The Great Tribulation

[Trekson]

Hi Rae, Your words: "The anointing of the most Holy (capital H, by the way) refers to the temple in heaven, not the temple on earth. This is a common error amongst Christians, which is why many continually look to Jews and to Jerusalem, instead of at the Christians and the Heavenly Temple. A very clear truth is opened up to us in Revelation -- that there is a temple in heaven."

I agree except for the anointing part. There is no doubt in my mind that the temple in heaven was anointed way before Moses set up the first temporary tabernacle. As such, it is a stretch to believe the temple was anointed after Christ was resurrected. It is my opinion that of all the various prophecies listed in this passage, Christ fulfilled two of them: "to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness".

The abomination of desolation isn't Rome. All the prophecies point to a single individual. The actual a of d is the image of the a/c that is erected.
Rev. 13:14 - "And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live."

Somehow, I don't think pinning a map of Rome on the wall will fulfill this prophecy.

History has a way of repeating itself and seeing as it is prophecied that Jerusalem will suffer destruction again... Rev. 11:13 - "And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven."...I still believe the fulfillment has not yet occurred.

The only thing 70 ad accomplished was to put an end to the grace period for the Jews culminating in the end of justification by the law. Sorry, but, imo, historicism is the wrong way to go when trying to interpret prophecy.

 

[Raeneske]

Hi Rae, Your words: "The anointing of the most Holy (capital H, by the way) refers to the temple in heaven, not the temple on earth. This is a common error amongst Christians, which is why many continually look to Jews and to Jerusalem, instead of at the Christians and the Heavenly Temple. A very clear truth is opened up to us in Revelation -- that there is a temple in heaven."

I agree except for the anointing part. There is no doubt in my mind that the temple in heaven was anointed way before Moses set up the first temporary tabernacle. As such, it is a stretch to believe the temple was anointed after Christ was resurrected. It is my opinion that of all the various prophecies listed in this passage, Christ fulfilled two of them: "to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness".

The abomination of desolation isn't Rome. All the prophecies point to a single individual. The actual a of d is the image of the a/c that is erected.
Rev. 13:14 - "And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live."

Somehow, I don't think pinning a map of Rome on the wall will fulfill this prophecy.

History has a way of repeating itself and seeing as it is prophecied that Jerusalem will suffer destruction again... Rev. 11:13 - "And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven."...I still believe the fulfillment has not yet occurred.

The only thing 70 ad accomplished was to put an end to the grace period for the Jews culminating in the end of justification by the law. Sorry, but, imo, historicism is the wrong way to go when trying to interpret prophecy.

Trekson,

You stated that you believe that the anointing was done way before Moses set up the first temporary tabernacle. But the example we're given does not demonstrate the anointing of the temple before the covenant is ratified. The Old Covenant was ratified by the sprinkling of the blood of the oxen, and in the NT the New Covenant is ratified with the sprinkling of the Saviour's blood for us upon the cross. After the covenant was ratified, the temple was anointed for the ministry of the earthly priests to be done in the most holy place. After the Great Sacrifice upon the cross, the ratifying of the New Covenant, the temple in Heaven was anointed, and Jesus began His work for us in the Holy Place.

You seem to agree that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in 70 A.D. This is shown by your comment of history repeating itself. But you're not making the connection that the abomination of desolation is Rome. All three passages talk of the exact same event.

Matthew 24:15-16 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:

Mark 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

That is referring to 70 A.D. The account in Luke opens up the understanding to us more.

Luke 21:20-21 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.

The abomination of desolation is indeed Rome. They are the ones that were prophesied to come and destroy Jerusalem. These passages are foretelling the same event. Millions of Christians understood this to be the very sign that Christ warned them of, hence they fled Judea, and not a single Christian died in that slaughter. If this understanding, which is indeed part of Historicism, is incorrect, then these Christians must have just been lucky about fleeing Jerusalem because of the warning in Matthew 24 and other passages. This of course, was not a lucky guess, but an understanding of Bible Prophecy that they had, which is why they knew when to flee Jerusalem. They saw the abomination of desolation, Rome, standing in the holy place. They saw the armies of the abomination of desolation surrounding Jerusalem to make the place desolate. So they fled from Jerusalem as per Christ's warning.

As for Revelation 13:14, no a map of Rome won't fulfill that prophecy, that is not what I am saying. An image does not have to be a picture of something, or even a stone, wooden, etc replica image of something. Something made in the image of something else simply means to be like that thing. We are made in the image of God. Christ is the express image of God. We are changed from glory to glory in the same image as Christ, or if we desire, degradation to degradation into the image of Satan. The old covenant law was a shadow, an not the exact image of things to come.

The image of the beast is an image of a kingdom, that is, to be made like a certain kingdom. Beast by Biblical definition (following 2 Peter 1:20 & Isaiah 28:9-10 rules) is a kingdom. This we can find in Daniel 7:17 & Daniel 7:23. The image of the beast is a replica of the kingdom, not a physical image to be set up for worship. The image of the beast is the replication of one kingdom copying another kingdom. When the image of the beast is made, the lamb horned beast will form an image to the type of government of the first beast. How then will people worship the beast and his image if it's not a physical image to bow down before? By simply paying homage to their rules, and regulations over and above the Law of the Creator God. A man can call himself a Christian all he wants, but if he is bowing down to the demands of Satan, and not God, we know who his god is. We know whom his father truly is, and we know whom he truly worships. He worships the god of dung, Beelzebub.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Rae, Your words: “You stated that you believe that the anointing was done way before Moses set up the first temporary tabernacle.”

I was speaking of the heavenly temple.

Your words: “After the Great Sacrifice upon the cross, the ratifying of the New Covenant, the temple in Heaven was anointed, and Jesus began His work for us in the Holy Place.”

Seeing as the heavenly temple is home to the Godhead, why would it need anointing? If it did, it was most likely anointed before creation.

Your words: “You seem to agree that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in 70 A.D. This is shown by your comment of history repeating itself. But you're not making the connection that the abomination of desolation is Rome. All three passages talk of the exact same event.”

Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed back in the days of Antiochus Eppiphanes. Do I agree that the three gospels are speaking of the same event? Yes I do. However, I disagree that the event was 70 AD and as I showed there is a future destruction coming.

Your words: “The abomination of desolation is indeed Rome. They are the ones that were prophesied to come and destroy Jerusalem. These passages are foretelling the same event. Millions of Christians understood this to be the very sign that Christ warned them of, hence they fled Judea, and not a single Christian died in that slaughter. If this understanding, which is indeed part of Historicism, is incorrect, then these Christians must have just been lucky about fleeing Jerusalem because of the warning in Matthew 24 and other passages. This of course, was not a lucky guess, but an understanding of Bible Prophecy that they had, which is why they knew when to flee Jerusalem. They saw the abomination of desolation, Rome, standing in the holy place. They saw the armies of the abomination of desolation surrounding Jerusalem to make the place desolate. So they fled from Jerusalem as per Christ's warning.”

This sounds like a little bit of preterist revisionism. Remember that prophecies of God are 100% accurate. Close, doesn’t count. According to various resources, Jerusalem had a population of around 60,000 in 70 AD. Most of the believers had relocated to Antioch before the siege by Rome had begun. Did the HS warn them? Probably, but by the gospel accounts? No way!

Your use of “millions of Christians” is highly exaggerated, there probably wasn’t that many believers in the whole world at the time, let alone in Jerusalem! Titus allowed about 500,000 Jewish Passover celebrants into Jerusalem but refused to let them out. That is why the death toll was abnormally high.

What was the warning given in the gospels? Matthew 24:15-16 “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:”

70 AD doesn’t qualify for several reasons.

1. Most of the Christians had fled before Rome even got there because Jerusalem had become an evil city and an army camped outside the walls does not equal “the holy place”. The holy place referenced is the Holy of Holies in the innermost room of the temple. That is the only thing that qualifies for the prophecy to be accurate.
2. The prophecy says when you “see it in the holy place, then flee” (paraphrased), NOT flee first and then you will see the a of d. No one was around by all accounts to see if an abomination of desolation occurred in 70 AD.
3. Since at Christ’s crucifixion, the temple veil was torn asunder, the believers didn’t recognize the temple as the Holy of Holies anymore. In the future fulfillment, it still won't be specifically the "holy place" but the Jews will consider it so and as the fulfillment will most likely be during the Time of Jacob, God, imo, uses this reference to reach what will become the Jewish remnant.
4. Titus did not do all that the a/c is prophesied to do thus eliminating any scriptures from Revelation to this fulfillment plus Rev. was written about 20-25 yrs. after 70 AD.

Your words: “The image of the beast is an image of a kingdom, that is, to be made like a certain kingdom.”

Sorry, but for the prophetic accounts of the actual time when this occurs, it is not speaking of a nation but of an individual. The man of sin, not the nation of sin, the lawless one, not the lawless nation. Remember 100% accuracy.