Timing of the abomination of desolation

[Truth7t7]

No, the 7th Trumpet sounds.

Then we have chapters 12 and 13. They interrupt the 7th Trumpet. Just like Daniel 9:27 is interrupted in the midst of a week. That week is the days of the 7th Trumpet. Revelation 10:7 happens before Satan and the FP are mentioned.

Yes all things should be finished. Unfortunately they are put on hold for 42 months. The midst of the week is interrupted. That is why there is an AoD set up. This is after the final harvest. Satan's 42 months is not the final harvest, nor does it lead to the final harvest. The AoD causes the week not to end, but keeps abomination and desolation going for another 42 months. Jesus does not do those things in verse 27. Jesus leaves for Mount Zion, and Satan is given full authority to do those things for 42 months. There is not a battle nor a struggle.

Jesus confirms the Atonement Covenant with the many. There are found souls still named in the Lamb's book of life. These will have to physically die by being beheaded to remain in the Lamb's book of life. That is why it is stated that they are overcome. They have to go through the valley of the shadow of death via being beheaded.

We Disagree, Horse Is Dead

 

[ewq1938]

You're rude and wrong, and incorrigible. Preterists do not merely believe the AoD was the 70 AD event--they also believe the book of Revelation was fulfilled in the Early Church.

Not all PP believe that. You have some PP beliefs and some futurist beliefs. When you express the PP beliefs, you are rightly called a PP ( or preterist for short). A true and full futurist believes all of the Olivet Discourse is yet future so you are not a full futurist. You are a partial futurist and a partial preterist.

 

[Truth7t7]

Not all PP believe that. You have some PP beliefs and some futurist beliefs. When you express the PP beliefs, you are rightly called a PP ( or preterist for short). A true and full futurist believes all of the Olivet Discourse is yet future so you are not a full futurist. You are a partial futurist and a partial preterist.

Correct, his teaching that Matthew 24:15 in Daniel's AOD was fulfilled in 70AD puts him in the partial preterist camp alone

 

[ewq1938]

I know exactly what the definition of a preterist is, you openly teach of 70AD fulfillment concerning events that are future and unfulfilled

Once again, I'm futurist in my eschatology, your preterist, it's that simple

From different threads:

I'm certainly not a Partial Preterist. I may be a hybrid between Partial Preterist and Futurist, if you like?

Hey, at least you're reasonable, unlike a couple others here who resort to name-calling. Instead of arguing the point they identify me as a Preterist. I actually have a position that is somewhat unique--though I don't really like unique interpretations. But the ebb and flow of Israeli history has made it difficult to pin down what Jesus was saying in his Olivet Discourse. My view is that there will be a future Great Tribulation, the 3.5 years reign of Antichrist. And there will be a future restoration of Israel, after Christ returns. This is a future interpretation of the book of Revelation.

But the Olivet Discourse is for me a very different animal. Jesus was pinpointing his own generation as suffering something prior to the coming of the Kingdom. It is very significant because it bridges Israel in the OT with the Church in the NT. What happened in that 1st generation after Christ that transitions between Israel and the Church? Is it Dispensationalism or Preterism? I don't believe it is either, but part of both.

Like I said, if you want to call me a hybrid between Preterism and Futurism that's fine by me.

You may choose to go on calling me a Partial Preterist. If so, I will grant you that right.

 

[Truth7t7]

From different threads:

That's exactly what his belief is, partially preterist, he teaches that Matthew 24:15 in Daniel's AOD took place in fulfillment in 70AD, when Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem, 100% preterist

If you teach partial preterism, your a preterist in your escgatology, it's that simple

Im a futurist, The AOD, Great Tribulation, And Second Coming are future events unfulfilled

 

[Keraz]

It isn’t very pleasant to think that the Lord can control our thinking. It brings free will into question, but who are we? He is the Creator.

Someone made the comment that it seems as though God is playing something like a video game; setting up situations and watching the outcomes.

But of course, God cannot give the game away, all the non-Christian peoples must not know His plans and even with the so called Christians, it is estimated that there may be only 2% who are honestly faithful. The other 98% follow false doctrines and cults or just simply warm a pew for an hour or so per week, the rest of the time they lie about anything, steal if the opportunity offers, commit adultery, etc, etc.

So what can we do? At least, if you belong to this forum you are making an effort to gain understanding of the end times. However, everywhere around us, ideas and theories are put forward that have no sound scriptural basis. Outdated and biased translations are a serious handicap. One example is in Luke 21:36; ‘escape all these things’, more correctly translated is; ‘to pass safely through all that is to come’, so as not to be a contradiction of verse 35.

Of course belief in God and the Lord Jesus, true repentance of sins and fervent prayers are essential to become right with God.

From my studies of prophecy, I firmly believe that very soon there will be an event of a similar magnitude to the great flood of Noah’s time. This time, most of the world’s population will survive. To be among the survivors we must heed the warnings, be aware of what will happen and be prepared for it. But our main hope is to have absolute trust in the Lord’s salvation and His promises of protection. Isaiah 30:15, Isaiah 41:15, Zechariah 9:15-16, 1 Peter 1:21, +

 

[Timtofly]

But if you want to have an adult conversation, I can do that too. Your choice. I've assumed you're a brother. But sometimes it's hard to tell.

No, all I have done is point out the AoD is set up after the Second Coming and subjugates all mankind for 42 months with utter abomination and desolation.

So much so that in order to avoid the mark, one must remove their head from their body.

You limit and negate setting up the AoD to the past. And one single army, not even every Roman army.

Setting up an AoD is the total opposite of an army overturning huge stones. "Tearing down" is literally the opposite of "setting up".

I am surprised you do not think Revelation 13 describes setting up an AoD.

Instead you use Luke and an event in 66AD to avoid a future AoD as described in Revelation 13. I notice you do not mention a future AoD once. Are you saying a current generation will never see an AoD, only the GT and a Second Coming? Are you claiming one generation does not see all, but Jesus' Words are meaningless:

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

Are you saying they will not see an AoD even though Jesus clearly said they would see all these things fulfilled? Why would you remove the AoD from the list?

 

[Timtofly]

The Early Church Fathers and the Last Days of the Jewish Age.

This is a horrible outline. He provided only one quote related to your argument, and interjected his own opinion instead of their arguments.

So Tertullian is as close as he could muster:

TERTULLIAN
In 203 AD Tertullian wrote his famous treatise Against The Jews. This early Church father also taught that Daniel’s 70th week had been fulfilled in 70 AD: “Vespasian vanquished the Jews…and so by the date of his storming Jerusalem, the Jews had completed the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel” (AAJ, VII; CID)."

Turtullian got his historical account wrong. Vespasian did not carry out 70AD. Titus did. Now for argument sake, back in 200AD, he was right and the father went by Titus and the son went by Vespasian. Tertullian was still wrong. Nor did he even give a firm date, nor did he even say Jerusalem experienced an AoD in 70AD. Turtullian just said the date of Vespasian storming Jerusalem.

In fact he would be considered a full preterist as the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, and not future. For making a fuss over denying you are associated in any way, not even 1%, why take the word of a person who could be taken as 100% preterist to prove your point?

How can the 70 weeks be fulfilled in 70AD without huge gaps in the timeline? Certainly not even Preterist would say that. They would end the 70 weeks within years of the Cross, not 40 years later. This is not even a strong argument for preterism, much less an AoD.

Now you are taking a weak view of an interpretation of Daniel's 70th week and declaring an AoD. Obviously Jerusalem is still not a desolation nor abomination. You cannot even give any lengths of your supposed AoD that was set up. How long did it's being set up affect those living around Jerusalem? Are we currently living in the Millennium then? The end of the 70 weeks ushers in the Millennium. Those 6 promises describe the Millennium experience.

Still waiting for a quote from an early church father declaring an AoD in 70AD. Not a modern human's opinion of the early church fathers.

 

[Timtofly]

Josephus wasn't a church father, he was a traitor to his Jewish people, he left his military command in Israel, and joined the enemy in Rome, being their propaganda minister, being rewarded with a Roman palace, women, and monies for his service to the Roman Emperor

Your 100% correct, no early church fathers Justin Martyr, Iranaeus, Hippolytus, even mentioned 70AD, let alone claimed it was fulfillment of Matthew 24

The Jesuit Roman catholic was the inventor of the preterist teaching as seen below

Wikipedia: Preterism
Historically, preterists and non-preterists have generally agreed that the Jesuit Luis de Alcasar (1554–1613) wrote the first systematic preterist exposition of prophecy Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi, published during the Counter-Reformation.

The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, which is a prefix denoting that something is "past" or "beyond". Adherents of preterism are known as preterists. Preterism teaches that either all (full preterism) or a majority (partial preterism) of the Olivet discourse had come to pass by AD 70.

Interpretation of the Great Tribulation

In the preterist view, the Tribulation took place in the past when Roman legions destroyed Jerusalem and its temple in AD 70 during the end stages of the First Jewish–Roman War, and it affected only the Jewish people rather than all mankind.

Christian preterists believe that the Tribulation was a divine judgment visited upon the Jews for their sins, including rejection of Jesus as the promised Messiah. It occurred entirely in the past, around 70 AD when the armed forces of the Roman Empire destroyed Jerusalem and its temple.

A preterist discussion of the Tribulation has its focus on the Gospels, in particular the prophetic passages in Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, and the Olivet discourse, rather than on the Book of Revelation. Most preterists apply much of the symbolism in Revelation to Rome, the Caesars, and their persecution of Christians, rather than to the Tribulation upon the Jews.

Jesus' warning in Matthew 24:34 that "this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" is tied back to his similar warning to the scribes and the Pharisees that their judgment would "come upon this generation", that is, during the first century rather than at a future time long after the scribes and Pharisees had passed away. The destruction in AD 70 occurred within a 40-year generation from the time when Jesus gave that discourse.

The judgment on the Jewish nation was executed by the Roman legions, "the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet." This can also be found in Luke 21:20.

Since Matthew 24 begins with Jesus visiting the Jerusalem Temple and pronouncing that "there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" (vs. 3), preterists see nothing in scripture to indicate that another Jewish temple will ever be built. The prophecies were all fulfilled against the temple of that time, which was subsequently destroyed within that generation.

Your point?

 

[covenantee]

Now more childish rhetoric. You don't even seem to be able to make your own case known.

All you can do is call humans pointless names and or labels.

It would seem throwing around accusations is easier than defending one's own position.

I "own" nothing. The Word of God is the Owner.

I simply relay what it says.

Unlike df, which insists on imposing its own deceptions and delusions.

To accompany its fantasies and fallacies.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Not all PP believe that. You have some PP beliefs and some futurist beliefs. When you express the PP beliefs, you are rightly called a PP ( or preterist for short). A true and full futurist believes all of the Olivet Discourse is yet future so you are not a full futurist. You are a partial futurist and a partial preterist.

No, I'm a Partial Futurist perhaps--certainly not a Partial Preterist! Another immature name-caller you are.

 

[covenantee]

Strong’s Definitions
כָּלָה kâlâh, kaw-law'; from H3615; a completion; adverb, completely; also destruction:—altogether, (be, utterly) consume(-d), consummation(-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance.

Strong's Concordance
kalah: completion, complete destruction, consumption, annihilation

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is a horrible outline. He provided only one quote related to your argument, and interjected his own opinion instead of their arguments.

So Tertullian is as close as he could muster:

TERTULLIAN
In 203 AD Tertullian wrote his famous treatise Against The Jews. This early Church father also taught that Daniel’s 70th week had been fulfilled in 70 AD: “Vespasian vanquished the Jews…and so by the date of his storming Jerusalem, the Jews had completed the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel” (AAJ, VII; CID)."

Turtullian got his historical account wrong. Vespasian did not carry out 70AD. Titus did. Now for argument sake, back in 200AD, he was right and the father went by Titus and the son went by Vespasian. Tertullian was still wrong. Nor did he even give a firm date, nor did he even say Jerusalem experienced an AoD in 70AD. Turtullian just said the date of Vespasian storming Jerusalem.

In fact he would be considered a full preterist as the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, and not future. For making a fuss over denying you are associated in any way, not even 1%, why take the word of a person who could be taken as 100% preterist to prove your point?

No Tertullian was not a Full Preterist. Preterism didn't exist yet. And Preterism is not defined by how one views the 70 Weeks of Daniel. In that case, nearly all the Church Fathers were Full Preterists.

I have no idea if Tertullian got things mixed up or not. Titus was operating under Vespasian, and Vespasian could be said to have ordered the invasion.

You questioned whether any of the Church Fathers even mentioned 70 AD. You are obviously unwilling to admit that something exists even when it is in front of you.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Correct, his teaching that Matthew 24:15 in Daniel's AOD was fulfilled in 70AD puts him in the partial preterist camp alone

You are not correct, and haven't done your homework. But you can believe the earth is flat for all I care. I should think you have little credibility on this forum?

 

[ewq1938]

No, I'm a Partial Futurist perhaps--certainly not a Partial Preterist! Another immature name-caller you are.

You are being a hypocrite:

You may choose to go on calling me a Partial Preterist. If so, I will grant you that right.

This wasn't said directly to me but if a person is allowed to call you a Partial Preterist then I will as well.

 

[covenantee]

This is a horrible outline. He provided only one quote related to your argument, and interjected his own opinion instead of their arguments.

So Tertullian is as close as he could muster:

TERTULLIAN
In 203 AD Tertullian wrote his famous treatise Against The Jews. This early Church father also taught that Daniel’s 70th week had been fulfilled in 70 AD: “Vespasian vanquished the Jews…and so by the date of his storming Jerusalem, the Jews had completed the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel” (AAJ, VII; CID)."

Turtullian got his historical account wrong. Vespasian did not carry out 70AD. Titus did. Now for argument sake, back in 200AD, he was right and the father went by Titus and the son went by Vespasian. Tertullian was still wrong. Nor did he even give a firm date, nor did he even say Jerusalem experienced an AoD in 70AD. Turtullian just said the date of Vespasian storming Jerusalem.

In fact he would be considered a full preterist as the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, and not future. For making a fuss over denying you are associated in any way, not even 1%, why take the word of a person who could be taken as 100% preterist to prove your point?

How can the 70 weeks be fulfilled in 70AD without huge gaps in the timeline? Certainly not even Preterist would say that. They would end the 70 weeks within years of the Cross, not 40 years later. This is not even a strong argument for preterism, much less an AoD.

Now you are taking a weak view of an interpretation of Daniel's 70th week and declaring an AoD. Obviously Jerusalem is still not a desolation nor abomination. You cannot even give any lengths of your supposed AoD that was set up. How long did it's being set up affect those living around Jerusalem? Are we currently living in the Millennium then? The end of the 70 weeks ushers in the Millennium. Those 6 promises describe the Millennium experience.

Still waiting for a quote from an early church father declaring an AoD in 70AD. Not a modern human's opinion of the early church fathers.

160AD Clement of Alexandria (On Daniel 9:24-27 ; The 'Seventy Weeks' of Daniel) "160 AD Clement of Alexandria "Cyrus had, by proclamation, previously enjoined the restoration of the Hebrews. And his promise being accomplished in the time of Darius, the feast of the dedication was held, as also the feast of tabernacles. There were in all, taking in the duration of the captivity down to the restoration of the people, from the birth of Moses, one thousand one hundred and fifty-five years, six months, and ten days; and from the reign of David, according to some, four hundred and fifty-two; more correctly, five hundred and seventy-two years, six months, and ten days. From the captivity at Babylon, which took place in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, was fulfilled what was spoken by Daniel the prophet as follows: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to seal sins, and to wipe out and make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. Know therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of the word commanding an answer to be given, and Jerusalem to be built, to Christ the Prince, are seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; and the street shall be again built, and the wall; and the times shall be expended. And after the sixty-two weeks the anointing shall be overthrown, and judgment shall not be in him; and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary along with the coming Prince. And they shall be destroyed in a flood, and to the end of the war shall be cut off by: desolations. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the middle of the week the sacrifice and oblation shall be taken away; and in the holy place shall be the abomination of desolations, and until the consummation of time shall the consummation be assigned for desolation. And in the midst of the week shall he make the incense of sacrifice cease, and of the wing of destruction, even till the consummation, like the destruction of the oblation."

 

[Truth7t7]

Strong's Concordance
kalah: completion, complete destruction, consumption, annihilation

Strongs & Merriam-Webster "Exactly The Same Definition" In English

Strong’s Definitions

כָּלָה kâlâh, kaw-law'; from H3615; a completion; adverb, completely; also destruction:—altogether, (be, utterly) consume(-d), consummation (-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

 

[Truth7t7]

You are not correct, and haven't done your homework. But you can believe the earth is flat for all I care. I should think you have little credibility on this forum?

Fact is, you believe and teach Daniel's AOD in Matthew 24:15, was fulfilled in 70AD when Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem, 100% "Preterism"

Fact is, Daniel's AOD Matthew 24:15 & Daniel 9:27 is future unfulfilled

 

[covenantee]

Strongs & Merriam-Webster "Exactly The Same Definition" In English

Strong’s Definitions

כָּלָה kâlâh, kaw-law'; from H3615; a completion; adverb, completely; also destruction:—altogether, (be, utterly) consume(-d), consummation (-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel 9:27 does not appear in your H3615 search results.
It's in 3617.

 

[Timtofly]

No Tertullian was not a Full Preterist. Preterism didn't exist yet. And Preterism is not defined by how one views the 70 Weeks of Daniel. In that case, nearly all the Church Fathers were Full Preterists.

I have no idea if Tertullian got things mixed up or not. Titus was operating under Vespasian, and Vespasian could be said to have ordered the invasion.

You questioned whether any of the Church Fathers even mentioned 70 AD. You are obviously unwilling to admit that something exists even when it is in front of you.

To back up your point about the AoD.

No one is saying 70AD did not happen. We know it happened because of two historians. They do not corroborate your point. I already said Luke was fulfilled in 66AD. Guess by who?

wiki:

"Vespasian's renown came from his military success; he was legate of Legio II Augusta during the Roman invasion of Britain in 43 and subjugated Judaea during the Jewish rebellion of 66."

I already knew about Vespasian and 66AD. I already said Luke was fulfilled in 66AD. You keep claiming otherwise. You want to put the armies in 66AD a fulfilled prophecy into 70AD, and then associate Matthew to force Matthew into the first century. That seems to be your only line of reasoning.

Since Titus Vespasian and Titus Vespasian were father and son who is to say who did what with vague generalities? Unless we have more facts about what happened and what the early church fathers thought happened, all we have is opinion.