The "watch rapture view"

[Douggg]

You're better than that. I rearranged nothing. Like you, I showed where I see each verse as fitting in the three categories you described. Don't lie, Douggg. No, I haven't.

Did I quote you correctly above ? I rearranged your sentences, just like you rearranged the order of the verses of Jesus's discourse.

 

[Douggg]

Prophecy is often not all in chronological order. It's very clear that Revelation 11 and 12 is not all in chronological order, for example. Am I rearranging the text of Revelation 11 and 12 by coming to that conclusion? You have the 7th trumpet sounding before the 5th trumpet. Are you rearranging the text to come to that conclusion? Stop your ridiculous false accusations.

Jesus gave a discourse in Matthew 24. Revelation is not a discourse but a collection of visions shown to John. So Revelation is not the equivalent of the Olivet Discourse.

 

[Zao is life]

You won't even acknowledge the grammatical fact that the word "therefore" does not have to refer to the verse or verses which immediately precede that verse (Matt 24:15), but can refer instead to something said previous to those, which is the case is other verses in scripture. Off the top of my head, I know Ephesians 4:1 is an example of that (refers back to Ephesians 3:13 rather than anything in Ephesians 3:14-21). Again, it makes no sense that Jesus would tell the disciples that the temple buildings would be destroyed, but then, for some unknown reason, not be willing to give them any details at all relating to that when they asked about the timing of it. I can't buy that at all.

In the mind of Christ once that veil in the temple was torn (which occurred when He died), the Old was gone and what mattered was only the new creation in Himself which would follow His resurrection from the dead.

He had already pronounced judgment on the city and the desolation of its temple. His body was all that mattered at the time.

The question was a burden to Jesus. He had already told the Pharisees in the hearing of those who asked Him, that though they destroy this temple, He would raise it up in three days. Only one Temple's destruction was important enough for Jesus to be thinking about, and He was soon to sweat blood pleading with the Father if at all possible, to let that cup pass from Him.

Crucifixion was the cruelest death the Romans had to punish criminals with, and it was reserved for the worst of criminals. Those who hung on crosses were despised by all nations, including the Jews. The Temple of God was about to be despised of all nations, delivered up to tribulation and killed. Yet Jesus still found time in Himself to concern Himself with the persecution and tribulation His disciples would face at the start of the age that was about to be born, and throughout the age, and at the close of the age - and to warn them about it.

The disciples did not understand it at the time, and the reason is understandable. But the fact that you don't understand it today is because of what you for too long have heard being preached from the housetops. Yet even so, you should know.

Your argument about the word "therefore" is just silly IMO. In that case why not have it referring back to the birth-pain signs Jesus had told His disciples not be alarmed about?

 

[covenantee]

It's amusing to me that you think wars, pestilences, famines and earthquakes in other parts of the world besides Judea and Israel would be referenced in relation to a coming time of tribulation and wrath in Judea and Jerusalem. Global events being a sign of a coming local event? That makes no sense.

It's also amusing to me that you don't know the difference between the known world of the Roman Empire at that time and the literal entire world. The gospel was very likely not preached in literally the entire world back then already before 70 AD. I believe Jesus was talking about the gospel being preached in literally every nation in the world and not just the known world within the Roman Empire.

It's also amusing to me that you think the gospel being preached throughout the world would be a factor in determining when the destruction of Jerusalem should occur. What relation is there between the gospel being preached throughout the world and the timing of the destruction of Jerusalem?

It's also amusing to me that you see references to "the end" in Matthew 24:4-14 (verses 6, 13 and 14) and don't associate those references with the end of the age that Jesus was asked about.

It's also amusing to me that, as an Amil, you would not see references to a time of increased apostasy, deception and wickedness as being related to Satan's little season. It makes me wonder what your understanding is of Satan's little season. What do you think is the difference between how things are during the thousand years and how things are during Satan's little season spiritually and morally?

I've said nothing about wars et al. Stick to the subject, eh.

Paul used both of Jesus' expressions, "all the world" and "all nations", verbatim, and expressed the gospel having reached them in the present tense, confirming its fulfillment.

Do you agree that Paul is referring to the same "all the world" and "all nations" that Jesus is referring to?

 

[TribulationSigns]

Before I elaborate, just so you know I believe that what @TribulationSigns said to you about the meaning of being on a housetop is highly plausible:

"And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by Yhwh, and that swear by Malcham" Zephaniah 1:5.

Luke 12
2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.
3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.

It's not literal housetops being spoken of. It's a metaphor, as TribulationSigns said. I never saw this before. I'm glad I read his post.

Very good. Glad I helped, to the glory of the Lord. This is why I have said that my post is here as a public record for anyone other than the person I debate with. You also did a good job with the rest of your post about the housetop. I will elaborate more about the housetops here to clarify something that will refute his nonsense about some Judean literal houses of fleeing Jews in 70AD. So much for a grain of salt, eh, @Spiritual Israelite. :-)

You are right, God is speaking in metaphors. That is to say, using words denoting one kind of object in place of another, in order to suggest some likeness between the two. The housetop is not used as a "figure" of the Church, rather it is used as a figure of the believers outside the house, in the mode of oration or public speaking. Consider this in the context of the day it was written. There were no huge houses to hold thousands of people, right? So the public speaking and announcements were done from the housetop, above the crowd where people could see and hear the speaker. It was the place of announcements, very much used as a stage or a platform would be used today so that we could speak to the public.

Please note that the housetop is "outside of the house" (Church), it is not "in" the house. Used in the context of Matthew 24 it is illustrating a preaching platform outside the Church, with the preacher being commanded not to go back inside the house to get anything. This is not speculation; this truth is made abundantly clear by the other books of the Bible that reference this prophecy, and indeed by the very context of Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:17

• ""Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: "

In other words, God warns His servants that when they flee from this abomination in the congregation, they are not to go back into the house (Church) to get anything, for there is nothing there that is worth their lives! For example, the works and possessions in this house are now rendered worthless and the habitation thereof dangerous. They will find no bread (the Word of God) there, no clothing (the righteousness of Christ) there, no gold (the preciousness of Christ) there, and no shelter from storm (the tabernacle of Christ) there. All these things that Christians possessed "in the house" are now gone, and they are not to look back, as Lot's wife looked back. Abominations in the Church have caused it to fall and become a desert (desolation). So they are not to go down into the house to take any thing out of it. They preach from the housetops. It may help to look at the next verse, because the very same spiritual picture is painted there where God says:

Matthew 24:18

• "Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes."

This is the very same warning to those who dwelled on the housetops not to go back in the house, but God is now using the metaphor of those in the field. Those who were laboring in the field symbolize those in the world (or outside the Church -Matthew 13:38). These are those Christians who are not in the house (Church), but who have come out into the wilderness of the world to sow seed or preach the gospel. Like those on the missionaries. They are not to try to go back into their house to get clothing. There is no clothing there that can protect anyone at this time. For the clothing, which is the righteousness of Christ, has departed it. This has nothing to do with AD 70 at all!! It concerns the spiritual nature of the Church at this time, where the rise of false prophets and christs are, and why believers should stay away from it.

There are those who feel "as if" they must go to a Church, even if the Church is unbiblical or it is preaching a false gospel. Because unfortunately they are looking to the Church for their security, instead of Christ, and they do not understand just how dreadfully terrible false gospel is to a Holy God. We should not neglect the assembling together of the saints, but we should also remember that we are married to Christ, not the Church! Consider the mirror reference to this event recorded in the book of Luke:

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."

The imagery illustrated here is that there is nothing in this abominable house that we should return to. If you're in the field or world, stay there, do not return to this house full of abominations. If our goods or works are left in the house, do not return for their sakes. In other words, don't return for the assembly's sake, for friendship sake, for companionship, for Church tradition, for free coffee and bagels, and worldly music, or for (so-called) love of God. Whosoever loves these more than God is not worthy of Him. Here in this passage of Luke it is a little clearer what the Lord is saying. Believers must not go back into the Church at this time, for the things they once had there will not clothe or shelter them, nor is it of any value now. Clearly God is commanding that the believers stay out of the House. Again, as recorded in Mark.

Mark 13:15

• "And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:"

God is distinguishing and separating the house, from the housetops. It is a dangerous and worthless effort to go inside the house at this time period. He that is outside the house (housetop) when they "see" the abomination calamity upon the house, should flee without delay. He should not take time to win others, or to secure any articles of apparel, or to get his stuff, or to secure bread from this house. For by doing so, he would endanger his own soul. For there is God's wrath upon this rebellious house, and He has been warned us to flee from it. That is the warning from God in Matthew 24 to those who can "SEE" the abomination stand in the Holy place. Everyone will not see it, in fact few will have it revealed to them. But when it is, they are to proclaim it from the housetops. But not enter into the house. Consider wisely:

Luke 12:2-4

• ""For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.
• Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.
• And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do."

Pay particular note to the contrasting of something being whispered in your ear, to something being proclaimed from the "housetops." In other words, the exact opposite of secretive is to make this a public announcement on the housetops. Preach the gospel message, do not sit in your closet, reveal these truths God has revealed to you, from the housetops. Be the watchman who blows the trumpet when they see danger, and don't worry about your person, being reviled, or being spoken evil against. Your job is to "Watch!" Tribulation, persecution, reviling, contempt or disdain by those unfaithful of the Church should not dissuade the Watchmen. We fear God, not man. We are God pleasers rather than men pleasers. Here again, the housetop is the place "outside the house" used to trumpet the warnings or make the announcement that all the people will hear the witness of the abomination in the Holy place. And even today, many earnest Christians have heard it in the ear (Luke 12:3) just what is Apostasy, and have seen with the eye the abominations in the house, and are indeed preaching from the housetops that many others will also see and hear.

Proverbs 25:24

• "It is better to dwell in the corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman and in a wide house."

Better to be on the housetop or outside the house than to live with the contentious or argumentative woman. Brawling woman, as in two diverse contending parties. For a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Here is something that a Jew, Flavius Josephus, said about what happened in Jerusalem in 70 AD. You can skip to the last paragraph if you want to see his estimated numbers of those killed in Jerusalem and those taken captive at that time.

The Wars of the Jews, Book 6

Please... stop it... You are not thinking logically. Flavius Josephus was decidedly NOT a prophet of God. Which begs the question, why is the church depending upon his words for interpretation anyway? The Bible is its own interpreter, dictionary, and authority. The fact is, Josephus never accepted or received Jesus as Christ, so I don't know where you are getting your information from. Do many Christians accept Josephus' writings as authoritative? Yes, unfortunately, to their own error! The only authoritative writings are the ones in the Bible, written by God's true authorized prophets who believed on Him. I put my trust in God, not the writings of secular historians.

Psalms 40:4

• "Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies."

He that puts his confidence or trust in the words of men, trusts in vain. The testimony that we should trust in is the Bible testimony. So many have erred in putting confidence in the writings and testimonies of men, over and above what God actually said.

Psalms 118:8

• "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man."

Luke 6:26

• "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets."

So I guess I should consider myself blessed if they don't all speak well of me. Besides, I don't preach what I think will have church leaders or people here speak well of me, but I bear witness to the testimony of Scripture. So if they have a problem with what I say, they should take it up with God themselves! Because Jerusalem was left desolate when they rejected Christ, not in 70 AD.

Luke 13:34-35

• "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
• Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."

It's the prophecy of a spiritual city being destroyed, not a literal/physical one. Physical Jerusalem is still standing today. But the Jerusalem Christ was talking about being left desolate, isn't (Matthew 22:2-14). This is the fulfillment of desolation of Old Testament church in Daniel 9:26 (not to be confused with verse 27, which is what the abomination of desolation of Matthew 24 applies to. The New Testament congregation!

You are incredibly clueless. I back up my beliefs with scripture on here as much as anyone does. That's the last thing you should be accusing me of.

Well...you may have some knowledge of Scripture, but without spiritual discernment or wisdom of Christ, I can see that you don't.

That's a big lie. I referenced the scripture that talks about Jesus being tempted by Satan in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights. Do you need me to quote that to you? What is your understanding of that? Haven't you said that Satan represents humans' sinful desires? Do you think Jesus was temped by His own sinful desires? No, He was tempted by a living spiritual being whose names is Satan.

How about Revelation 20:10 talking about Satan being cast into the lake of fire and being tormented day and night? Is that describing people's sinful desires being tormented? Clearly not. That's only something that would be described in relation to a living being.

Sigh... time out.... You are getting way ahead of yourself. I can see why you have the incorrect interpretation about Satan, all built up based on your incorrect understanding of Satan from the beginning. For example... Isaiah 14:12? Exactly who is Lucifer? Do you understand the meaning of Lucifer? That is the question.

 

[The Light]

Even though the Antichrist is reigning for 1260 days duyring those trumpets and bowls? How do you get 3 1/2 years into one year?

I am gone till Tuesday and will respond then.

The Antichrist does reign for 3.5 years. But the trumpets and bowls of God's wrath are only one year in length. During that one year is the marriage of the bridegroom, Jesus, with the bride, the raptured believers who are in heaven.

Isaiah 34
8 For it is the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.

 

[The Light]

Sigh... time out.... You are getting way ahead of yourself. I can see why you have the incorrect interpretation about Satan, all built up based on your incorrect understanding of Satan from the beginning. For example... Isaiah 14:12? Exactly who is Lucifer? Do you understand the meaning of Lucifer? That is the question.

In Isaiah 14 Lucifer is certainly not Satan.

 

[pandaflower]

JESUS died in the 70th week

How do you know that?

 

[jeffweeder]

How do you know that?

Hi,

Dan 9
24 “Seventy weeks [of years, or 490 years] have been decreed for your people and for your holy city (Jerusalem), to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make atonement (reconciliation) for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness (right-standing with God), to seal up vision and prophecy and prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

25 So you are to know and understand that from the issuance of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until [the coming of] the Messiah (the Anointed One), the Prince, there will be seven weeks [of years] and sixty-two weeks [of years];


7+62 =69 weeks pass, then Messiah arrives to complete his work of atonement.


Jn 17
Jesus said,
“Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, so that Your Son may glorify You. 2 Just as You have given Him power and authority over all mankind, [now glorify Him] so that He may give eternal life to all whom You have given Him [to be His—permanently and forever]. 3 Now this is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true [supreme and sovereign] God, and [in the same manner know] Jesus [as the] Christ whom You have sent.
4 I have glorified You [down here] on the earth by completing the work that You gave Me to do. 5 Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory and majesty that I had with You before the world existed.

 

[Zao is life]

How is it reasonable to argue that Dan 12:7 is involving the end of the age, then argue that Daniel 12:11-12 is involving the days of A4E? As if verse 13 in Daniel 12 makes sense if applied to the days of A4E.

It is reasonable in the exact same way that it's reasonable that Ezekiel 39:23-29 is referring not to the judgment of Gog, nor to a regathering of Israel into their own land following the judgment of Gog, but to the same gathering of Israel back into the land mentioned in Ezekiel 36.

You need to understand this in order to understand Daniel 12 properly (you won't understand Daniel 12 properly if you don't understand this), so look at Ezekiel 36:24 to Ezekiel 39:29, because what you see in this passage is a "Markan Sandwich", and prophetic scripture is full of them:

Ezekiel 36:24-38 opens the prophecy regarding Israel being gathered from the nations back into their own land.
Ezekiel 39:23-29 closes that prophecy.
Ezekiel chapter 37 gives more detail regarding the same prophecy (see Ezekiel 37:23-25).

The above are the two pieces of bread of the Markan sandwich: The bottom piece being Ezekiel 36:24-38 & Ezekiel chapter 37; and the top piece being Ezekiel 39:23-29. Everything else in-between is talking about Gog and Magog coming against Israel following the time they had been gathered from the nations back into their own land.

I.O.W Ezekiel 38:1 through to Ezekiel 39:22 are parenthetic.

* The Temple mentioned in Ezekiel 37:26-29 is elaborated about in the visions of the Tabernacle (Ezekiel 40:2) that Ezekiel saw in Ezekiel chapters 40-48, which all correlates with the visions John saw in the Revelation (chapters 20-22).

There is a lot of metaphor being used throughout.

IN THE SAME WAY, and as part of the bottom piece of bread in another Markan Sandwich, the text of Daniel 8:11 and Daniel 11:31 links both verses to both:-

(a) daily sacrifices for sin being removed (which is what occurred in the 2nd temple in the days of Antiochus IV); and
(b) an abomination of desolation being placed in the holy place (which is what occurred in the 2nd temple in the days of Antiochus IV); and

The above verses are the bottom piece of bread in the Markan Sandwich.

Daniel 12:11-12 links the daily sacrifices for sin being removed in that (2nd) temple of God to 1,290 days and 1,335 days, and closes the prophecy.

Daniel 12:11-12 is the top piece of bread closing the prophecy.

Daniel 12:1-10 (a second bottom piece of bread) is another prophecy - and is talking about the end of the age, which Daniel 12:13 (another top piece of bread) closes. It's a prophecy within a prophecy and a Markan Sandwich within a Markan Sandwich.

The reason Daniel 12 is written like this is because A4E is the type of the son of perdition of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and the abomination of desolation he placed in the holy place is a type of the abomination of desolation of Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

Notice how the end of the age mentioned in Daniel 12:1-10 speaks about 3.5 years in verse 7 (not 1,290 days or 1,335 days).

Daniel 12:6-7 correlates with the end of the age in Revelation 10:5-7. That's how marvelous this prophecy is.​

 

[Zao is life]

Can you elaborate on this? How are you concluding that Matthew 24:15-21 implies suddenness? Both passages indicate that once something is seen as happening then those in Judea would need to flee to the mountains. What is the difference between Matthew 24:15-22 and Luke 21:20-24 in relation to the suddenness that the things described in them occur?

Before I elaborate, just so you know I believe that what @TribulationSigns said to you about the meaning of being on a housetop is highly plausible:

"And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by Yhwh, and that swear by Malcham" Zephaniah 1:5.

Luke 12
2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.
3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.

It's not literal housetops being spoken of. It's a metaphor, as TribulationSigns said. I never saw this before. I'm glad I read his post.

Let alone your goods in the house, if the children in the house were not waiting and watching with you on the housetop, then don't first go trying to call them, because the groom has come, and it's too late for them:

Luke 17:31-32
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. Remember Lot’s wife.

"Remember Lot’s wife" tells you exactly how suddenly what's mentioned in Matthew 24:21-22 is going to come: "Look! I will come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays alert and does not lose his clothes so that he will not have to walk around naked and his shameful condition be seen." Revelation 16:15.

"And the one in the field must not turn back to get his cloak." Matthew 24:18.

Matthew 22
12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 24
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Those who missed the groom are seen in Revelation 6:15-17 - basically "weeping and gnashing their teeth".

With regard to pregnant and nursing mothers, Jesus was talking about those who would be around to see the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Luke 21:20-24), which is why Jesus used the same illustration regarding those who will be around to see the coming great tribulation.

It's all illustrations, or metaphorical. Matthew 24:15-22 and Luke 21:20-24 are not talking about the same period. One has occurred. The other is coming.

 

[Zao is life]

Do you see them as all being parallel up to Matthew 24:14, Mark 13:13 and Luke 21:19, respectively? In other words, do you see Matthew 24:1-14, Mark 13:1-13 and Luke 21:5-19 as being parallel passages (without all the exact same details)? If so, I don't know why you would not see each of them as continuing to be parallel in the verses which follow each of those verses (Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14 and Luke 21:20 and then beyond those as well).

This is not guess-work. The grammar of the passages and the word therefore in Matthew 24:15 as well as the word before in Luke 21:12 are all important, and brushing aside the meaning of these words and the grammar used, is engaging in guess-work, IMO.

(1) Luke is using a Markan sandwich, where verses 8-11 is the bottom piece of bread and verses 25-36 is the top piece of bread - which are both talking about the end of the age and time of Jesus' return.

In-between the two pieces of bread Luke is speaking about the first century, where the word BEFORE in Luke 21:12 indicates that the persecution Jesus' disciples were going to endure (verses 12-19) would take place even BEFORE Jerusalem was destroyed (verses 12-24).

This WAS their experience, and Nero's persecution erupted and ended even before AD 70.

(2) I know that you believe that Matthew also uses a Markan sandwich, where you believe verses 15-22 of Matthew 24 don't belong with verses 9-14 and verse 23 onward, but Matthew does not use the word BEFORE in verse 15, but the word THEREFORE, and the conjunctive words used throughout the text of Matthew 24:9-31 do not warrant or support separating verses 15-22 from the rest of the text of Matthew 24, IMO.

We're not going to agree on that.

In verses 10 and 13 of Mark 13, Mark ties the persecution the disciples were warned they will endure, to the gospel first being published among all nations, and to the promise that the one who endures to the end will be saved - the way Matthew's account does. Then Mark speaks about the abomination of desolation (singular) standing where it ought not. It follows Matthew's account (or Matthew follows Mark's account, according to some scholars).

I believe the abominations (plural) mentioned in Daniel 9:26-27 are indeed associated with the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in AD 70 (I believe those abominations were in the form of continued animal sacrifices for sins made during the 40 years between Christ's crucifixion and AD 70, even while the gospel was being preached by the Jewish disciples).

* Nothing else happening to, or occurring in a city and a temple that is not holy unto God constitutes the abominations (plural) that are mentioned in Daniel 9:26-27.

But IMO those abominations are not talking about the same abomination of desolation (singular) mentioned in Daniel's prophecies, and by Jesus in Matthew and Mark's accounts.

* In Luke 21:12-24 Luke talks about the persecution the disciples would endure before the city and temple were destroyed - and the sign Jesus gives of the close of that period of persecutions, is armies gathering against Jerusalem.

* Matthew & Mark talk about the tribulation the disciples are to endure at the end of the age - and the sign Jesus gives of the end of the age, is an abomination of desolation appearing in the holy place, where it does not belong. I believe it's talking about 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and the biblical type is the abomination of desolation placed in the holy place by A4E in the 2nd century BC.
​

=================================​

"'Abomination of Desolation' is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with which the 2nd century BC Greek king Antiochus IV Epiphanes replaced the twice-daily offering in the Jewish temple, or alternatively the altar on which such offerings were made."
(Abomination of desolation - Wikipedia)​

=================================​