When You See the Abomination of Desolation Stand in the Holy Place

[amigo de christo]

The "abomination" is when Satan stands in Jerusalem, and proclaims that he is God, and the world believes it. The "desolation" is an incorrect translation into the English, which should read "desolator", and Satan is the desolator that will make the claim that he is God, the true Christ. "Desolation" is a condition, in the Hebrew manuscripts it is written, "On the wings of the desolator," this is not a condition, but a entity, a person. It is through this individual, Satan that the abomination shall come from. It is the desolator [Satan] that shall cause all but the sealed of God, to become desolate, or deceived.

Daniel 9:27 "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, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and the determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

The Holy place is the place that the temple sits, and this is the subject for the very first, when the buildings of the temple were observed by the disciples, and the question of what it would be like at His second advent. This is where the desolation [Satan, the Antichrist] shall sit on mount Zion, making his abominations, or statements that he is the Christ.

The world will be deceived when Satan claims himself to be Christ, for he does have supernatural powers, and he will use them to to draw the peoples of the world to come to peace. He will say, I am Jesus whom ye have been waiting for, and I have come to bring peace to the world, and the world will be brought to peace and prosperity by Satan, the Antichrist.

The abomination that causes the desolation of those who would worship it .
It means Abomination that causes the desolation of said place . CAUSE GOD will make it desolate . Very simple .

 

[marks]

Okay, but I don't understand your view here? So I'll just run through the passage quickly, and insert paraphrasing and commentary so you know how I take it. The biggest problem I see, in opposing my own position, is that the temple's destruction is not viewed as the major element in the Discourse. I do.

Matt 24.1 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

This is the 70 AD event, in which both Jerusalem and the temple are desolated.

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

Again, the main event concerned the 70 AD event. The question about its relationship to the 2nd Coming is still focused on 70 AD as the main event in the Discourse.

4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

These "birth pains" precede and presage the main event, the 70 AD event--the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. These "birth pains" include rumblings of war, including Roman military activities in the region. Natural disasters would also take place at that time, indicating God's displeasure with Israel and elsewhere. As such, these "birth pains" *preceded* the 70 AD event.

9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

This is an elaboration of the "birth pains," or a further explanation of the same. The natural disasters and threat of military action threatening Israel would include other indications of God's displeasure with Israel's behavior. Israel would persecute Jewish Christians. And that would be part of the cause of the impending judgment in 70 AD. Even as the Jewish unbelievers persecute the Christians, those same Christians would be testifying to them about the Kingdom of God and its consequent judgments.

15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let no one on the housetop go down to take anything out of the house. 18 Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20 Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.

The "abomination of desolation" is a direct consequence of Jewish ungodliness and wickedness, including the persecution of Christians. The AoD refers to Dan 9.26-27, where Messiah is cut off, and there follows the desolation of both Jerusalem and the temple. It is specifically called the "abomination of desolation." Although the term is applied elsewhere in Daniel to Antiochus 4, as well, here in Dan 9, the term is applied only to the Roman desolation in 70 AD.

Where a lot of Christians get confused is in their failure to see that Jesus applied this Jewish desolation to the entire NT age, rendering it the Jewish Diaspora of the NT age. It is Israel's lack of a homeland and lack of status with God throughout the entire Church age. There is a Christian remnant among the Jewish People. But largely, the Jewish People remain obstinate and opposed to Christian conversion until judgment comes at the return of Christ.

Thus, the "Great Distress" Jesus speaks of concerns the Jewish People, and not yet of the international Church. Jesus was speaking while the Law was still in effect, and the international Church had not yet come into being. The only nation of God at that time was Israel, and Christian nations had not yet come into being.

I trust this makes my position clear? What do you think? I get a lot of opposition, but not much honest feedback, because it doesn't appear to be "politically correct" at the present time. But it was the predominant view in the Early Church, I believe.

And then, the "great tribulation" describes the time from 70 AD to the second coming of Jesus, do I understand correctly?

(I may need to ask a few questions)

Much love!

 

[marks]

The abomination that causes the desolation of those who would worship it .
It means Abomination that causes the desolation of said place . CAUSE GOD will make it desolate . Very simple .

I look at the OT use of "abomination" in pointing to idols.

An abomination standing in the holy place.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Paul concluded, this was completed
Colossians 1:23 KJV
[23] If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

I'm not sure I follow . . . is it the great tribulation that is completed?

Much love!

 

[Curtis]

The whores and publicans went in ahead of you.

Except they didn’t go in before me.

 

[marks]

The whores and publicans went in ahead of you.

Why do you speak this way?

Much love!

 

[Randy Kluth]

And then, the "great tribulation" describes the time from 70 AD to the second coming of Jesus, do I understand correctly?

(I may need to ask a few questions)

Much love!

I'm always told this is not so, and yet that's exactly what Jesus said in Luke 21.

Luke 21.20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

I can't emphasize enough that this is not *my unique view.* This was the view in the Early Church. There were some twists and turns on Dan 9 and on the Olivet Discourse, but I speak in general terms. They were viewed, generally, as fulfilled in the time of Christ's sacrifice, following by a punishment of the Jews, lasting until the 2nd Coming.

I often see others say that Matthew and Mark gave us the same Discourse, and yet meant something different from what Luke meant. Luke talked about the 70 AD event, but Matthew and Mark talked about Antichrist, they say. This is a very common position today, and yet the consensus view in the Early Church was that all 3 versions spoke of the 70 AD event.

But there has always been some confusing of the Abomination of Desolation with the Antichrist. I just don't see that that's what the implication is after reading Luke's version.

Also, when elaborating on the "birth pains," leading up to the 70 AD event, Jesus describes how the early Christian Jews would be treated, not just by unbelieving Jews, but also by "all nations." And they would preach the gospel to "all the world."

So what Jesus referred to as "birth pains" anticipated the 70 AD event in their generation, but also described an age-long ministry and experience of the Church. Nevertheless, the main focus at the time was the 70 AD event, because only Israel was God's People at the time Jesus gave this Address.

 

[Enoch111]

This is a very common position today, and yet the consensus view in the Early Church was that all 3 versions spoke of the 70 AD event.

Just because there is a "consensus" view does not make it right. In fact it is generally the reverse.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Just because there is a "consensus" view does not make it right. In fact it is generally the reverse.

It can be argued either way. The popular position is not generally correct--I agree. When stating what is "orthodox" is funneled through a narrow channel, however, we are not consulting run of the mill Christians, but outstanding Christians, learned, experienced, and proven. In this case, a consensus can be helpful, though not always.

 

[Waiting on him]

Why do you speak this way?

Much love!

I don’t see a problem with the post.

 

[marks]

I don’t see a problem with the post.

Then that's why.

Much love!

 

[Waiting on him]

Galatians 4:19 KJV
[19] My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

 

[Waiting on him]

Then that's why.

Much love!

Matthew 21:31 KJV
[31] Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
Don’t be such a crybaby.

 

[marks]

I can't emphasize enough that this is not *my unique view.* This was the view in the Early Church.

I've studied these different views for many years. I've made it my practice to understand different views "from the inside", that is, to find all the best reasons to hold that view, and learn how they all work together. I want to be able to present at least as good an argument for views I disagree with as those who hold them.

This would be a question for you,

In Revelation 12, it describes war in heaven, and Satan cast onto the earth. When does or did that happen as relates to the great tribulation, and Jesus' second coming?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Matthew 21:31 KJV
[31] Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
Don’t be such a crybaby.

No surprise that as you are rude to others you will be rude to me.

Much love!

 

[Waiting on him]

 

[Randy Kluth]

I've studied these different views for many years. I've made it my practice to understand different views "from the inside", that is, to find all the best reasons to hold that view, and learn how they all work together. I want to be able to present at least as good an argument for views I disagree with as those who hold them.

Wise approach, brother! As for me, if in anything I hold to a wrong view, I strongly urge God to correct me, in any way He sees fit, through anybody He wishes to use. My only wish is to conform to His view, to His will.

Like you, studying these things has been a life-long endeavor. I memorized the Olivet Discourse way back in the early 70s. But I remained dissatisfied with my interpretation of it, which was based on what I was taught by others. It never fit together cohesively. I've worked at it, and prayed about it, for many, many years! I've been willing to accept bits and pieces from anybody caring to add their 2 cents, including from those whose eschatology was different from my own.

What I hold to now is an amalgamation of several views, held together by a general blueprint given us by a consensus of early Church Fathers. The discrepancies I've been able to explain as a product of various illusions, such as the illusion that Israel had been lost for all time. I have no interest in pushing my view on others--only in defending my view so as to help others who like me struggled with this mightily. I've wanted the help, and so now I want to give it to those who also want the help.

This would be a question for you,

In Revelation 12, it describes war in heaven, and Satan cast onto the earth. When does or did that happen as relates to the great tribulation, and Jesus' second coming?

Much love!

Visions are difficult, because they are symbolic and almost timeless. This picture portrays the defeat of Satan by the birth and ascension of Christ to God's heavenly throne. The Church suffers in the picture of Israel going through the wilderness, hoping to get to the Promised Land. We suffer the opposition of Satan, who invests his full power and authority in the Antichrist. He must do this because man was given dominion on earth. And so Satan must find men to carry out his will of rebelling against God.

The Great Tribulation began as a Jewish Punishment for rejecting Christ. But for Christians in Israel this meant not just loss of their homeland, but also attacks by both Romans and Jews. That general tribulation is being experienced by Christians throughout the world today in a variety of ways. None of us has the support of the Evil One. You think?

 

[Jay Ross]

OK, I remember rightly. Thank you.

With such disparate ways to interpret the Bible, I find it not unreasonable that we should reach different conclusions.

Much love!

Mark s, you claim that you believe what is written in the scriptures, yet you believe and have posted that the beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire, 1,000 years before Satan, based on your simple and literal reading of the scriptures. Unfortunately, this is not what the scriptures teach concerning when the Beast and the False Prophet are cast into the lake of fire.

That is because of your disparate way of interpreting the scriptures, that in many cases, you disagree with what God has had recorded in the scriptures such that there is no basis for comparison between what you post and what God actually had written into the scriptures.

Some common synonyms of disparate are different, divergent, diverse, and various. While all these words mean "unlike in kind or character," disparate emphasizes incongruity or incompatibility such that we actually are walking contrary with God when we hold to tightly to our own personal beliefs concerning the basis of our salvation and the end times.

Shalom

 

[marks]

disparate emphasizes incongruity or incompatibility such that we actually are walking contrary with God

My use of 'disparate' was in fact to emphasize the wide difference in different views. However, it's you who is talking about people's walks with God. Just to make that clear.

Much love!

 

[CadyandZoe]

Chuck Missler used to speak of the Bible having a similar property to an hologram. The hologram image has an interesting property compared to a photograph.

If you take a photo of me and use a pair of sissors to cut out my tie, then when you look at the photo, you will never again see what my tie looked like. But in an hologram, if you snip out a bit, then when you look directly at that part, the missing piece is gone, but when you look from a different place, you can "see around" the missing part, and still see what was there, albeit not as clearly.

His idea was that the Bible is like this. There the information is all given in so many places and ways, it becomes self-correcting. In my studies of the Bible, I have to agree with this, as I've found so much consistency in it's message, whether the Gospel or prophecy.



I agree, we should note carefully, "1260 days" and "42 months".

The Jews of that day used a 30 day month, and a 360 day year. There is speculation that the earth's orbit was affected by something at that time, changing our year from 360 days to the current 364.25 days.

Do you think of these time measurements to be that, time measurements, but applied to different peoples? Or that they are not actually time measurements, but are representing something else?

Much love!

I think both.
Sometimes how we express time carries meaning beyond the duration of the moment in question. For instance, suppose a character in a novel said something like "They stayed with us for a fortnight." I don't know how many people know that a fortnight is 14 days or two weeks, but many of us know that the speaker is probably from the UK, Ireland, Australia, or New Zealand.

American TV shows of the '60s and '70s featured cowboy and Indian stories. And the Indian characters were often heard speaking of "many moons" as in "white man not pass this way for many moons." We seem to count time based on what we, as a culture, deem important or significant.

In the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy we have this exchange between Gimli and Legolas,

Gimli: "Most have seen too many winters!" Legolas: "Or too few. Look at them. They're frightened."

In other words, the unit of measure seems significant depending on the context.