Does Daniel 7:21–22 Support Amillennialism or Premillennialism?

[Davidpt]

Your phrase, "Jesus is going on the clouds to heaven not to the earth," is confusing though.

No it isn't. And we should know this, including you, based on the following clues. That is if there is actually any sleuth abilities in you, so to speak. IOW, we have to be like sleuths sometimes if we expect to interpret something correctly.

So let's start with the following.

Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

We know Jesus is ascending here. No one disputes that. And take note that it is involving a cloud. A literal cloud, though? Highly unlikely, the fact the text says the cloud received Him. Since when and how do literal clouds receive someone? Obviously then, angels are likely meant here, not literal clouds.

Next we need to go to Daniel 7:13-14.

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven.

Could it be the same clouds of heaven seen in Acts 1? I tend to think so, regardless that Acts 1 never mentioned clouds of heaven, but did mention a cloud receiving Him, thus taking Him out of their sight below. Therefore, according to Daniel 7:13, the cloud meant in Acts 1 can simply be meaning the clouds of heaven. And that we don't need Acts 1 to call it the clouds of heaven when Daniel 7:13 is already doing that. Thus Scripture interpreting Scripture.

Next note that when Jesus arrives at His destination, He is then brought before the Father, and then given at that time, meaning after He has arrived, dominion, and glory, and a kingdom. Obviously, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that He was not already in possession of dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, before He arrived.

Next let's compare to Matthew 24:30.

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.


This scene can't remotely be the same scene seen in Daniel 7:13-14. And the reason why we know that is plainly simple, plainly obvious. Notice how Jesus is arriving---the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. This indicates He is already in possession of power and great glory before He arrives.

Where then is it that He initially obtained this power and great glory? Daniel 7:13-14, for one, obviously. Which then means Daniel 7:13-14 is simply parenthetical, not meant to be taken to be meaning when Daniel 7:9-12 is meaning. Daniel 7:13-14 simply explains, for one, how the one meant in Daniel 7:9-10, obviously meaning Christ, initially came to obtaining this position as the one sitting on the throne in Daniel 7:9.

Of course though, if one lacks sleuth abilities, so to speak, none of this is going to mean anything nor prove anything to them. They are simply not good sleuths is all. Some ppl aren't, some ppl are. That's just the way it is. Some ppl prefer to hold on to their doctrines no matter what and at all costs. Some ppl just don't like to admit they are ever wrong about anything, period. It is above them to do that. Their doctrines they hold are more important than the truth, assuming their doctrines are not the truth.

FWIW, there was a time decades ago that I too concluded that Daniel 7:13-14 is future still. Then one day I noticed something in Matthew 24:30 that isn't present in Daniel 7:13-14. Per the former Jesus is arriving already in possession of power and great glory. Per the latter, it is not until after He arrives first, that He is then presented with power and glory, etc.

At that point I didn't need to be a rocket scientist in order to figure out that the coming meant in Daniel 7:13-14 is not the same coming meant in Matthew 24:30. At that point it was plainly obvious they are not the same coming once I noticed these differences between Daniel 7:13-14 and Matthew 24:30. One coming is an ascension, the other coming is a return. It's that simple, and it's that obvious.

 

[Truth7t7]

The Revelation 20 Chapter gives more detail for after Christ's future return with a literal "thousand years" reign over those above angry nations.)

Jesus returns in fire and final judgement dissolving this earth by fire (The End)

There won't be a future 1,000 year kingdom on this earth at the return of Jesus, this teaching is a fabricated fairy tale of man that doesn't exist in scripture

 

[Truth7t7]

I was asking again because I don't know what you mean exactly by Gods eternal realm is that in heaven or on the earth?

Ask yourself, is this present earth eternal, hopefully you will find a clear answer, 2 Peter 3:10-13

If verses 9-10 are the second coming then how come Jesus is seen on the clouds after that?

Notice that Jesu sis coming on the clods to heaven not to the earth?

I Disagree

Jesus Is coming in the clouds to earth in the second coming, at this event time ceases as eternity begins in the twinkling of an eye

 

[Marty fox]

Ask yourself, is this present earth eternal, hopefully you will find a clear answer, 2 Peter 3:10-13

I Disagree

Jesus Is coming in the clouds to earth in the second coming, at this event time ceases as eternity begins in the twinkling of an eye

So your meaning the new heaven and earth then

Yes Jesus will come down at the second coming in the future still I just don’t believe that’s what Daniel 7:13-14 is I believe that was Jesus going on the clouds to heaven the end of the journey He started in Acts chapter one

 

[Davidpt]

Jesus returns in fire and final judgement dissolving this earth by fire (The End)

There won't be a future 1,000 year kingdom on this earth at the return of Jesus, this teaching is a fabricated fairy tale of man that doesn't exist in scripture

How can someone allegedly by so right about Amil, a far more complex subject, then be so wrong about the 70 weeks, a very simple subject where even a 5th grader can easily comprehend 490 years are meant, not 490 days? IOW, even 5th graders are better at math than you are. Not to mention, one can't conclude Amil from the NT alone and then pretend nothing in the OT is also relevant.

If nothing else, you undeniably prove that Amil can't be the correct view. Because it makes zero sense that you can supposedly be smart enough to figure out Amil, assuming it's supposed to be the correct view, when you are not even smart enough to figure out these 70 weeks, not even close to being smart enough to figure it out. You are not just a little wrong here and there about the 70 weeks. You are entirely wrong about the 70 weeks. You are not right about any of it, as in zero. Yet you want us to believe something preposterous, that you are right about Amil though, a far more complex subject than the 70 weeks, the latter being simple to figure out in comparison. Yet you can't figure out the latter but you can figure out the former. Yeah, right, that really makes a lot of sense. You alone debunk Amil. No one even needs to debunk it.

I don't care if any of this offends you. Why should I care when you don't care that your literal 70 weeks interpretation offends me and everyone else in here. That we are so stupid that we are to believe it's 70 literal weeks rather than 70 weeks of years. That we are so stupid that we are to believe this entire 70 weeks is still future rather than all of it or at least most of it has already been fulfilled, depending on how one interprets the 70th week. That we are so stupid that we are believe that Christ fulfills none of it, that the anti-christ fulfills all of it. Your literal 70 weeks interpretation is literally anti-christ in nature in more ways than just one.

 

[Davidpt]

This thread is mainly about Daniel 7 though it has gotten derailed with that of the 70 weeks. And since the 70 weeks have become a topic of discussion, I will say this. It is equally anti-christ in nature to apply the following to that of a future ac rather than Christ--and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.

Yet it is not anti-christ in nature to still assume a gap somewhere in the 70 weeks, as long as the gap is not between the 69th and 70th week, but is after this part--and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. After all, who in their right mind would insist Christ also fulfilled this part---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate?

Plus, no way can that be meaning 70 AD like many insist, either. It's not like abominations are never mentioned in the NT. It's not like Revelation 17 doesn't exist in the NT, that it's not even there. I don't know what it is about some of these interpreters around here at times that are interpreting some of these things in a vacuum then insisting Scripture interprets Scripture, that this is their methodology. Why then are they with their carnal minds connecting this with 70 AD----and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate---rather than using their spiritual minds and connecting it with Revelation 17 which is also connected with the 42 month reign of the beast instead? Therefore, in their minds, only the former, using carnal thinking, is an example of interpreting Scripture with Scripture, not the latter. Yeah, right, if you say so.

 

[covenantee]

After all, who in their right mind would insist Christ also fulfilled this part---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Christ fulfilled it.

He used abominations, the Roman armies, to make Jerusalem desolate.

He was in His Right Mind.

 

[Davidpt]

Christ fulfilled it.

He used abominations, the Roman armies, to make Jerusalem desolate.

He was in His Right Mind.

There is zero in all of the Bible that supports 70 AD involved abominations. Why is it that abominations are still relevant after 70 AD was fulfilled? Meaning Revelation 17, for one. Or are you perhaps one of those Preterists that insists Revelation 17 is involving 70 AD somehow?

 

[Davidpt]

Christ fulfilled it.

He used abominations, the Roman armies, to make Jerusalem desolate.

He was in His Right Mind.

LOL. One of the most preposterous things I ever heard in my life, that the Roman armies were the abominations. But not that that this is the first I have heard you claim that. As if what is recorded in Revelation 17 is not a far better fit for abominations, but instead, that the Roman armies are a far better fit. Only a carnally minded person could and would conclude that, in this particular case. IOW, someone lacking good discernment, in this case.

 

[Marty fox]

LOL. One of the most preposterous things I ever heard in my life, that the Roman armies were the abominations. But not that that this is the first I have heard you claim that. As if what is recorded in Revelation 17 is not a far better fit for abominations, but instead, that the Roman armies are a far better fit. Only a carnally minded person could and would conclude that, in this particular case. IOW, someone lacking good discernment, in this case.

Humm

Matthew 24
15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] 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 housetopgo 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.

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.

Matthew uses the words abomination that causes desolation because he wrote his gospel to the Jews and they would understand what he meant. Luke uses the word armies because he wrote his gospel to a gentile

 

[Davidpt]

Humm

Matthew 24
15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] 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 housetopgo 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.

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.

Matthew uses the words abomination that causes desolation because he wrote his gospel to the Jews and they would understand what he meant. Luke uses the word armies because he wrote his gospel to a gentile

Not one mention of abominations recorded in Luke 21, though. Which might mean what Luke 21:20 is involving is not what Matthew 24:15 is involving. I have zero issue with agreeing Luke 21:20 involved 70 AD. But I do have issue with Matthew 24:15 involving 70 AD. For one, if the AOD was fulfilled in the first century it would no longer be a mystery as to what it was. IOW, every single person that agrees it was fulfilled in the first century, they would all be on the same page, thus be in 100% agreement with each other as to what it was. But instead, they have turned it into a multiple choice circus.

Maybe it means what interpreter A) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter B) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter C) insists it means? So on and so on. That really makes sense, that if the AOD was fulfilled 2000 years ago, there are still all these different theories as to what it was. And that the rest of us are expected to figure out which theory seems the most convincing.

Those are examples of red flags, not examples of something having already been fulfilled, except not everyone who insists it has already been fulfilled can even agree with each other as to what it was. Why not? It's not like it could still be a mystery as to what the AOD was if it has already been fulfilled.

 

[covenantee]

LOL. One of the most preposterous things I ever heard in my life, that the Roman armies were the abominations. But not that that this is the first I have heard you claim that. As if what is recorded in Revelation 17 is not a far better fit for abominations, but instead, that the Roman armies are a far better fit. Only a carnally minded person could and would conclude that, in this particular case. IOW, someone lacking good discernment, in this case.

One of the most preposterous things I ever hear in my life is that the Olivet discourse synoptic verses Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20 are not about the same event.

That's from someone perpetuating pure nonsense.

 

[Earburner]

Let’s look at two key passages:





Here’s what I want to draw attention to:

A Rare and Powerful Connection

The exact phrase "and judgment was given" appears only twice in the entire Bible (KJV):

Daniel 7:22 – "and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High"

Revelation 20:4 – "and judgment was given unto them"

That’s not a coincidence.

Both passages:

Use the same rare phrase

Refer to the saints

Refer to judgment/vindication

Result in the saints reigning or possessing the kingdom

It is perfectly reasonable to conclude that Revelation 20:4 is picking up exactly where Daniel 7:22 leaves off.

And let’s be honest: no one — not even Amils — is going to argue that the “them” in Revelation 20:4 refers to the beast or the wicked. It's clearly the saints.

Continued....

There is much to unpack here in regards to the judgment of God for both those who died in faith under the altar of the OC. And those who are born again under the NC.

Before we get into this comparative situation, I have two questions that beg an answer:
1. Did anyone (except Mary and Elizabeth) of OC. Israel know in advance of the moment of when Jesus WAS revealed to them in mortal flesh as the Messiah?
2. Does anyone of NC. church know in advance of the moment when Jesus SHALL be revealed from heaven in flaming fire?
The answer to both is "No".

The fact that you have made a comparison between the two verses, informs me of when it was that ALL the Saints were given/possessed the Kingdom (Luke 12:32), so that ALL the Saints of the Most High could receive the judgment of God's Gift of His Holy Spirit AFTER Jesus' death and resurrection, and onward, during this present Age of God's Grace.

Ref.
Dan. 7:22 – "and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High"
Rev. 20– "and judgment was given unto them".

There is only ONE judgment TO ALL the Saints of the Most High, and that is John 3:18, 11:26, which is in the manifestation of John 14:23 and Rev. 3:20 and Acts 10:45.

Though the OC. Saints had died in faith believing of the Messiah to come, this is exactly what the OC Saints had been waiting for (Rev. 6:9-11), because no one, prior to Jesus, ever had the permanent GIFT of the Holy Spirit of God dwelling within them.
John 7
[39] (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given;
because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Jesus Himself is the judgment of God, as revealed by His words in John 3:18.

 

[Davidpt]

There is much to unpack here in regards to the judgment of God for both those who died in faith under the altar of the OC. And those who are born again under the NC.

Before we get into this comparative situation, I have two questions that beg an answer:
1. Did anyone of OC. Israel know in advance of the moment of when Jesus WAS revealed to them in mortal flesh as the Messiah?
2. Does anyone of NC. church know in advance of the moment of when Jesus SHALL be revealed from heaven in flaming fire?
The answer to both is "No".

The fact that you have made a comparison between the two verses, informs me of when it was that ALL the Saints were given/possessed the Kingdom (Luke 12:32), so that ALL the Saints of the Most High could receive the judgment of God's Gift of His Holy Spirit AFTER Jesus' death and resurrection, and onward, during this present Age of God's Grace.

Ref.
Dan. 7:22 – "and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High"
Rev. 20– "and judgment was given unto them".

There is only ONE judgment TO ALL the Saints of the Most High, and that is John 3:18, 11:26, which is in the manifestation of John 14:23 and Rev. 3:20 and Acts 10:45.

Though the OC. Saints had died in faith believing of the Messiah to come, this is exactly what the OC Saints had been waiting for (Rev. 6:9-11), because no one, prior to Jesus, ever had the permanent GIFT of the Holy Spirit of God dwelling within them.
John 7
[39] (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given;
because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Per Premil it might look like this.

Revelation 20:4 is understood to be a fulfillment or echo of Daniel 7:22, with both passages describing the saints taking possession of the kingdom after a period of tribulation and the defeat of oppressive powers. While Daniel describes the saints taking possession of the kingdom after a period of struggle, Revelation 20:4 shows martyred Christians reigning with Christ for a thousand years, a period that aligns with the establishment of God's eternal kingdom.
Similarities between the passages

Judgment and possession:
Both Daniel 7:22 and Revelation 20:4 describe judgment being given to the saints, who then take possession of the kingdom.

End of oppressive reign:
In Daniel 7, the suffering and oppression by the beastly powers come to an end before the saints receive their kingdom. Revelation 20:4 occurs after the destruction of the beast and the binding of Satan for a thousand years, which is a fulfillment of God's judgment.
Reigning with Christ:
Daniel 7:22 states that the saints take possession of the kingdom. Revelation 20:4 expands on this by saying they "lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years," implying a literal reign with Jesus in His kingdom.

How they relate

Fulfillment:
Revelation 20:4 is viewed as a specific manifestation and fulfillment of the broader promise in Daniel 7:22.

Historical context:
While Daniel describes the broader prophetic events leading up to the transfer of the kingdom, Revelation provides more detail on the actual period of the saints' reign with Christ. The "First Resurrection": Revelation 20:4 mentions the souls of those martyred being "raised" to life, described as the "first resurrection". This is the key event that allows them to participate in the Millennial reign with Christ.


As to Amil I can't see how these 2 passages can correlate with each other. How can anything recorded in Daniel 7:22 be meaning prior to the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age? And if it can't, then how can Revelation 20:4 be meaning prior to the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age? Unless one can of course prove Daniel 7:22 does not equal Revelation 20:4. But if it does equal it, Daniel 7:21-22 alone provides the correct time frame for Revelation 20:4.

Once again, IMO, no way can Daniel 7:22 not be involving Christ's bodily return in the end of this age. And the reason is simple. There is no coming during the past 2000 years that can explain this coming--- I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came(Daniel 7:21-12). Obviously meaning this coming puts a stop to this war being made with the saints once and for all. Admittedly though, Premil appears to maybe contradict this when they insist there is another battle against the saints after the thousand years. That's a fair point. I get it. But still how can Daniel 7:22 not involve the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age. And how can Daniel 7:22 not equal Revelation 20:4?

 

[Earburner]

Not one mention of abominations recorded in Luke 21, though. Which might mean what Luke 21:20 is involving is not what Matthew 24:15 is involving. I have zero issue with agreeing Luke 21:20 involved 70 AD. But I do have issue with Matthew 24:15 involving 70 AD. For one, if the AOD was fulfilled in the first century it would no longer be a mystery as to what it was. IOW, every single person that agrees it was fulfilled in the first century, they would all be on the same page, thus be in 100% agreement with each other as to what it was. But instead, they have turned it into a multiple choice circus.

Maybe it means what interpreter A) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter B) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter C) insists it means? So on and so on. That really makes sense, that if the AOD was fulfilled 2000 years ago, there are still all these different theories as to what it was. And that the rest of us are expected to figure out which theory seems the most convincing.

Those are examples of red flags, not examples of something having already been fulfilled, except not everyone who insists it has already been fulfilled can even agree with each other as to what it was. Why not? It's not like it could still be a mystery as to what the AOD was if it has already been fulfilled.

This might be a clue to you in Prov. 6:16-19
[16] These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him [God]:
[17] A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
[18] An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
[19] A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

 

[Earburner]

Per Premil it might look like this.

Revelation 20:4 is understood to be a fulfillment or echo of Daniel 7:22, with both passages describing the saints taking possession of the kingdom after a period of tribulation and the defeat of oppressive powers. While Daniel describes the saints taking possession of the kingdom after a period of struggle, Revelation 20:4 shows martyred Christians reigning with Christ for a thousand years, a period that aligns with the establishment of God's eternal kingdom.
Similarities between the passages

Judgment and possession:
Both Daniel 7:22 and Revelation 20:4 describe judgment being given to the saints, who then take possession of the kingdom.

End of oppressive reign:
In Daniel 7, the suffering and oppression by the beastly powers come to an end before the saints receive their kingdom. Revelation 20:4 occurs after the destruction of the beast and the binding of Satan for a thousand years, which is a fulfillment of God's judgment.
Reigning with Christ:
Daniel 7:22 states that the saints take possession of the kingdom. Revelation 20:4 expands on this by saying they "lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years," implying a literal reign with Jesus in His kingdom.

How they relate

Fulfillment:
Revelation 20:4 is viewed as a specific manifestation and fulfillment of the broader promise in Daniel 7:22.

Historical context:
While Daniel describes the broader prophetic events leading up to the transfer of the kingdom, Revelation provides more detail on the actual period of the saints' reign with Christ. The "First Resurrection": Revelation 20:4 mentions the souls of those martyred being "raised" to life, described as the "first resurrection". This is the key event that allows them to participate in the Millennial reign with Christ.


As to Amil I can't see how these 2 passages can correlate with each other. How can anything recorded in Daniel 7:22 be meaning prior to the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age? And if it can't, then how can Revelation 20:4 be meaning prior to the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age? Unless one can of course prove Daniel 7:22 does not equal Revelation 20:4. But if it does equal it, Daniel 7:21-22 alone provides the correct time frame for Revelation 20:4.

Once again, IMO, no way can Daniel 7:22 not be involving Christ's bodily return in the end of this age. And the reason is simple. There is no coming during the past 2000 years that can explain this coming--- I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came(Daniel 7:21-12). Obviously meaning this coming puts a stop to this war being made with the saints once and for all. Admittedly though, Premil appears to maybe contradict this when they insist there is another battle against the saints after the thousand years. That's a fair point. I get it. But still how can Daniel 7:22 not involve the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age. And how can Daniel 7:22 not equal Revelation 20:4?

Did not the Ancient of days come to this world in mortal flesh?

Though I know that your understanding is of the Pre-mil view, I would that you should adjust your focus on the First coming of Jesus, and take notice of how the The Gift of God to usward was God's ultimate judgment and of great importance to us all.

Even to those who were of OC Israel, that had died in faith, God did not forget them (Malachi 3:16). After Jesus' death and resurrection, each were given a white robe, which is symbolic of God's Holy Spirit.
You can see the symbolic 144,000 here: Mat. 27:50-54; Rev. 6:9-11.

Btw.... no one can be resurrected into New Life without the permanent Gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Marty fox]

Not one mention of abominations recorded in Luke 21, though. Which might mean what Luke 21:20 is involving is not what Matthew 24:15 is involving. I have zero issue with agreeing Luke 21:20 involved 70 AD. But I do have issue with Matthew 24:15 involving 70 AD. For one, if the AOD was fulfilled in the first century it would no longer be a mystery as to what it was. IOW, every single person that agrees it was fulfilled in the first century, they would all be on the same page, thus be in 100% agreement with each other as to what it was. But instead, they have turned it into a multiple choice circus.

Maybe it means what interpreter A) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter B) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter C) insists it means? So on and so on. That really makes sense, that if the AOD was fulfilled 2000 years ago, there are still all these different theories as to what it was. And that the rest of us are expected to figure out which theory seems the most convincing.

Those are examples of red flags, not examples of something having already been fulfilled, except not everyone who insists it has already been fulfilled can even agree with each other as to what it was. Why not? It's not like it could still be a mystery as to what the AOD was if it has already been fulfilled.

David it doesn’t matter what everyone thinks it is or there different opinions all that matters is what the bible says that it is,and that is exactly what I showed

Reread both passages word for word and see how they line up

At both “the abomination that causes desolation“and “when Jerusalem being surrounded by armies”

Those in Judea are to flee to the mountains

It will be dreadful for pregnant women and nursing mothers

Then in Luke verse 22 Jesus said

22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written.

What do you this Jesus meant by that? He's talking about the events of Olivet discourse

Jesus then in both chapters goes on to talk about the signs in the sun moon and stars, then the son of man coming on the clouds, then this generation won’t pass away until all of this happens.

Of course they are both talking about the same events open your eyes and your heart

Not one mention of abominations recorded in Luke 21, though. Which might mean what Luke 21:20 is involving is not what Matthew 24:15 is involving. I have zero issue with agreeing Luke 21:20 involved 70 AD. But I do have issue with Matthew 24:15 involving 70 AD. For one, if the AOD was fulfilled in the first century it would no longer be a mystery as to what it was. IOW, every single person that agrees it was fulfilled in the first century, they would all be on the same page, thus be in 100% agreement with each other as to what it was. But instead, they have turned it into a multiple choice circus.

Maybe it means what interpreter A) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter B) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter C) insists it means? So on and so on. That really makes sense, that if the AOD was fulfilled 2000 years ago, there are still all these different theories as to what it was. And that the rest of us are expected to figure out which theory seems the most convincing.

Those are examples of red flags, not examples of something having already been fulfilled, except not everyone who insists it has already been fulfilled can even agree with each other as to what it was. Why not? It's not like it could still be a mystery as to what the AOD was if it has already been fulfilled.

Not one mention of abominations recorded in Luke 21, though. Which might mean what Luke 21:20 is involving is not what Matthew 24:15 is involving. I have zero issue with agreeing Luke 21:20 involved 70 AD. But I do have issue with Matthew 24:15 involving 70 AD. For one, if the AOD was fulfilled in the first century it would no longer be a mystery as to what it was. IOW, every single person that agrees it was fulfilled in the first century, they would all be on the same page, thus be in 100% agreement with each other as to what it was. But instead, they have turned it into a multiple choice circus.

Maybe it means what interpreter A) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter B) insists it means? Or maybe it means what interpreter C) insists it means? So on and so on. That really makes sense, that if the AOD was fulfilled 2000 years ago, there are still all these different theories as to what it was. And that the rest of us are expected to figure out which theory seems the most convincing.

Those are examples of red flags, not examples of something having already been fulfilled, except not everyone who insists it has already been fulfilled can even agree with each other as to what it was. Why not? It's not like it could still be a mystery as to what the AOD was if it has already been fulfilled.

 

[Davy]

Sure but Acts 1 only says that a cloud hid Him not that He went up on a cloud.

I don't know where in the world you that above idea about Jesus when He ASCENDED to Heaven per Acts 1, but He literally... DID ASCEND to Heaven in a cloud, and His disciples present with Him there at the Mount of Olives saw Him ascend...

Acts 1:9-10
9 And when He had spoken these things, while they beheld, He was taken up; and a cloud received Him out of their sight.
10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
KJV

My point was that Daviel 7:13-14 happened when He went back up to heaven in Acts chapter 1.

Sorry, but your point is not Biblical.
The Daniel 7:13-14 Scripture is about Jesus' FUTURE RETURN of Revelation 1:7 and Revelation 19:11-21.

Daniel 7:13-14 also aligns with Daniel 2:34-35 and Daniel 2:44. And Daniel 2:44 about the "days of these kings" when God sets His Kingdom up is linked to the time of the "ten kings" of Revelation 17:12-14 at the very end of this present world, which is still yet future to us. And those verses are only a few like them that link that kingdom being setup by Christ in final at his FUTURE 2ND COMING which is still future to us.

Coming on the clouds or a day of clouds in actually a symbolic sign of judgement

NO, it is not symbolic. The cloud Jesus ascended into... Heaven in view of His disciples was a real cloud. Likewise the cloud Jesus returns with also will be a literal cloud.

Stephen Spielberg tried to simulate the idea of that cloud in his movie Close Encounters of The Third Kind when the alien spaceship came in towards the end of the movie. Who knows, that might be a fairly close speculation Spielberg did. (I'm not saying God is an alien, or any such idea as that.)

God's Presence on earth manifesting per The Old Testament is often associated with a cloud...

Isa 19:1
19 The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at His presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.
KJV

Ex 13:21
21 And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:
KJV

 

[Davy]

No it isn't. And we should know this, including you, based on the following clues. That is if there is actually any sleuth abilities in you, so to speak. IOW, we have to be like sleuths sometimes if we expect to interpret something correctly.

I get your "sleuth" meaning, but I wouldn't use that term. I'd use something like detective, or powers of deduction, which actually is still not the way to understand this matter in God's written Word.

So let's start with the following.

Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

We know Jesus is ascending here. No one disputes that. And take note that it is involving a cloud. A literal cloud, though? Highly unlikely, the fact the text says the cloud received Him. Since when and how do literal clouds receive someone? Obviously then, angels are likely meant here, not literal clouds.

Yes, a LITERAL CLOUD, in the sky above the earth. Or do you have a problem understanding what a 'cloud' in God's creation is? Apparently you do not understand that.

And your inference above about angels suggests you are saying Jesus is an angel, which He is not. (see Book of Hebrews).

God used a LITERAL CLOUD to guide the Israelites in the wilderness per Old Testament history, and I believe it as written.

But your inferring that can't be how it is meant is only showing your DOUBTING of how God uses His creation as written in His Word, and even how God made His creation.

You instead are trying to compare your flesh existence to try and understand Jesus' ascent to Heaven upon a cloud per Acts 1.

Do you not understand there are TWO separate 'heaven' ideas mentioned in God's Word, each in a different dimension of existence? Or do you use your fleshy carnal mind with wrongly thinking God's Heavenly abode is up in the literal sky atmosphere around the earth like many deceived Jews believe?


God's Word teaches about ONLY TWO different dimensions of existence, this earthly dimension we are in, and then the heavenly dimension of Spirit where God and the angels dwell. That dimension of Spirit is NOT... up in the literal cloud sky atmosphere around the earth. Instead it exists behind a veil that we cannot see, unless God allows us to see it, like He did with Isaiah, Ezekiel, Apostles Paul and John.

What you apparently have little clue about, is that on the day of Christ's future return on the "day of the Lord", that veil is going to be removed for all... peoples. This was even hinted at in the Old Testament prophecy in Isaiah 25 where Apostle Paul pulled from about death being swallowed up in victory. The Heavenly dimension is going to be revealed right here, ON EARTH, when Jesus returns. Both this earthly dimension and that Heavenly dimension will be joined together, just as it was before prior to Satan's original rebellion and fall.

Thus what 1 Thess.4:16-17 is showing with Jesus' future DESCENT back to this earth IN A CLOUD, happens once He comes out of the Heavenly dimension of Spirit, and into our earthly cloud atmosphere on His way to the Mount of Olives at Jerusalem. And Apostle Paul taught that at Jesus' resurrection His body was made a "quickening spirit", which means of that Heavenly dimension order, and not our flesh order. The type body of the world to come is the "spiritual body" Paul taught; looks like flesh, feels like flesh, can eat earthly food and live upon this earth, but is not real flesh, but is made of Spirit and cannot perish unless only God Himself causes it to be destroyed.

So yeah, Jesus will return upon a LITERAL CLOUD in the earth's sky atmosphere, which is how He also ascended into Heaven per Acts 1. You simply have yet to understand the difference between the two separate dimensions shown in God's Word.

(For those who might be thinking about 2 Cor.12 where Paul mentioned the third heaven. Nowhere in God's Word does it ever mention the creation of more than 2 heavens. The Genesis 1:1 verse when God created the Heaven and the earth, the Hebrew for KJV "Heaven" is actually plural. It's because the 'sky' atmosphere around the earth is also called a heaven. When Apostle Paul said he was caught up to the "third heaven", he was actually referring to the future 3rd world earth age that will take place once Satan, death, hell, and the wicked are all destroyed. The idea of multiple dimensions in Heaven is actually an idea from eastern pagan religions.)

 

[Earburner]

Once again, IMO, no way can Daniel 7:22 not be involving Christ's bodily return in the end of this age. And the reason is simple. There is no coming during the past 2000 years that can explain this coming--- I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came(Daniel 7:21-12). Obviously meaning this coming puts a stop to this war being made with the saints once and for all. Admittedly though, Premil appears to maybe contradict this when they insist there is another battle against the saints after the thousand years. That's a fair point. I get it. But still how can Daniel 7:22 not involve the bodily return of Christ in the end of this age. And how can Daniel 7:22 not equal Revelation 20:4?

To understand what I have been saying (post 113 and 116), I suggest that you entertain the truthful view of all the three "comings" of Christ:
1. Past- In mortal flesh.
2. Present- By His Holy Spirit.
3. Future- In flaming fire of Immortality.
Church-ianity has been very neglectful about #2.

In Rev., one must understand that the Eternal mind of God is not always speaking about the far future. For anyone to believe that He is, they are allowing themselves to be indoctrinated by a force of mind that is not "the Mind of Christ".
1 Cor. 2:5-16
[5] That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men [Church-ianity], but in the power [Holy Spirit] of God.