivet Discourse'
LUKE'S GOSPEL vs. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL Below is a comparison of Luke's gospel with Matthew's regarding the location of Jesus at the time He s...
And here are the rest of the biblical facts that you cannot escape, though you desperately try to:
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
The gospels use the word naos in reference to the sanctuary of God in the hieron - the physical temple structure in Jerusalem - until the verses telling about the tearing of the veil - but not after that.
ἱερόν hierón (hee-er-on'):neuter of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts, whereas 3485 [naós] denotes the central sanctuary itself (of the Temple in Jerusalem, or elsewhere).
[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
The New Testament only uses the word naos in reference to the bodies of saints as the temple (naos) of God, the church as the temple (naos) of God, and the heavenly temple in the Revelation after the verses telling of the tearing of the veil.
The naos is the holy place where the man of sin / son of perdition will appear, calling himself God and rising from out of the lawlessness (the lawlessness that Jesus told us will accompany the time of the end).
Paul called that tabernacle the naos - which in the New Testament always refers to the sanctuary of God, and is the word Paul always only used in reference to the bodies of saints and the church as the tabernacle of God (rather than the word hieron which he used in reference to the physical temple in Jerusalem).
After the verses talking about the tearing of the veil in the sanctuary (naos) of God which was contained in the hieron (the physical temple structure) the first time the word is used again in reference to the sanctuary of God is in Acts, where the apostle states that God does not dwell in a sanctuary (naos) made with (human) hands.
There will be no removal of the daily sacrifice again because that was done in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and there is no daily sacrifice in the sanctuary of God today - but there will appear an idol in the naos - New Testament temple - the man of sin himself.
The abomination of desolation placed in the holy place (which the Greek would refer to as the naos) of the 2nd temple did not result in the destruction of either the temple or the city - after Antiochus IV was ousted the temple was cleansed and rededicated to God.
The New Testament Temple cannot be destroyed bu it can be defiled- and it will be.
"And what agreement does a temple [naós] of God have with idols? For you are the temple [naós] of the living God, as God has said, "I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." 2 Corinthians 6:16.
"Do you not know that you are a temple [naós] of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple [naós] of God, God shall destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are." -- 1 Corinthians 3:16-17.
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
Holy Places
THE HOLY PLACE OF THE OLD COVENANT / TESTAMENT (Holy Place and Most Holy Place of the Old Covenant / Testament) THE HOLY PLACE OF THE NEW CO...Abomination of Desolation
================================= "'Abomination of Desolation' is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with whic...
God said it will happen.
Jesus said you will SEE IT HAPPERN
and when you SEE IT HAPPEN RUN!! because somethign is going to happen.
You just spent a bunch of energy trying to refute the very words of Jesus and his warning to the people who will witness these events.
You can;t symbolise prophesy, Prophecy has a purpose. There is only one reason to symbolise it, because literal interpretation would go against your own belief system.
Lets make our belief system fit with the word. not twist the word to fit our belief system, I learned many years ago to do this.. and have come to the light of many things I used to believe in error.
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
Of course there are no sacrifices for sin in the New Testament sanctuary of God. The abomination of desolation placed in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes is not the same temple - it's a biblical type. And though you desperately try to pretend that you do not understand the difference between a biblical type and its antitype, your argument nevertheless fails dismally - because here is the context of the Olivet Discourse:
The 'Olivet Discourse'
LUKE'S GOSPEL vs. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL Below is a comparison of Luke's gospel with Matthew's regarding the location of Jesus at the time He s...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
And here are the rest of the biblical facts that you cannot escape, though you desperately try to:
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
The gospels use the word naos in reference to the sanctuary of God in the hieron - the physical temple structure in Jerusalem - until the verses telling about the tearing of the veil - but not after that.
ἱερόν hierón (hee-er-on'):
[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
neuter of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts, whereas 3485 [naós] denotes the central sanctuary itself (of the Temple in Jerusalem, or elsewhere).[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple):
The New Testament only uses the word naos in reference to the bodies of saints as the temple (naos) of God, the church as the temple (naos) of God, and the heavenly temple in the Revelation after the verses telling of the tearing of the veil.
The naos is the holy place where the man of sin / son of perdition will appear, calling himself God and rising from out of the lawlessness (the lawlessness that Jesus told us will accompany the time of the end).
Paul called that tabernacle the naos - which in the New Testament always refers to the sanctuary of God, and is the word Paul always only used in reference to the bodies of saints and the church as the tabernacle of God (rather than the word hieron which he used in reference to the physical temple in Jerusalem).
After the verses talking about the tearing of the veil in the sanctuary (naos) of God which was contained in the hieron (the physical temple structure) the first time the word is used again in reference to the sanctuary of God is in Acts, where the apostle states that God does not dwell in a sanctuary (naos) made with (human) hands.
There will be no removal of the daily sacrifice again because that was done in the 2nd temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and there is no daily sacrifice in the sanctuary of God today - but there will appear an idol in the naos - New Testament temple - the man of sin himself.
The abomination of desolation placed in the holy place (which the Greek would refer to as the naos) of the 2nd temple did not result in the destruction of either the temple or the city - after Antiochus IV was ousted the temple was cleansed and rededicated to God.
The New Testament Temple cannot be destroyed bu it can be defiled- and it will be.
"And what agreement does a temple [naós] of God have with idols? For you are the temple [naós] of the living God, as God has said, "I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." 2 Corinthians 6:16.
"Do you not know that you are a temple [naós] of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple [naós] of God, God shall destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are." -- 1 Corinthians 3:16-17.
"Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For the Day of Christ shall not come unless there first comes the apostasy, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naós] of God, setting himself forth, that he is God." -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
Holy Places
THE HOLY PLACE OF THE OLD COVENANT / TESTAMENT (Holy Place and Most Holy Place of the Old Covenant / Testament) THE HOLY PLACE OF THE NEW CO...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Abomination of Desolation
================================= "'Abomination of Desolation' is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with whic...
zaoislife.blogspot.com
So Jesus told them to run when they see the man of sin appear in the New Testament Temple after rising out of the lawlessness in it (that Jesus told us in Matthew 24:9-14 will accompany the time of the end in the church).
Therefore the saints in Judea must run when they see it happening in the church/es. Because armies will gather once again against Jerusalem.
THE PECULIARITY OF MANY CHRISTIANS (BUT NOT ALL)
For some reason only God knows the full answer to, though there are many millions of people in the world who speak English, and even more who can speak English, only a very small minority of them do not understand that the word therefore in Matthew 24:15 links what Matthew records Jesus saying about the abomination of desolation to what Jesus had just said about the tribulation of the saints at the end of the age - and though it be rightfully laughable to all the others, that tiny minority happen to all be Christians - making all Christians be laughed at by all the other millions of people who either speak English or can speak English.
Those Christians who refuse to understand that the word therefore that Matthew used, links what Matthew recorded Jesus saying about the abomination of desolation to what He had just said about the tribulation of the saints at the end of the age, do so because they try to assert that Matthew was writing a commentary on what Luke recorded Jesus saying about the wrath of God coming upon Jerusalem,
and they somehow manage to do this despite the fact that Matthew was an eyewitness writing his own record of all the things that Jesus said on the Mount of Olives, Mark was writing what Peter related, and Luke was recording what who knows how many eyewitnesses were relating about all the things Jesus said on the Mount of Olives -
and in Luke's gospel he frequently has Jesus saying the exact same things about the end of the age and His return while still on His way to Jerusalem that Matthew has Jesus saying on the Mount of Olives.
Only because it's convenient to keep their minds and their understanding enslaved to their own chosen eschatology do many Christians refuse to acknowledge the meaning of the word therefore in Matthew 24:15, and to insist on making Luke's record a commentary of what Matthew and Mark recorded, Matthew a commentary of what Mark and Luke recorded, etc.
Last edited:
True, but keep in mind this. In the OT, in the book of Daniel, for example, that's pretty much what 'destroy' typically means throughout that book, meaning this Hebrew word--'shachath'. Why would any interpreter assume there is no connection to 2 Thessalonians 2:4 anywhere in the book of Daniel? Any interpreter that might be doing that is apparently taking everything in the book of Daniel involving a city and a temple per chapters 7-12, in the literal sense. I don't know why, though? It clearly isn't meaning in the literal sense in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 nor Revelation 11:1-2. And if these accounts are connected with Daniel chapters 7-12, there you go then, it can't be meaning in the literal sense in the book of Daniel if it's not meaning in the literal sense in the NT, assuming there is connection here.
Last edited:
Anyone that is arguing that 70 AD is meant by Matthew 24:21, that is basically what they are arguing. Which then contradicts what Jesus said in that verse and it contradicts reality, when even WW1 and WW2 were greater in scale than 70 AD. How you have not heard that interpretation before, puzzles me? I don't interpret that verse in that manner, but some of those you are debating in here, such as @covenantee and @Spiritual Israelite, certainly do if they are applying that verse to 70 AD.
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
Bear in mind too that any interpreter who does not take the word in Daniel 9:26 as referring in a literal sense to the destruction of both the temple and of the city is being willfully ignorant - willfully ignorant of the fact that Jesus repeated this prophecy when HE said the temple IN JERUSALEM would be destroyed and as Luke records, also said that JERUSALEM was going to be destroyed - and willfully ignorant of the fact that a destruction did occur in 70 AD and that Jesus was not referring to a desolation that did not involve the real, actual destruction of both temple and city.
The abomination of desolation placed in the holy place - which though it's written in Hebrew, the Greek would call the naos - by Antiochus IV Epihanes did not cause the destruction of either the city or the temple.
Daniel 9:26 states that the prince of the people who would come would destroy the city and the sanctuary. Daniel 9:27 which associates abominations (plural) with the making desolate until the consummation of the temple cannot possibly be referring to a different prophecy to Daniel 9:26.
IMO it's just a case of trying desperately to keep Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessaolonians 2:4 as referring to an abomination in the New Testament Temple - the naos - while maintaining a complete dissociation of the abomination of desolation placed by Antiochus IV in the holy place as the biblical type of it.
It's a type - it's not the same temple. The AoD of A4E is associated also with daily sacrifices being removed, as well as an idol in the holy place - but there are no daily sacrifices in the New Testament holy place to be removed. The type is the type, not the antitype. A4E is not the man of sin but the type of the man of sin.
Last edited:
Zao is life
Well-Known Member
For some reason only God knows the full answer to, though there are many millions of people in the world who speak English, and even more who can speak English, only a very small minority of them do not understand that the word therefore in Matthew 24:15 links what Matthew records Jesus saying about the abomination of desolation to what Jesus had just said about the tribulation of the saints at the end of the age - and though it be rightfully laughable to all the others, that tiny minority happen to all be Christians - making all Christians be laughed at by all the other millions of people who either speak English or can speak English.
Those Christians who refuse to understand that the word therefore that Matthew used, links what Matthew recorded Jesus saying about the abomination of desolation to what He had just said about the tribulation of the saints at the end of the age, do so because they try to assert that Matthew was writing a commentary on what Luke recorded Jesus saying about the wrath of God coming upon Jerusalem,
and they somehow manage to do this despite the fact that Matthew was an eyewitness writing his own record of all the things that Jesus said on the Mount of Olives, Mark was writing what Peter related, and Luke was recording what who knows how many eyewitnesses were relating about all the things Jesus said on the Mount of Olives -
and in Luke's gospel he frequently has Jesus saying the exact same things about the end of the age and His return while still on His way to Jerusalem that Matthew has Jesus saying on the Mount of Olives.
Only because it's convenient to keep their minds and their understanding enslaved to their own chosen eschatology do many Christians refuse to acknowledge the meaning of the word therefore in Matthew 24:15, and to insist on making Luke's record a commentary of what Matthew and Mark recorded, Matthew a commentary of what Mark and Luke recorded, etc.
The great tribulation of Matthew 24:21-22 which will be shortened for the elect's sake is referring to the same tribulation of the saints at the end of the age that Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:9-14. Anyone who understands English grammar and doesn't try to use really amateur hermeneutics to have Matthew be writing a commentary of what Luke said about the wrath of God that was to come upon Jerusalem will understand what Matthew meant when speaking about an abomination of desolation in the holy place.
@Davidpt
--- Every day Jesus was teaching in the temple courts,
but at night he went and stayed on the Mount of Olives. --- Luke 21:37
The Temple was built on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The Mount of Olives is opposite the Temple Mount. There is a valley between the two (the Kidron Valley).
"Now as Jesus was going out of the temple courts and walking away, his disciples came to show him the temple buildings. And he said to them, "Do you see all these things? I tell you the truth, not one stone will be left on another. All will be torn down!" (Matthew 23:37-24:2).
--- Every day Jesus was teaching in the temple courts,
but at night he went and stayed on the Mount of Olives. --- Luke 21:37
On the Mount of Olives the disciples asked Jesus when the temple would be destroyed. Yet the gospels and epistles and the book of Acts contain zero evidence that He answered their question because none of them knew either when the temple would be destroyed, nor when Jesus would return
- and instead of us reading about Jesus answering that question once He had sat down on the Mount of Olives, in all three synoptic gospels we read Jesus launching into a discourse about the persecution and tribulation that the living stones of the New Testament temple were to face, the end of the age, and the signs of His return.
We don't even read about Him talking about the Jerusalem temple on the Mount of Olives again. We only read about Him talking about the coming destruction of Jerusalem when the wrath of God was to come upon the city.
-- yet these English speaking people keep telling us that Jesus was talking about the temple in Jerusalem after He sat down on the Mount of Olives, as though like them we too cannot read.
Last edited:
When was the A.O.D fulfilled?
It hasn’t been fulfilled yet. This is yet future."But he who endures to the end shall be saved. "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),
- Matthew 24:13-15
The "abomination" occurs when Satan stands in Jerusalem and declares that he is God, and the world believes him. This is the great apostasy!
—PEtRA
If that is meaning in the literal sense, then so is the following since it is clearly recorded in Matthew 24 as well.
Luke 17:31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
32 Remember Lot's wife.
33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.
Compare verse 31 with Matthew 24:17-18. Then compare verse 33 with Matthew 16:24-26. IOW, by comparing verse 33 with Matthew 16:24-26 we can know that the fleeing in verse 31 is not meaning in the literal sense where one is literally leaving their home, no time to pack, just get out now. Obviously, if taking verse 31 in the literal sense it is impossible to make sense out of this part in that case--and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.
Similar threads
