Daniel's 1260 vs. 1290 vs. 1335 vs 2300 Days Prophecies (Abomination of Desolation Was the Crucifixion)

[Spiritual Israelite]

Do you deny that Matthew was recording what Jesus said to all His disciples, who at the time were all or mainly Jewish?

No.

Do you deny that Luke was not an eyewitnesses and was recording what Jesus said to all His disciples, who at the time Jesus spoke, were all or mainly Jewish, after having collected information from Jesus' Jewish eyewitnesses?

No. What is the reason for this question?

Do you deny that whether Luke's record or Matthew's record, Jesus was talking to His mainly Jewish audience in what both Matthew and Luke recorded?

No. But, Luke was writing to a Gentile audience so that is why he recorded Jesus's words differently at times so that his Gentile audience could understand what Jesus was talking about. Certainly, it would have been ridiculous for Luke to write "let the reader understand" in relation to a prophecy written by the prophet Daniel while knowing they would have no familiarity with it.

Do you deny that to the Jewish mindset of Jesus' day, "the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet standing in the holy place" would have immediately been identified with Christ's audience at the time, with the abomination of desolation placed in the holy place by Antiochus IV in the 2nd century BC?

Yes, I deny that. That was a past event and Jesus was talking about a future event. Since what He was talking about related to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple buildings, I think they would have immediately thought of Daniel 9:26-27 which has nothing to do with Antiochus IV in the 2nd century BC.

Do you deny that Jesus Himself celebrated channukah on which the above historical occurrence it was based?

LOL. No, I'm sure He did that, but this is an irrelevant question. As usual, you are making things unnecessarily complicated.

Do you deny that in order to split Matthew 24:15-21 out from the rest of the passage in terms of what period of time its talking about, you defy the common use of English grammar and the Greek grammar that Matthew 24:9-31 is correctly translated from, which connects the entire passage into one and the same period of tribulation at the end of the age by the use of the words "and", "therefore", "for", "but" etc?

LOL. I deny that you have any idea of what you're talking about here.

Do you deny that Luke 21:20-24 is not a parallel passage to Matthew 24:15-21 and that Luke 21:20-24 was talking about the wrath of God that would come upon Jerusalem, and that the disciples should therefore flee Judea when they see armies gathering against Jerusalem?

LOL. Yes, I deny that Luke 21:20-24 is not a parallel passage to Matthew 24:15-21 and you know that since I've said so many times.

Do you deny that tribulation can refer to the wrath of God? If so, read Romans 2:9, 2 Thessalonians 1:6 and Revelation 2:22.

Do you deny that Matthew 24:9 and verses 21-22 and verses 29-31 are talking about a period of tribulation that Jesus was saying His disciples would endure - and that the period would be shortened for the elect's sake (Matthew 24:22)?

Yes, of course I do, since Jesus will return immediately after "the tribulation of those days" that Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:29, which was not the tribulation He described in verses 21-22. Since you deny that Luke 21:20-24 is a parallel passage, you miss that the times of the Gentiles have followed the tribulation described in Matthew 24:15-21 that occurred in 70 AD. The times of the Gentiles will end when Jesus returns in the future.

Quite clearly, you do deny all this.

Quite clearly, you are wrong and have no idea of what you're talking about. Quite clearly, you are denying the obvious, which is that Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24 are parallel passages and describe what happened in Judea and in Jerusalem in 70 AD.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I am not sure how much 'parallel' you are referring to, so I will do a quick analysis with commentary:

I am saying that Matthew 24:15-22 is parallel to Luke 21:20-24a. I don't include Luke 21:24b because I see everything being parallel except for Jews being taken captive to all nations and the times of the Gentiles that followed 70 AD.

This is referring to the siege of Jerusalem in 70AD. Note that there is no 'let him who reads understand' message. The word 'see' therefore in this case is to see physically with the eyes. There is no 'abomination' mentioned. Some folks conflate this with the Abomination of Desolation event. They are not the same.

Yes, they are the same. You definitely have an inappropriate username. Please change it to a username that more accurately describes you like Eisegesis.

Luke spelled it out because he was writing to a Gentile audience. It would not have made any sense for him to write "let the reader understand" the prophecy from Daniel to Gentiles who would have been unfamiliar with Daniel's prophecies.

Look at the obvious similarities between these passages.

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: ) 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

You really expect me to believe that Jesus said the things recorded above separately within the Olivet Discourse? Which would mean He said "When ye shall see" something in relation to the desolation of Jerusalem, "then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains" two different times during His discourse? And would mean He said something related to them not trying to leave Judea or enter into it two different times? And would mean He said "And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!" two different times? And would mean He said "there shall be great distress" or "there shall be great tribulation" two different times in relation to distress and tribulation that would occur in Judea? That's not even reasonable to think He did that. Imagine how confused the disciples would have been if He said such similar things twice during the discourse. Surely, they would have asked "Wait, didn't you already say that?" if He said what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24 separately from saying what is recorded in Matthew 24:15-21. I can't even take that theory seriously at all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It's Bible 101 stuff:

View attachment 65447

How does seeing the two witnesses as the law and the prophets line up with the two witnesses being described as two candlesticks (lampstands) and two olive trees (Revelation 11:4)?

In the book of Revelation, candlesticks (lampstands) represent churches (Revelation 1:20). In Romans 11, it talks about branches of a wild olive tree (Gentile believers) being grafted into the cultivated olive tree that had some natural branches cut off (Israelite unbelievers) while other natural branches remained (Israelite believers). So, I believe the two witnesse represent the church with Jew and Gentile believers witnessing together as one body.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LOL. Turns out his eisegesis regarding Matthew 24:15-21 is the same as yours and @Spiritual Israelite's (and others).

That means it's exegesis then. In contrast to your eisegesis. Except for him saying that the abomination of desolation was Christ's crucifixion, that is. I disagree with that. That can't be the case since Jesus was saying that people in Judea would need to flee into the mountains after seeing the abomination of desolation stand in the holy place and, obviously, no one in Judea fled to the mountains after Jesus was crucified.

 

[Exegesis]

Luke spelled it out because he was writing to a Gentile audience. It would not have made any sense for him to write "let the reader understand" the prophecy from Daniel to Gentiles who would have been unfamiliar with Daniel's prophecies.

Are you a Dispensationalist?

​

Look at the obvious similarities between these passages.

Sure, but do you have a problem with combining Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to form a complete integrated picture?

​

The Gospels can appear contradictory to one another if we do not combine them into a single cohesive teaching.

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

Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )

The two verses above are quite different from one another. There is a difference that seems to be lost on you. This difference was pointed out by @Davidpt in opening post of his thread:

When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

When Christ died and rose? Or in 70 AD when it was fully destroyed? There can only be one answer here. Why this matters is because of what Matthew 24:15, for one, records. Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the...

www.christianityboard.com

You responded to it, so you are obviously aware. I believe his case is solid. There is no way that a Holy Place still existed after the crucifixion, especially decades later in 70AD. What you are teaching is that the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus was pointless. I am trying to show you the bigger picture here. Your interpretation causes huge problems with the entire Bible.

According to you, the Temple was still the Sanctuary of Strength long after Jesus was crucified:

Daniel 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Moreover, you teach that the daily sacrifice was still being accepted by God. And how exactly is Jerusalem 'compassed with armies' the exact same thing as 'setting up' the Abomination of Desolation? See the problem?

Note that Daniel 11:31 is often attributed to Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Now you have even bigger problems as, according to you, the Abomination of Desolation happened more than one time.

Speaking of problems adding up, you have yet to address when the Abomination of Desolation occurs in this verse:

Daniel 12:11 "And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days."

Three questions:

1. Do you agree that the Abomination of Desolation occurs at 1290?
2. What year was that?
3. How is 'compassed with armies' the same as 'setting up'

You really expect me to believe that Jesus said the things recorded above separately within the Olivet Discourse?

Yes. Again, it is not unreasonable to integrate the Four Gospels into each other and harmonize the teachings. The only evidence you have to back up your case is that the verses 'kind of look like each other', yet I can use the entire Bible, with both Old and New Testaments, to prove my case. In fact, here is a separate study demonstrating that the Abomination of Desolation can indeed be the Crucifixion:

Mark 13:14 - A Cryptic Prophecy of the Messiah's Death? - Northwest Institute for Ministry Education Research

Larry J. Perkins, PhD Generally, current explanations of Mark 13:14 identify the “desolating sacrilege” or “the abomination of desolation” with the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. While certainly the agent of this desolation, the Roman action is not … Continue reading →

nimer.ca

Quote:

We have argued that in Mark’s narrative it is the execution of the Messiah through the deliberate conspiracy of the Jewish religious leaders that is the “abomination that causes desolation.” God views the actions of these leaders as an abomination and this valuation calls for a stern response, namely desolation that occurs because of destruction.

I have every right to believe what I believe.

 

[Davy]

Hello aga

Hello again' the great tribulation is on the church not Isreal

9 After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:

“Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb.”
11 All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12 saying:

“Amen!
Praise and glory
and wisdom and thanks and honor
and power and strength
be to our God for ever and ever.
Amen!”
13 Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”

14 I answered, “Sir, you know.”

And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

I do believe that it started the day Stephen was killed and it is still happening today.

No, the great tribulation will be upon the Jews of Israel too, just in a different way, spiritually by their deception to the coming false-Messiah.

It is an in-grained error many Churches make with thinking of the word 'tribulation' like it must involve physical torture, etc. No, the physical persecutions will be upon those of us who stand in Jesus Christ throughout it, but for the deceived, the tribulation will be their deceptions in false worship to the coming false-Messiah. Which do you think is a worse tribulation event then?

It will be the 'spiritual' false worship tribulation that will be the great tribulation. And that is why Daniel 12:1 and Jesus in Matthew 24:21 said it will be a time on earth not since the beginning of the world, nor ever shall be. It will be because of the coming false-Messiah in Jerusalem working great signs and miracles to deceive the whole world into believing he is God having come (except Christ's elect who will know better - Rev.13:4-8).

 

[Exegesis]

How does seeing the two witnesses as the law and the prophets line up with the two witnesses being described as two candlesticks (lampstands) and two olive trees (Revelation 11:4)?

This is a very important question as it pertains to the 1260 days of years in Daniel and adds further proof that the Abomination of Desolation was set up at 1290 in the timeline (Jesus begins ministry/Two Witnesses are killed) as opposed to 1335 (destruction in 70AD).

We must properly interpret the Woman of the Apocalypse:

Revelation 12:1 "And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:"

Ultimately, this is not about a single woman. The woman being described in the above verse is symbolic of whoever is carrying Her Seed at any given moment in time leading up to the birth of Jesus. As many Christians are aware, Genesis 3:15 references something called 'Her Seed'. A popular interpretation is that Her Seed refers to Jesus. This I agree with.

Now look here:

Revelation 12:17 "And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."

I believe that Her Seed (in this context) is referring to the seed of Abraham and Sarah. But again, this seed continues for many centuries. Likewise, the man-child can be anyone who carries Abraham's Seed until the birth of the Messiah. In this context, it begins with Isaac.

Long story short, the 1260 years begins with the construction of the Tabernacle in the Wilderness. This is the 'place prepared':

Revelation 12:6 "And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days."

Her Seed fled into the wilderness with Moses. The Israelites nourished the tabernacles and temples for 1260 years until their Messiah was born. Remember, the tabernacles and temples were the body of Jesus. They took care of his body all that time. That is the profound symbolic meaning. They ministered to him:

Hebrews 10:5 "Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:"

They fed their Messiah like a little baby, remember?

Isaiah 1:11 "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats."

Dude was stuffed!

Thirty years after the birth of their Messiah, at 1290 in the timeline, Jesus began his ministry.

Now then...

At the same time as the Israelites were taking care of the body of Jesus, we have candlesticks and two cherubim of olive tree, in the tabernacles and temples correct?

1 Kings 6:23 "And within the oracle he made two cherubims of olive tree, each ten cubits high."

The two cherubim of olive tree are symbolic of the Two Witnesses and vice versa:

​

They witness every time the LORD appears between the cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant. Candlesticks are symbolic the Word of God:

Psalms 119:105 נ (NUN). "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."

In the book of Revelation, candlesticks (lampstands) represent churches (Revelation 1:20). In Romans 11, it talks about branches of a wild olive tree (Gentile believers) being grafted into the cultivated olive tree that had some natural branches cut off (Israelite unbelievers) while other natural branches remained (Israelite believers). So, I believe the two witnesse represent the church with Jew and Gentile believers witnessing together as one body.

Sounds good to me. If the tabernacles and temples represent the body, and we are temples, then it all adds up. We are all born again into the Glorified Body. Two sticks joined. Jew and Gentile together at last.

 

[Marty fox]

No, the great tribulation will be upon the Jews of Israel too, just in a different way, spiritually by their deception to the coming false-Messiah.

It is an in-grained error many Churches make with thinking of the word 'tribulation' like it must involve physical torture, etc. No, the physical persecutions will be upon those of us who stand in Jesus Christ throughout it, but for the deceived, the tribulation will be their deceptions in false worship to the coming false-Messiah. Which do you think is a worse tribulation event then?

It will be the 'spiritual' false worship tribulation that will be the great tribulation. And that is why Daniel 12:1 and Jesus in Matthew 24:21 said it will be a time on earth not since the beginning of the world, nor ever shall be. It will be because of the coming false-Messiah in Jerusalem working great signs and miracles to deceive the whole world into believing he is God having come (except Christ's elect who will know better - Rev.13:4-8).

Yet I provided the scripture showing what the great tribulation is.

Your talking about the great deception which is different

 

[Exegesis]

Besides the metaphorical meaning scripture repeatedly gives to God's elect (the stars)...

@Zao is life . I would like to get your opinion on this verse:

Daniel 8:10 "And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them."

Do you see a link to these verses?:

Matthew 2:16-18 "Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not."

In other words, when Herod had all of those children killed, could that be related to 'stamping on stars'?

 

[Zao is life]

@Zao is life . I would like to get your opinion on this verse:



Do you see a link to these verses?:



In other words, when Herod had all of those children killed, could that be related to 'stamping on stars'?

There's no link to Herod in Daniel 8:10, IMO. Daniel 8:10 was a specific prophecy about a specific person who was to arrive on the scene during a specific period in history, and the prophecy had been fulfilled over a hundred years before what Herod did, and had occurred over a period of 2.300 evenings and mornings, which began even before that person had placed an abomination of desolation in the holy place.

There is a link between Daniel 8:10 and Matthew 24:9-31 (especially Matthew 24:15-22); 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4; Revelation 11:1-2; Revelation 6:12-17; and Revelation 7:13-17 - but only in terms of the former (Daniel 8:10) having become the type of the latter.

 

[Exegesis]

Thanks @Zao is life for the response. I guess the point I was making was about the symbolism of Stars being 'stamped'.

You brought up an important point regarding Stars in this verse in Genesis:

Genesis 37:9 "And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me."

If we analyze this further, we discover a distinction:

• Sun = Father (Adult)
• Moon = Mother = (Adult)
• Stars = Siblings (Children)

Do you see it? Stars are children and not adults. So if Stars are being 'stamped on', wouldn't that mean that children are being killed as opposed to adults?

 

[Davy]

Yet I provided the scripture showing what the great tribulation is.

I saw no Scripture evidence of any such thing that eliminates Israel from the "great tribulation". As a matter of fact, per the Book of Daniel 12:1, the time of Jacob's trouble is the "great tribulation" Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24 and Mark 13. And the Book of Daniel prophecies about the 'end' are given specifically... to Daniel's people and to Jerusalem!

Your talking about the great deception which is different

I'm talking about the time of "great tribulation" which is WHEN the "strong delusion" Paul warned about in 2 Thess.2 will happen. Same events Jesus was warning about in Matthew 24:15 forward, and John in Revelation 13:11 forward, when the coming false-Messiah, or "man of sin", arrives in Jerusalem and proclaims himself as God, working miracles to deceive with. Hard to miss all those Scripture links, and here you are TRYING... to create non-existing separations about them?? Looks like you WANT to be deceived.

 

[Davy]

In other words, when Herod had all of those children killed, could that be related to 'stamping on stars'?

Nope.

 

[Exegesis]

Nope.

Here is an interesting commentary:

The horn grows and grows before Daniel's gaze, until it seems to touch the stars, that is, the host of heaven. As to what is meant by the stars, we must look elsewhere for an explanation. Have we any right to take "the host of heaven" as meaning the people of God? The phrase, "host of heaven," occurs elsewhere in Scripture nearly a score of times, and it rover means anything else than the stars or the angels. Therefore all interpretations that make this mean either the people of God or the Levites, must be thrown aside.

Daniel 8:10 Commentaries: It grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down.

 

[Exegesis]

Here is another commentary to ponder:

​

The Handwriting on the Wall

Publisher's description: Jordan unravels the imagery of God's prophecies revealed in Daniel, events that were dawning in Daniel's lifetime.

www.google.com

Another:

​

The Antichrist and the Second Coming

What if the commonly held beliefs concerning the Antichrist are mistaken? The Antichrist and the Second Coming looks at the Antichrist and the Second Advent of Christ from a preterist (i.e., past fulfillment) perspective and provides a unified interpretation of the little horn, the prince to...

www.google.com

 

[Davy]

Here is an interesting commentary:

The horn grows and grows before Daniel's gaze, until it seems to touch the stars, that is, the host of heaven. As to what is meant by the stars, we must look elsewhere for an explanation. Have we any right to take "the host of heaven" as meaning the people of God? The phrase, "host of heaven," occurs elsewhere in Scripture nearly a score of times, and it rover means anything else than the stars or the angels. Therefore all interpretations that make this mean either the people of God or the Levites, must be thrown aside.

Daniel 8:10 Commentaries: It grew up to the host of heaven and caused some of the host and some of the stars to fall to the earth, and it trampled them down.

Rev 12:3-4
3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
KJV

Stars in God's Word, other than natural stars, can represent angels, or certain people. Per above, those "stars" represent the angels which Satan drew to earth with him at his original rebellion in the old world. That also shows he setup a beast kingdom on earth back then that had only "seven crowns" instead of ten like the one of Rev.13:1 which is for the end of this present world.


Dan 8:9-10
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
KJV

That above prophecy is actually what the Rev.12:7-14 prophecy at the end of this world will be about, when Satan and his host of angels are cast out of the heavenly dimension down to earth in our... earthly dimension which will create the "great tribulation" events.


Jude 12-13
12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
KJV

Those are about the "crept in unawares" of Jude 4, those ordained to the condemnation of working against Christ Jesus.


Rev 1:20
20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
KJV

There's a direct reference to how "stars" can represent angels.


Rev 6:12-13
12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;
13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
KJV

The idea of "untimely figs" is about the winter fig that grows in the winter, but is an early fig, and falls off in the spring. That again is actually pointing to the coming Revelation 12:7-14 events of Satan and his angels being booted out of the heavenly dimension down into our earthly dimension at the end of this world.

 

[Exegesis]

That above prophecy is actually what the Rev.12:7-14 prophecy at the end of this world will be about, when Satan and his host of angels are cast out of the heavenly dimension down to earth in our... earthly dimension which will create the "great tribulation" events.

I'm curious as to how you visualize the angels being cast down to earth. Will they show up in a physical body? Will it be immortal? Will they appear and disappear in a supernatural way? Or will they maybe have to possess someone?

 

[Jay Ross]

I'm curious as to how you visualize the angels being cast down to earth. Will they show up in a physical body? Will it be immortal? Will they appear and disappear in a supernatural way? Or will they maybe have to possess someone?

Isaiah 24:21-22 will be applicable in around 20 years' time when Satan and the Angels will be cast down to the earth to be imprisoned in a cistern/pit for many days to await the time of their punishment.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Are you a Dispensationalist?

View attachment 65494​

LOL. Not even close. I'm an Amillennialist. It's a fact that Luke was writing to a different audience than Matthew, so that should be taken into account. Has nothing to do with dispensationalism. It's ridiculous to not acknowledge that Luke 21:20-24 is a parallel passage to Matthew 24:15-21 when that is so obviously the case.

Sure, but do you have a problem with combining Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to form a complete integrated picture?

View attachment 65495​

The Gospels can appear contradictory to one another if we do not combine them into a single cohesive teaching.

Of course we should do that and that's exactly what I'm doing by looking at Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20 and Luke 21:20-24 to get the full picture of what Jesus was saying there.

The two verses above are quite different from one another. There is a difference that seems to be lost on you.

Why do you ignore the obvious similarities between the two verses?

This difference was pointed out by @Davidpt in opening post of his thread:

When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

When Christ died and rose? Or in 70 AD when it was fully destroyed? There can only be one answer here. Why this matters is because of what Matthew 24:15, for one, records. Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the...

www.christianityboard.com

You responded to it, so you are obviously aware.

So, you know that at the time Jesus was speaking it was still the holy place, so it was quite reasonable for Him to refer to the temple as the holy place at the time He was speaking, regardless of whether or not it would still be considered the holy place at the time the abomination of desolation stood there.

I believe his case is solid. There is no way that a Holy Place still existed after the crucifixion, especially decades later in 70AD.

I agree that it was no longer the holy place after Christ's crucifixion, but it was still the holy place when Jesus was giving His Olivet Discourse.

What you are teaching is that the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus was pointless. I

Stop your nonsense. Get serious or we're done. Your username is extremely inappropriate. You have no idea what exegesis is.

am trying to show you the bigger picture here.

LOL. You clearly have nothing to show me.

Your interpretation causes huge problems with the entire Bible.

What interpretation is that? You're acting as if I'm saying the temple was still the holy place in 70 AD, but I'm not saying that. Stop wasting time arguing with a straw man.

According to you, the Temple was still the Sanctuary of Strength long after Jesus was crucified:

I never said that. You, like many here, need a lot of work on your reading comprehension skills.

Moreover, you teach that the daily sacrifice was still being accepted by God.

Nope. Never said that, so you have quite the imagination here. It's unfortunate that in today's day and age few have any attention span or reading comprehension skills anymore.

And how exactly is Jerusalem 'compassed with armies' the exact same thing as 'setting up' the Abomination of Desolation? See the problem?

It's not exactly the same thing, but they are related. It's foolish to claim that Luke 21:20-24 is not a parallel passage to Matthew 24:15-21.

I have every right to believe what I believe.

Of course you do, but you're wrong for the same reason Davidpt is wrong. Because of doctrinal bias you refuse to acknowledge the truth that Matthew 24:15-21 is a parallel passage to Luke 21:20-24. Jesus did not say "when you see" something that would result in the desolation of Jerusalem that those in Judea would need to flee to the mountains twice in the Olivet Discourse. He did not say "How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers!" twice during the Olivet Discourse. It is ludicrous to believe that.

 

[Marty fox]

I saw no Scripture evidence of any such thing that eliminates Israel from the "great tribulation". As a matter of fact, per the Book of Daniel 12:1, the time of Jacob's trouble is the "great tribulation" Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24 and Mark 13. And the Book of Daniel prophecies about the 'end' are given specifically... to Daniel's people and to Jerusalem!


I'm talking about the time of "great tribulation" which is WHEN the "strong delusion" Paul warned about in 2 Thess.2 will happen. Same events Jesus was warning about in Matthew 24:15 forward, and John in Revelation 13:11 forward, when the coming false-Messiah, or "man of sin", arrives in Jerusalem and proclaims himself as God, working miracles to deceive with. Hard to miss all those Scripture links, and here you are TRYING... to create non-existing separations about them?? Looks like you WANT to be deceived.

Why would you say such ridicules comment like that "Looks like you WANT to be deceived."? What do you expect in a reply after saying that?

The verse I provided show that the great tribulation is only on the church and Jews would only be a part of that if they were also Christians.

There is also a tribulation against Israel but that as scripture shows is a different tribulation as there are many tribulations