Timing of the abomination of desolation

[ewq1938]

Luk 19:41 And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
Luk 19:42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
Luk 19:43 For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
Luk 19:44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

This didn't happen in 70 AD and still has not happened.

 

[covenantee]

I know what those in jusea will flee from and where they flee too. Both are in Revelation.
No the abomination that causes desolation is not the Roman army. God created man. Man is not the abomination that causes desolation. In fact, Jerusalem was not desolate after 70 AD. The Romans stayed there for years after 70 AD.

It was not desolate.

Better tell Jesus that He was wrong.

Matthew 23
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

 

[shilohsfoal]

Better tell Jesus that He was wrong.

Matthew 23
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

You should at least wait till Jerusalem kills the saints before saying she is desolate.

 

[covenantee]

You should at least wait till Jerusalem kills the saints before saying she is desolate.

Tell Jesus that He was wrong about everything.

 

[shilohsfoal]

Tell Jesus that He was wrong about everything.

Why?
I agree with Jesus. Jesus was saying Jerusalem will be desolate and it shall. Desolate as in uninhabited.
Your wrong about it bejng desolate in 70 AD. It wasn't. It is recorded history that the romans remained in the city. It's not Jesus that is wrong. It's you. You misjudged the time of Jerusalems desolation.

You believe the time of Jerusalems visitation was in 70 AD but it wasn't. Jesus didn't return in 70 AD.
On the day of the Lord when the abomination of desolation is placed in Jerusalem. Jerusalem will be made desolate.

 

[Jay Ross]

It wasn't conjecture on Luke's part.

Luke 21
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

What to believe?

1. Luke's account
or
2. Dispensational futurism's disbelief

The Holy Spirit was Luke's inspiration in identifying the abomination of desolation.

I believe the Holy Spirit and Luke.

Dispensational futurism does not.

Oh so if I claim that my understanding/inspiration was gained through the Holy Spirit as you are suggesting that this is needed on my part, I do not believe that you would believe me anyway. I would suggest that your rebuttal of my post is a very false argument as neither you or I can demonstrate that the HS was responsible for Luke's or my written understanding. It would be conjecture in either case since Luke is no longer alive to confirm what you have stated.

Often the issue is our interpretation of the written word and not the influence of the HS on the writer during his writing of that particular portion of the scriptures. It is our bias that directs our understanding.

Oh well each to his own wisdom.

 

[covenantee]

Why?
I agree with Jesus. Jesus was saying Jerusalem will be desolate and it shall. Desolate as in uninhabited.
Your wrong about it bejng desolate in 70 AD. It wasn't. It is recorded history that the romans remained in the city. It's not Jesus that is wrong. It's you. You misjudged the time of Jerusalems desolation.

But Jesus didn't misjudge it.

He spoke in the present tense, reflecting the impending doom of that generation.

 

[shilohsfoal]

But Jesus didn't misjudge it.

He spoke in the present tense, reflecting the impending doom of that generation.

This generation means the people of this age.
The end of the age does not take place till christ comes. Christ did not come in 70 AD.
The time of Jerusalems visitation was not in 70 AD.

 

[shilohsfoal]

But Jesus didn't misjudge it.

He spoke in the present tense, reflecting the impending doom of that generation.

Daniel 12:11 And from the time the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation set up, there will be 1,290 days.
Daniel 12:12 Blessed is he who waits and reaches the end of the 1,335 days.

So who do you say was blessed, the Roman soldiers in Jerusalem?

 

[covenantee]

This generation means the people of this age.
The end of the age does not take place till christ comes. Christ did not come in 70 AD.
The time of Jerusalems visitation was not in 70 AD.

From the df bible:

Matthew 23
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that not yet killest the prophets, and not yet stonest them which are not yet sent unto thee, how often would I have not yet gathered thy children together, even as a hen not yet gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not yet!
38 Behold, your house is not yet left unto you desolate.

 

[shilohsfoal]

From the df bible:

Matthew 23
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that not yet killest the prophets, and not yet stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have not yet gathered thy children together, even as a hen not yet gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not yet!
38 Behold, your house is not yet left unto you desolate.

Oh, your saying it was desolate in 33ad.
No,Jesus prophecied of the future. It was not desolate in 33ad.

You know what a prophecy is?

 

[covenantee]

Oh so if I claim that my understanding/inspiration was gained through the Holy Spirit as you are suggesting that this is needed on my part, I do not believe that you would believe me anyway. I would suggest that your rebuttal of my post is a very false argument as neither you or I can demonstrate that the HS was responsible for Luke's or my written understanding. It would be conjecture in either case since Luke is no longer alive to confirm what you have stated.

Often the issue is our interpretation of the written word and not the influence of the HS on the writer during his writing of that particular portion of the scriptures. It is our bias that directs our understanding.

Oh well each to his own wisdom.

Feel free to explain with bias and understanding how ye is not ye, and/or see is not see, and/or Jerusalem is not Jerusalem, and/or compassed is not compassed, and/or armies is not armies, and/or know is not know, and/or desolation is not desolation, and/or nigh is not nigh.

 

[covenantee]

Oh, your saying it was desolate in 33ad.
No,Jesus prophecied of the future. It was not desolate in 33ad.

You know what a prophecy is?

Everything that I quoted from the df bible is "not yet", so it is of the future.

Exactly as you claim.

 

[Jay Ross]

Feel free to explain with bias and understanding how ye is not ye, and/or see is not see, and/or Jerusalem is not Jerusalem, and/or compassed is not compassed, and/or armies is not armies, and/or know is not know, and/or desolation is not desolation, and/or nigh is not nigh.

My friend you seem to have an axe to grind and you are becoming tiresome in your rhetoric and put downs.

It seems to me that you have one particular timeline that you are defending which in no way reflects the scriptures.

Daniel 12:9-13: - 9 And he said, "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.

11 "And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.
​

13 "But you, go your way till the end; for you shall rest, and will arise to your inheritance at the end of the days."​

NKJV​

If we use this above passage as our reference for the AoD, then it clearly is situated at the end of the seventh age.

Trying to fit the AoD elsewhere during the seven ages, demonstrates a poor understanding of what the Scriptures tell us.

 

[covenantee]

My friend you seem to have an axe to grind and you are becoming tiresome in your rhetoric and put downs.

It seems to me that you have one particular timeline that you are defending which in no way reflects the scriptures.

Daniel 12:9-13: - 9 And he said, "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.

11 "And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.
​

13 "But you, go your way till the end; for you shall rest, and will arise to your inheritance at the end of the days."​

NKJV​

If we use this above passage as our reference for the AoD, then it clearly is situated at the end of the seventh age.

Trying to fit the AoD elsewhere during the seven ages, demonstrates a poor understanding of what the Scriptures tell us.

Brother, why are you ignoring Luke 21:20?

There is a three-way corroboration between Matthew 24:15, Daniel 9:26-27, and Luke 21:20 which unmistakably identifies and confirms the AoD of 70 AD as the Roman armies.

It is therefore a different AoD from Daniel 12:9-13.

Hence your confusion.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I do consider your approach to this possible, that Jesus was using hyperbole. Many instances in the bible hyperbole is used.

However, I tend to think Jesus literally meant that every stone of the temple buildings would come down, because they did. When he said the city would suffer that fate, he was referring, I believe, to the fate of the temple--every stone would come down.

I think what you're saying is viable, also. What I don't find to be viable is that His prophecy regarding the destruction of the temple buildings is not yet fulfilled. We are obviously in agreement about that. It makes no sense whatsoever to think that He was talking about the temple buildings being destroyed in stages over a long period of time.

What happened to the religious buildings in the city was in effect a leveling of the city. This is not hyperbole as much as generalization. When you say the farm was "leveled," that is literally true if the farm buildings come down.

Not every implement in the field, and not every row of plantings, had to be literally "leveled." The farm is literally "leveled" when the main structures or the emphasized structures are literally leveled.

Yeah, that's reasonable. I think the main takeaway is that He was saying the temple buildings would be destroyed and they most certainly were. Arguing over semantics is pointless, in my opinion. Someone trying to act like what happened in 70 AD had nothing at all to do with what Jesus said would happen is completely ludicrous in my view (and I know you agree with that).

That's how I see it. At any rate, the fact the Romans literally leveled the temple buildings indicates to me that this was what Jesus was talking about--not an Antichrist who isn't even part of the conversation!

Exactly.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Quite good. A hearty Amen to everything you've been saying! :)

Thanks, I appreciate that. I appreciate your thoughts on this as well. I think either of our perspectives on this are quite reasonable and viable while the idea that what happened in 70 AD had nothing to do with the destruction of the temple buildings is not reasonable at all.

 

[shilohsfoal]

I think what you're saying is viable, also. What I don't find to be viable is that His prophecy regarding the destruction of the temple buildings is not yet fulfilled. We are obviously in agreement about that. It makes no sense whatsoever to think that He was talking about the temple buildings being destroyed in stages over a long period of time.

Yeah, that's reasonable. I think the main takeaway is that He was saying the temple buildings would be destroyed and they most certainly were. Arguing over semantics is pointless, in my opinion. Someone trying to act like what happened in 70 AD had nothing at all to do with what Jesus said would happen is completely ludicrous in my view (and I know you agree with that).

Exactly.

Thanks, I appreciate that. I appreciate your thoughts on this as well. I think either of our perspectives on this are quite reasonable and viable while the idea that what happened in 70 AD had nothing to do with the destruction of the temple buildings is not reasonable at all.

Personally, I feel it's ludicrous to believe the day of the Lord was in 70 AD.
I honestly do t believe the time of Jerusalems visitation took place that year.

I just don't believe it happened.
Zechariah 14:4 On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half the mountain moving to the north and half to the south.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Can you explain when a building is no longer a building? The 4th floor, the 3rd floor, the 2nd floor, the 1st floor, ground level, the basement, the foundation, or the cornerstone? You tell me when the building is no longer the building.

When the walls come down and the ceiling caves in I would say you can no longer call it a building. Why do you ask? Do you think a building has to completely disintegrate and be 100% annihilated in order to no longer be a building? In that case, for example, you could conclude that the twin towers in New York were still buildings after they collapsed, but no one in their right mind would claim that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Personally, I feel it's ludicrous to believe the day of the Lord was in 70 AD.

I didn't say that, though. I believe Jesus talked about two different events in the Olivet Discourse. One relating to things that would occur locally in and around Jerusalem and one global event that is yet future which is the return of Christ at the end of the age.

I honestly do t believe the time of Jerusalems visitation took place that year.

Why not? The city was attacked and destroyed. It fits what Jesus prophesied in Luke 19:41-44 and Luke 21:20-24 (Matt 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20).

I just don't believe it happened.
Zechariah 14:4 On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half the mountain moving to the north and half to the south.

The NIV translates Zechariah 14:1 as "a day of the Lord". It's not talking about the same day of the Lord described in passages like 1 Thess 5:1-6 and 2 Peter 3:10-12. It doesn't describe the complete destruction of all unbelievers like the NT passages do. There are major problems with associating Zechariah 14 with the return of Christ. Not the least of which is that it would mean animal sacrifices would be reinstated at that time in that case (Zech 14:16-21).

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I know what those in jusea will flee from and where they flee too. Both are in Revelation.
No the abomination that causes desolation is not the Roman army. God created man. Man is not the abomination that causes desolation. In fact, Jerusalem was not desolate after 70 AD. The Romans stayed there for years after 70 AD.

It was not desolate.

You're missing the context of what scripture indicates would make it desolate. It's not talking about it being made completely uninhabited by anyone. It was made desolate in terms of the Jews no longer being there (they were all either killed or they fled) and it was desolate in terms of the Jews no longer being able to gather at the temple there anymore since it was destroyed.