The "watch rapture view"

[TribulationSigns]

He doesn't believe that there was a Judaean Church that God preserved.

Do you consider that to be truth?

That’s a lie—and a blatant misrepresentation of what I actually said.

I never denied that there were churches in Judea that God preserved. What I did challenge is the false idea of some distinct theological category called “the Judaean Church” as if it were a separate class within the Body of Christ to built your flawed preterism doctrine upon. Paul mentions “churches in Judea” (Galatians 1:22) just as he mentions churches in Galatia, Macedonia, etc. Those are regional congregations—not separate doctrinal entities.

What I said—and still say—is this: there is one true Church, made up of ALL the elect, from every region, nation, and generation. That includes the faithful in Judea, but it is not limited to them, nor elevated into some separate status like your so-called “Judaean Church.”

So stop twisting my words. If you want to debate doctrine, do it with honesty and integrity—not by misrepresenting what I never said. Bearing false witness doesn't strengthen your argument—it just exposes the weakness of it. No wonder your credibility is falling apart here.

 

[Zao is life]

@Davidpt I asked ChaptGPT this question:

Daniel 9:26 is associated by Christian scholars with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple of God in Jerusalem by Roman armies in A.D70, but the idol in the Old Testament temple placed by Antiochus IV Epiphanes is not associated with the destruction of either Jerusalem or the temple in Jerusalem. Which of the two is more likely to be identified with an abomination of desolation (singular) in the holy place of the Old Testament temple?

Great question — you're engaging with a complex and much-debated issue in biblical prophecy interpretation!

Let’s break it down carefully:

Daniel 9:26 and the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70)
Daniel 9:26 says:

"And after the sixty-two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

Many Christian scholars, especially in traditional and dispensational interpretations, link this to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Romans in A.D. 70. In this view:

The “prince that shall come” refers to the Roman leader (often seen as Titus, or a type of antichrist figure).

The destruction is seen as a fulfillment of the "desolations" decreed.

But note: While this passage speaks of destruction and desolations, it doesn’t explicitly use the phrase abomination of desolation in v.26.

Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the abomination of desolation
Antiochus IV Epiphanes (2nd century B.C.), during the time of the Maccabees:

Set up an altar (or possibly a statue) to Zeus in the Jerusalem temple.

Sacrificed pigs on the altar (an abomination in Jewish law).

Stopped the regular temple sacrifices (Dan. 11:31, 8:11–13).

This event is directly called an "abomination" in Daniel 11:31:

"And forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate."

Which is more directly linked to the singular 'abomination of desolation' in the Old Testament temple?
Antiochus IV's action is the clearer match:

The event happened within the temple while it was still standing and functional.

It involved placing something idolatrous in the holy place — a direct desecration.

The terminology of abomination that makes desolate is explicitly used in connection with this act (Daniel 11:31, Daniel 8:13).

⚠ A.D. 70 destruction:

The temple was destroyed and the city devastated.

But there’s no historical record of a single specific idolatrous object or image being set up in the holy place right before or during its destruction.

The desolation came through destruction rather than through an idol standing in the holy place.

Summary
➡ Antiochus IV Epiphanes' action is more likely to be identified with the singular "abomination of desolation" in the holy place of the Old Testament temple, because:

It involved a specific defiling object or action within the temple.

The text of Daniel connects the phrase to his act explicitly.

The Roman destruction, while desolating, does not match as closely the image of an abomination set up in the holy place before the desolation.

This is what wikipedia says:

=================================​

"'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)

=================================
​

And the things that ChatGPT has said in the last 4 posts I made is what I have been saying all along myself.​

 

[TribulationSigns]

And the things that ChatGPT has said in the last 4 posts I made is what I have been saying all along myself.

Beware...

Just because ChatGPT repeated something you agree with doesn’t make it Truth. AI—including ChatGPT—is not the arbiter of truth. It pulls from a wide range of sources, including those steeped in false doctrine. It doesn’t speak by the Spirit of God, nor does it provide divine interpretation of Scripture. Truth comes from God’s Word rightly divided, not from algorithms echoing popular opinion out there on the Internet. So let’s not pretend AI is some kind of theological authority—it’s not.

 

[Zao is life]

@Davidpt I asked ChatGPT this question - and the answer is straight out of @Spiritual Israelite 's book of eschatological confusion. In other words, it disagrees with both you and me:

Is Jesus' mention of an abomination of desolation in the holy place in Matthew 24:15 more likely to be associated with the abomination of desolation placed in the holy place by Antiochus IV Epiphanes which did not result in the destruction of the temple or city, or with the abominations mentioned in Daniel 9:27?

Excellent and thoughtful question — let’s break it down carefully, as you’re probing a key point in interpreting Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:15.

Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:15
"So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains."

Important features of what Jesus says:

He refers to a future visible event (“when you see…”).

He cites Daniel as the source — not a generic tradition.

He links it to a crisis that requires fleeing Judea.

✡ Which Daniel passage is Jesus referencing?
Daniel 11:31 – Antiochus IV Epiphanes
This speaks of Antiochus profaning the temple with an abomination (altar to Zeus, pagan sacrifice).

It didn’t destroy the temple or the city.

Jewish forces (the Maccabees) eventually restored the temple.

While Antiochus’ actions are the first and clearest historical fulfillment of “abomination of desolation” language, Jesus speaks of something future from his point of view (Antiochus’ desecration was ~200 years earlier).

Daniel 9:27
"And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator."

This speaks of abominations connected to desolation — with the city and sanctuary ultimately destroyed (9:26).

The context (9:26–27) points to destruction rather than just temporary defilement.

This passage seems to match a final crisis tied to desolation of city + sanctuary.

Jesus’ reference aligns more naturally with Daniel 9:27, because:

He warns of a catastrophic event requiring flight (fulfilled in part in A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem).

The abomination triggers not just defilement but widespread desolation (as in Daniel 9:27).

Summary of association
➡ Jesus’ abomination of desolation in Matthew 24:15 is more likely associated with the abominations of Daniel 9:27 rather than with Antiochus IV’s act (Daniel 11:31).

Here’s why:

Jesus places the abomination in the future relative to his audience.

The event leads to destruction and desolation, matching Daniel 9:27 better than Daniel 11:31.

Daniel 11:31 refers to Antiochus’ historical act, which was already past at Jesus’ time.

However, it’s important to note that many scholars (especially those who see patterns of prophetic fulfillment) believe Jesus may have drawn on the type or pattern of Antiochus' desecration (Daniel 11:31) to describe a future, greater abomination that would lead to destruction — as prophesied in Daniel 9:27.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice how the part I changed to red above associates the destruction of the temple and Daniel 9:27 with Matthew 24:15, and hence associates Daniel 9:27 and AD70 with the AoD in the holy place.

That's the mistake they all make - but Matthew 24:15 has nothing to do with AD70 and Daniel 9:27 because Matthew 24:15 is talking only about the future AoD of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, which scripture associates only with A4E and the AoD he placed in the holy place of the 2nd temple.

 

[covenantee]

What I did challenge is the false idea of some distinct theological category called “the Judaean Church” as if it were a separate class within the Body of Christ to built your flawed preterism doctrine upon.

What you did challenge was entirely a product of your warped psychotic imagination. What "distinct theological category" did you think the Judaean Church could have represented? That is beyond risible.

Since you obviously flunked kindergarten English, I wish to inform you that "the Church in Judaean" is the same as the "the Judaean Church".

But I'm confident that you don't and won't understand that either.

 

[Zao is life]

Beware...

Just because ChatGPT repeated something you agree with doesn’t make it Truth. AI—including ChatGPT—is not the arbiter of truth. It pulls from a wide range of sources, including those steeped in false doctrine. It doesn’t speak by the Spirit of God, nor does it provide divine interpretation of Scripture. Truth comes from God’s Word rightly divided, not from algorithms echoing popular opinion out there on the Internet. So let’s not pretend AI is some kind of theological authority—it’s not.

I just posted another one where it disagrees with my view.

I'm not bothered about ChatGPT. I'm only doing this because @Davidpt seems to think my view regarding the AoD of A4E being one of the biblical types of 2 Thess 2:4 and Matt 24:15 is wrong and he used ChatGPT to show me that AI agrees with his answer.

So I showed him that ChatGPT agrees with my answer and proved to him that the way you word your question is probably going to get you the answer you want.

My own understanding comes through prayerful study of the scriptures and reliance on the Holy Spirit yet it disagrees with yours so let's not go into who has 'spiritual discernment' and all this about ChatGPT please. You're not talking to first graders who need to understand your 'deeper wisdom' regarding things like relying on AI for reliable answers to every question.

PS: Nor does your own mind get what the Holy Spirit is teaching us any less fuddled in certain respects than the average Christian's does, despite the fact that you keep implying that you have more 'spiritual discernment' and are less 'carnal' in your thinking every time someone disagrees with you (you would have a lot more humility in your own mind about the depth of your own understanding, considering it a lot less highly than you do if you yourself were not carnal in your thinking).

 

[David in NJ]

What you did challenge was entirely a product of your warped psychotic imagination. What "distinct theological category" did you think the Judaean Church could have represented? That is beyond risible.

Since you obviously flunked kindergarten English, I wish to inform you that "the Church in Judaean" is the same as the "the Judaean Church".

But I'm confident that you don't and won't understand that either.

@TribulationSigns

Did you guy's sort this out???
Because i see Truth on both sides here and was wondering if we could combine that which is TRUTH and put aside any misconceptions.

We should easily AGREE that the Body of Christ is One Body with many members and those many members are scattered across the earth and called "local assemblies" or local churches.

 

[Douggg]

Summary of association
➡ Jesus’ abomination of desolation in Matthew 24:15 is more likely associated with the abominations of Daniel 9:27 rather than with Antiochus IV’s act (Daniel 11:31).

Hi Zao is life,

Antiochus's troops placed a statue image of Zeus in the temple. The statue image was a preview of what the Matthew 24:15 abomination of desolation will be - a statue image.

But there is a big difference in the Matthew 24:15 abomination of desolation with anything done in the past. The statue image that the false prophet has made in Revelation 13:14-15, although at first inanimate, will come to life and speak.

It will come to life and speak because Satan will indwell it. The reason of knowing this is that in Ezekiel 28:16-19, it prophesies the end of Satan's power and his being exposed to the kings of the earth and all present that day. The day that Jesus returns.

Ezekiel 28:19 says Satan will be a terror in those days, but will be a terror no more.

Ezekiel 28:19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

 

[covenantee]

@TribulationSigns

Did you guy's sort this out???
Because i see Truth on both sides here and was wondering if we could combine that which is TRUTH and put aside any misconceptions.

We should easily AGREE that the Body of Christ is One Body with many members and those many members are scattered across the earth and called "local assemblies" or local churches.

There's no truth to be found in any attempt to allege that "Judaean Church" is a "regional nickname invented to prop up a false preterist narrative".

That is nothing other than a fallacious figment of a diseased imagination.

 

[David in NJ]

There's no truth to be found in any attempt to allege that "Judaean Church" is a "regional nickname invented to prop up a false preterist narrative".

That is nothing other than a figment of a diseased imagination.

i do not understand the significance of the "Judean church/church at Judea"

 

[covenantee]

i do not understand the significance of the "Judean church/church at Judea"

The Judaean Church was the group of Judean Christians who fled in response to Jesus' warning in Matthew 24:16, and survived the Roman assault on Jerusalem and Judaea.

TS denigrates it because it was a literal event which doesn't fit his psychotic hyperspiritualized gnostic perspective.

 

[David in NJ]

The Judaean Church was the group of Judean Christians who fled in response to Jesus' warning in Matthew 24:16, and survived the Roman assault on Jerusalem and Judaea.

TS dismisses it because it was a literal event which doesn't fit his hyperspiritualized gnostic perspective.

Thank You

Now this has nothing to do with being separate from the Body of Christ, as in a special group that is distinguished from the Body of Christ.

 

[The Light]

Even if that means watching for something that is not even Biblical, a Pretrib rapture in this case, @Douggg view? Christ only comes back one time. An alleged Pretrib rapture does not equal that 'one time'. In the meantime while one is still watching for this Pretrib rapture Matthew 24:21 might already be in progress.

You cannot prove that the pretribulation rapture is not Biblical. However, we can easily prove that your contention that Jesus comes back only once is incorrect. How do you explain Jesus coming to earth and redeeming the 144,000 from the earth as first fruits?

Revelation 14
1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

 

[David in NJ]

You cannot prove that the pretribulation rapture is not Biblical. However, we can easily prove that your contention that Jesus comes back only once is incorrect. How do you explain Jesus coming to earth and redeeming the 144,000 from the earth as first fruits?

Revelation 14
1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

You cannot prove that the pretribulation rapture is not Biblical. However, we can easily prove that your contention that Jesus comes back only once is incorrect.

This is LOL x10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

 

[The Light]

This is LOL x10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

I noticed how quickly you ran off with no proof. That's always the case, as there is no proof. However, there is proof that the Lord comes more than once.