Confirming of the Covenant - Daniel 9:27

[Spiritual Israelite]

26a) And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself

26b) and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27a) And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease

27b) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Look what some interpretations are doing here. Instead of treating these as pairs, they have an odd man out instead.

Those that want the AC to be the one fulfilling 27a, they want that to involve 26b, 27a, and 27b, therefore, leaving nothing to pair with 26a, thus making 26a the odd man out. Why is there nothing to pair 26a with per this scenario?

The way I am reasoning this, there is no odd man out here. 26a can indeed be paired with something, 27a in this case. Logically then, that means 26b can be paired with something as well, 27b in this case. Now there is no odd man out. Now there is nothing that can't be paired with something. Which means 27a belongs with 26a, and 27b belongs with 26b, which means it is now undeniably crystal clear who the pronouns in 27a are referring to, and who the pronoun in 27b is referring to. But let's not think outside of the box, though. It is bad to do that not good.

I don't know if you realize it, but your way of communicating can be hard to follow. Which would explain why you sometimes don't get much response. It's simply because people don't even know what you're intending to say rather than being a case of people not being willing to consider your view.

With that said, I think I get your point here and I would agree that it's valid. The Messiah of verse 26 has to be the "he" of verse 27 and the prince mentioned in verse 26 in relation to the destruction of the city and the sanctuary, regardless of who it is, has to be the one in verse 27 who "shall make it desolate". I believe that's what you're saying, right?

 

[Davidpt]

David, I can't take you seriously about this unless you can tell me why fleeing in the winter or on the sabbath would be difficult in a non-literal sense and why it would be difficult for pregnant women or nursing mothers to flee in a non-literal sense. And tell me what Judea and the mountains represent in a non-literal sense. I've tried to get you to explain that before and you weren't able to even offer a guess. Has that changed or is that still the case?

Explain to me why you see it making perfect sense that if the Discourse is involving events that begin occurring once He has ascended back into heaven and then end with His return in the end of this age, and that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves has to be fulfilled before He can return, why He would leave something major like that out of the Discourse altogether?


Then when Paul brings it up we can't even determine what led him to say the things he did in that chapter. We can't go to Matthew 24:15, for instance, because this is meaning in the first century pertaining to 70 AD, and no way is 2 Thessalonians 2:4 pertaining to 70 AD, where even you don't dispute that. We can't go to the OT to the book of Daniel in ch 9 because that AOD in question is involving what Matthew 24:15 is involving, 70 AD in this case. Nor can we go to Daniel 8, 11, or 12, because that AOD is pertaining to A4E, not anything 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving. None of this according to me, but according to you and others like yourself.

I just can't can't get on board with that kind of thinking, that something major such as 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves, that Jesus was silent regarding that subject altogether, But was He really, though?

How about this, for one?

Matthew 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.



Why would verse 24 not be connected with the following in 2 Thessalonians 2?

2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

And why would verse 12 not be connected with the following in 2 Thessalonians 2:3?

except there come a falling away first

How can 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9, not be connected with 2 Thessalonians 2:4? How can 2 Thessalonians 2:4 not be connected with Matthew 24:15 since there is nothing else in that chapter pertaining to something abominable involving a temple except for that?

And while you are at it, explain why it makes perfect sense that the temple the man of sin defiles in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, that it doesn't need to be cleansed at some point?

Daniel 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.


Can't be involving any of this because that was already fulfilled ages ago, before Christ was even born. Again, not according to me, though. I don't interpret that to mean that. I think it's meaning after the temple is defiled in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, that this is meaning when it is cleansed. Otherwise we have to conclude that that temple, though defiled, is not in need of any cleansing since we have no Scriptures to support it.

 

[Douggg]

A possibility. Do you really think that is what Jesus had in mind when He indicated that they should pray that they wouldn't have to flee during the winter? To avoid a small possibility that it would snow? Come on, Doug. Please be honest here. That can't be what Jesus was saying. So, tell me what else you think He could have meant by that if it applies to something in the future?

Fleeing in the winter months could be much more difficult because of the weather.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Explain to me why you see it making perfect sense that if the Discourse is involving events that begin occurring once He has ascended back into heaven and then end with His return in the end of this age, and that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves has to be fulfilled before He can return, why He would leave something major like that out of the Discourse altogether?

So, you don't want to deal with the fact that you have no answer at all for how what Jesus said in Matthew 24:15-21 could all be taken non-literally? You'd rather not even comment on that and talk about something else? You are expecting me to address what you're saying here after you didn't address what I said at all? Have I not made it clear many times that I'm not interested in discussions where I'm the only one answering the other's questions?

Then when Paul brings it up we can't even determine what led him to say the things he did in that chapter. We can't go to Matthew 24:15, for instance, because this is meaning in the first century pertaining to 70 AD, and no way is 2 Thessalonians 2:4 pertaining to 70 AD, where even you don't dispute that. We can't go to the OT to the book of Daniel in ch 9 because that AOD in question is involving what Matthew 24:15 is involving, 70 AD in this case. Nor can we go to Daniel 8, 11, or 12, because that AOD is pertaining to A4E, not anything 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is involving. None of this according to me, but according to you and others like yourself.

I just can't can't get on board with that kind of thinking, that something major such as 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves, that Jesus was silent regarding that subject altogether, But was He really, though?

I can't get on board with the thought that Jesus's answer to the question regarding when the physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed is not recorded anywhere in Matthew 24. Did Matthew really not record Jesus's answer to that question for some inexplicable reason?

How about this, for one?

Matthew 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.


Why would verse 24 not be connected with the following in 2 Thessalonians 2?

2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

It is connected. Do you not remember how I've explained my understanding of Matthew 24 to you? Why are you talking to me as if you have no idea of how I interpret it or as if I interpret the whole thing the way a preterist does? Jesus was asked 2 questions about 2 different events. Why futurists like yourself think that the answer to only one of those questions is recorded in Matthew 24 is beyond me. Well, I know why you do it, but I'll keep that to myself.

And why would verse 12 not be connected with the following in 2 Thessalonians 2:3?

except there come a falling away first

It is.

How can 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9, not be connected with 2 Thessalonians 2:4?

It is.

How can 2 Thessalonians 2:4 not be connected with Matthew 24:15 since there is nothing else in that chapter pertaining to something abominable involving a temple except for that?

Because 2 Thessalonians 2:4 relates to something happening globally while Matthew 24:15 does not. The parallel passage of Luke 21:20-24 makes that even more clear even though Matthew 24:15-21 makes that clear enough by the fact that it only says people in Judea would nee to flee, and not people all over the world.

And while you are at it, explain why it makes perfect sense that the temple the man of sin defiles in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, that it doesn't need to be cleansed at some point?

Daniel 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Now you lost me. I don't see any connection between Daniel 8:14 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

Can't be involving any of this because that was already fulfilled ages ago, before Christ was even born. Again, not according to me, though. I don't interpret that to mean that. I think it's meaning after the temple is defiled in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, that this is meaning when it is cleansed. Otherwise we have to conclude that that temple, though defiled, is not in need of any cleansing since we have no Scriptures to support it.

What are you talking about here?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Fleeing in the winter months could be much more difficult because of the weather.

Not in today's day and age, especially in a place where it doesn't even snow much at all. It's not even reasonable to think that Jesus had in mind that it would be difficult for them to flee because of snow since it rarely snows there. In today's day and age, apart from a blizzard, it is not difficult to travel when it snows because of the ability to melt ice and use snow plows. Why won't you acknowledge this? I don't believe you are being fully honest about this.

The only thing that makes sense regarding there being difficulty traveling during the winter in a place that typically has mild winters like Judea is if people had to travel on foot. Even in non-snowy, but cold and/or rainy conditions, fleeing would be difficult on foot because you get cold after being outside a long time and if you get wet, it's even worse. And it can be slippery. If it's raining hard or if there was a thunderstorm it would obviously be difficult to travel on foot as well. But, in today's day and age? You can just travel in a heated vehicle where you're protected from the cold, rain and lightning storms. No problem. It simply makes no sense at all to think that Jesus would say it would be difficult to flee in the winter unless He was talking about fleeing on foot without the aid of modern vehicles.

 

[covenantee]

How can 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9, not be connected with 2 Thessalonians 2:4? How can 2 Thessalonians 2:4 not be connected with Matthew 24:15 since there is nothing else in that chapter pertaining to something abominable involving a temple except for that?

And while you are at it, explain why it makes perfect sense that the temple the man of sin defiles in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, that it doesn't need to be cleansed at some point?

There's nothing involving a temple in Matthew 24:15. The word "temple" does not appear there, nor anywhere in the parallel synoptic gospel verses. In Luke 21:20, Luke identifies the abomination of desolation as being the Roman armies. Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20 are corroborations of Daniel 9:26, which refers to the "people of the prince" who "destroy the city and the sanctuary", a clear reference to the Roman armies who were the people of prince Messiah to accomplish His purpose of destruction upon Jerusalem. They are also corroborations of Daniel 9:27, which uses similar language to refer to the abominations (Roman armies) whom Messiah used to accomplish His purpose of desolation upon Jerusalem.

There is no connection between 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and Matthew 24:15, because there is no temple in the latter. The 2 Thessalonians 2:4 temple is a "naos" temple, which is the word that Paul uses consistently throughout his epistles to describe the spiritual temple of the believer; collectively, the Church. It thus describes a presence (the man of sin) who takes up residence in the Church, arrogating and usurping spiritual authority therein, so far as to declare himself to be God.

Only a spiritual revival can provide the cleansing needed for such a condition.

 

[Timtofly]

Guess what? I don't take any of that in the literal sense, either. Obviously, Preterists take that in a literal sense, since they are taking this to mean Jerusalem and the 2nd temple before it is destroyed in 70 AD.

Obviously, you are taking that in a literal sense as well, but not for the same reasons Preterists are.

Since both you and Preterists can't be correct here if you all are coming to different conclusions, that doesn't automatically mean that one of you are correct then. There is such a thing as nobody being correct, which appears to be the case here.

Let's think about this for a minute assuming these things are meaning in a literal sense involving a literal temple in a literal city called Jerusalem in the middle east.

Verse 2 should make my point for me.

A literal temple is in view here, it is in the literal city of Jerusalem. And for a 42 literal months, the court which is without the temple, it has been given to the Gentiles, and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Since this would be meaning in the 21st century, obviously there would be television cameras and satellites above filming these events for 42 months. You then logically turn on your tv to see what is happening outside of this temple in this court that Gentiles are treading under foot forty and two months. Since these 2 verses are meaning in the literal sense according to you, what would it look like to the outside world viewing these things live on their tvs? What would they be seeing televised?

IOW, what exactly are they doing, meaning these Gentiles, for 42 months by being outside of the literal temple in this literal court? What are they hoping to accomplish? Why is it taking them 42 months to accomplish it? Why do they never manage to get inside of this literal temple but remain in limbo outside in the literal court for a literal 42 months?

There will be no technology at this point, unless Satan replaces all that God destroyed at the Second Coming.

The only Temple in Jerusalem will be the one Jesus sets up His throne in. The one Satan will sit on for those 42 months. The courtyard of the Temple is where business is done between the Temple and the rest of the world.

The 42 months is God allowing time for Satan to "give it his best shot". Satan wants to sit as God over the earth without any restraint from God. So Satan will be doing his worldly business in the temple courtyard trampling under foot that sacred area for 42 months. That business is the abomination of desolation including setting up an image that is brought to life in that very courtyard.

"But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months."

"And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months."

The FP is the spokesman or mouth of Satan for those same 42 months. The FP represents the task of doing business in the courtyard of the Temple for 42 months. Since Revelation 11:1-13 is written as a parenthetical to Revelation 13, the 2 witnesses are in direct competition with the FP and the image brought to life, during the same 42 month period.

One has to remember that this 42 months is not explicitly for Satan to have fun, nor control. The sole reason for this 42 months of AoD is the confirmation of the Atonement Covenant done by Jesus during the week of the days of the 7th Trumpet. The confirmation is the strengthening of the Covenant not the dissolving or failure of the Covenant. Jesus does not give into Satan's demands. Jesus is not even overcome by Satan. Many erroneously say there is a 7 year treaty that is broken in the midst of a period of 7 years.

That is all human made up theology, and goes directly against the whole meaning of confirming this Covenant. The Atonement Covenant was established at the foundation of the world. The Atonement Covenant is directly related to the Lamb's book of life, that was sealed with 7 seals from the foundation of the world. While the Cross was the physical act in human time, the Atonement was already in effect even before Adam disobeyed God.

This confirmation takes place after the final harvest. The majority of 8 billion people have already received their eternal destination. Eternal life or tossed into the LOF. Only the gleanings as it were after all harvests have been carried out. The church was removed. All of Israel was removed from the earth. And the majority of all Gentiles have all been removed. The only ones left are those who will receive the mark or chop off their heads to avoid the mark. These 42 months allow humans the free choice to do either. So the Atonement Covenant is extended as one last opportunity to choose death by beheading to literally end Adam's dead corruptible flesh, and set the soul free so to speak.

This is not the symbolic spiritual act of daily crucifying the flesh. This will be a permanent one way decision to trust that one will be judged and given life after the 42 months are over. Being beheaded is the act of faith. This act will be the only way to escape the LOF. Satan is convincing people to take the mark and denounce God. Satan would be against any choice to accept God, even the act of chopping one's head off. There is no endurance of saving one's own dead flesh until the end. Being beheaded is the testimony of obedience to Jesus Christ.

The point that this 42 months is given to the Gentiles indicates that Israel will not be present as the governing body during these 42 months. Jesus as King of Israel, and all His redeemed subjects will wait elsewhere, not try to co-exist together. This is what the sea of glass is for. This is what being carried away by eagle's wings to a desert place means in Revelation 13. Israel will not be present on earth for Satan to rule over. All Satan has is the throne, and a hollow victory, but woe to those left on earth for those 42 months. Just because one has the mark and can join the economy, does not mean people will stop killing each other just for the fun of it.