Timing of the abomination of desolation

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,504
586
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In Daniel 9:27, no trumpet mentioned once. In fact the word "trumpet" is not mentioned nor implied.
The NT shows us the truth of the OT. The NT does not mention 70AD one time as a point of prophecy fulfilled. Take your own recommendation, and scrap the whole 70AD theology you assert onto Scripture.

You only use history if it suits you. You reject history if it goes against your theological bias. You have to use Josephus or some other historian to even claim 70AD as a date. Without them, you would not even know the year Jerusalem was leveled to the ground. The OT does not have to be specific. It is the NT that points to how the OT was fulfilled.

Your main point would have nothing unless you take the words of a non Christian historian. None of the early church fathers gave a date. So complaining the word trumpet is missing is being hypocritical when no early church father gave a date either.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In Daniel 9:27, no trumpet mentioned once. In fact the word "trumpet" is not mentioned nor implied.

If mere assertions are your proof, you can claim anything is true, no matter how little true evidence for the claim exists. You're right--Dan 9.27 does not mention anything futurist. Only a small number of Church Fathers, including Irenaeus and his student Hippolytus, held to a future AoD beyond the time of Christ and his generation. But the context is clearly the time of Messiah when he accomplished all 6 things spoken of him in 9.24.

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place."

Christ atoned for wickedness, brought in eternal righteousness, and completed prophecy concerning the new heavenly worship at his 1st Coming. The ensuing destruction of the old temple worship in his generation finished transgression and sinful practices in Israel. The noncompliant Jews were either killed or sent away into exile from the land.

All this happened in the generation of Jesus and completed the 70 Weeks prophecy. Not a bit of it is future, nor did Jesus refer to it as a future event. Rather, he said it would all take place in "this generation," ie in his own generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,594
1,873
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The NT shows us the truth of the OT. It is the NT that points to how the OT was fulfilled.

So then why do you deny that Matthew and Luke show the truth and fulfillment of Daniel?

RK, SI, myself, et al, serve a God of fulfillments.

You don't.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Randy Kluth

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,594
1,873
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
If mere assertions are your proof, you can claim anything is true, no matter how little true evidence for the claim exists. You're right--Dan 9.27 does not mention anything futurist. Only a small number of Church Fathers, including Irenaeus and his student Hippolytus, held to a future AoD beyond the time of Christ and his generation. But the context is clearly the time of Messiah when he accomplished all 6 things spoken of him in 9.24.

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place."

Christ atoned for wickedness, brought in eternal righteousness, and completed prophecy concerning the new heavenly worship at his 1st Coming. The ensuing destruction of the old temple worship in his generation finished transgression and sinful practices in Israel. The noncompliant Jews were either killed or sent away into exile from the land.

All this happened in the generation of Jesus and completed the 70 Weeks prophecy. Not a bit of it is future, nor did Jesus refer to it as a future event. Rather, he said it would all take place in "this generation," ie in his own generation.

Amen brother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Randy Kluth

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,504
586
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If mere assertions are your proof, you can claim anything is true, no matter how little true evidence for the claim exists. You're right--Dan 9.27 does not mention anything futurist. Only a small number of Church Fathers, including Irenaeus and his student Hippolytus, held to a future AoD beyond the time of Christ and his generation. But the context is clearly the time of Messiah when he accomplished all 6 things spoken of him in 9.24.

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place."

Christ atoned for wickedness, brought in eternal righteousness, and completed prophecy concerning the new heavenly worship at his 1st Coming. The ensuing destruction of the old temple worship in his generation finished transgression and sinful practices in Israel. The noncompliant Jews were either killed or sent away into exile from the land.

All this happened in the generation of Jesus and completed the 70 Weeks prophecy. Not a bit of it is future, nor did Jesus refer to it as a future event. Rather, he said it would all take place in "this generation," ie in his own generation.
For claiming not to be a Preterist. You certainly preach 100% Preterist doctrine.

The 6 promises will not be reality until the 7th Trumpet stops sounding. You are asserting all your marbles into Daniel 9. Revelation is the fulfillment and explanation of Daniel 9. It is not my opinion it is John's written statements of fact in Revelation. At least I am using Scripture.

You are using human opinion, and non-Christian historians. None of the early church fathers said 70AD was a point in history. Stop using 70AD if you are going to literally go by the early church fathers. Just call it the destruction of Jerusalem sometime in the first century.

I am not one so picky as to not use Josephus as a historical record. Jesus was the Atonement, the Lamb of God. But Jesus was cut off. There has not been a completion of the 6 promises. Not until Jesus is also Prince on the earth.

"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince."

"and the people of the prince that shall come."

Jesus was not Prince in the first century. No throne was set up to reign on earth. Gabriel even told Daniel the Prince part was to come, a separate event that would be future from the first coming as Prince. Now you can call that just my opinion, but it is Scripture.

Your opinion changes things up and totally removes Jesus as Prince. You then have to conjure Roman armies into the text. I don't have to add anything. Just pointing out the facts. Revelation explains my point if you would take the time to view the pertinent passages. No NT text gives us Roman armies nor armies as AoDs period. You even make up thoughts not found in the NT. Armies did not make the first AoD an event. If you accept Antiochus Epiphanes as per Daniel as being an AoD event, then you still have to read Josephus, Macabees, or understand Hanukkah, points not really Scripture unless you add them to the canon or have a Bible that does.

What is different about their word from yours? No one is arguing that Jerusalem was not left desolate. That lasted for way longer than most empires did. So the word desolate hardly describes what an actual AoD is. Neither does the proximity of an army make for an abomination. The Romans housed their armies on the Temple complex built by Herod call the Antonia Fortress for years prior to the Jewish revolts after 30AD. According to your standards, the AoD had already been in place for decades. It was already an AoD when Jesus was born, baptized, crucified, and was resurrected. Yet you reject that point, and cherry pick a non-Christians 70AD year as only an AoD at that point. You then dismiss the fact that Josephus clearly points out when Pilate arrived, there was an AoD incident, that the Jews did complain to Pilate about regarding the Armies and their ensign. Pilate complied, and the incident was settled, and the armies were not considered an AoD after that. I am not ruling out that Titus may have had a similar intention that Antiochus Epiphanes took advantage of. It never happened because the temple and city was leveled because Titus was so disgusted at the Jews for creating their own AoD situation way before he ever arrived, although the several month seige did not help. Certainly you refuse to see that even the Jewish revolt had totally desecrated the temple, but that is a mute point. God had left the Temple in 30AD. It was already a different religion known as Judaism that was in control any way.

The Law of Moses was not a religion. It was an economy based around temple life. Yes the emphasis is placed too much as taking care of sin because of sin offerings. God knew that all other nations already had religions. A relationship with God is not a religion. It is a partnership between two literal parties based on faith and trust. Religion is just human imagination. That is why an AoD is an affront to God. Not because the building is a holy place. An AoD is literally replacing God with a religion.

Yes, Antiochus Epiphanes just sacrificing a pig was more of a mockery than your acceptable AoD. The AoD was Antiochus Epiphanes forcing a foreign religion and removing the daily sacrifices of the Law of Moses. That also did not happen in 70AD. God already removed what the temple stood for in 30AD. God removed the daily sacrifices with the Atonement of the Cross. Daniel 9:27 is still future, because the time is when Jesus is sitting as Prince on a throne, in a temple setting. Once again, with that future AoD, the purpose of the temple will be removed by Jesus as Prince to give the authority to Satan for 42 months, per Revelation 13. Satan is allowed and permitted by God. Satan does not force God's hand nor defeates God in some battle.
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,504
586
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So then why do you deny that Matthew and Luke show the truth and fulfillment of Daniel?

RK, SI, myself, et al, serve a God of fulfillments.

You don't.
I told you what was fulfilled and when. Yet you keep falsely accusing me.

What God you serve is not the point. Your interpretation of Scripture is what is bogged down in human imagination.
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,594
1,873
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I told you what was fulfilled and when. Yet you keep falsely accusing me.

What God you serve is not the point. Your interpretation of Scripture is what is bogged down in human imagination.

Have you been endowed with infallibility? Better get over to the Vatican pronto.

Carry on serving your god of unfulfillment.

That is not the God that I serve.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
For claiming not to be a Preterist. You certainly preach 100% Preterist doctrine.

Indulge me a little, brother. I've told you I'm not a Preterist many times, and still you insist on trying to draw me into controversy with my fellow brothers who are Preterists. So I've had to ask myself, why don't you get it? So here's what I think.

Again, are you a Preterist because you believe prophecy of the virgin birth was fulfilled in history? Are you a Preterist because you believe prophecy of the suffering of Christ was fulfilled in history? I don't think so. Preterism refers to belief that most prophecy in the Bible was fulfilled in the past. We are to look back to Christ for our legal access to God in heaven through the cross of Calvary. We are not to engage in all kinds of speculations about future prophecy.

I've told you I have sympathies for my brothers who are Preterists. I agree if this is their reason for being Preterists that looking back to Christ on the cross in the past for the basis of our Christian living is essential. I agree it is essential and much more important than speculating about future prophecy, particularly since Christ discouraged us from doing that.

So why do I run into this disbelief that someone like me calls himself a Futurist, all the while agreeing with some Preterist beliefs? I think it's because God wished for America to be a modern nation in history, fulfilling a role late in history in God's plan. God wanted us to be rooted in the past, and yet aware of future fulfillments.

John Darby influenced the distribution of the Scofield Reference Bible and its notes supporting Dispensationalism. So in the American revivals of the 20th century, many enthusiastic Christians came to believe that the Bible taught Futurist Dispensationalism.

It unfortunately uprooted some of the more basic fundamental Christian beliefs about biblical prophecy that had been in the Church for well over a thousand years! God seemed to endure some errant Futurist beliefs in order to establish the American Church's belief in Futurism, since America would play an important role in Futurist Prophetic fulfillment.

The thing in history that turned Christianity away from original non-Dispensationalist Futurism was the loss of belief that God would restore Israel. The Church came to believe that since Israel was hardened and non-receptive to the Gospel, surely God had something different in mind? The international Church was the true "Spiritual Israel."

So for many hundreds of years the Church leaned towards past beliefs, towards apostolic beliefs, to remain on track and to reform errors met along the way. And that was sorely needed.

But in these times, God is preparing the world and Israel for judgment. And so, God has restored the nation of Israel, preparing for her final judgment, and also for her ultimate national restoration. It was necessary for America to believe that because many Jewish people have resided here.

So many futurists in America cannot believe me when I say I'm Futurist and yet hold to some Preterist beliefs. I believe we need to go back into the past to be rooted in fundamental Christian doctrine, and also go back to the original belief in Israel's restoration. But I also believe we need to recognize, in the Olivet Discourse, that Jesus indicated nations of faith will ultimately fall. And Christians need to be aware of and prepared for that.

So I teach the Abomination of Desolation was God's judgment against Israel in 70 AD, warning that the same thing is happening to Christian nations today. But I also believe a future Antichrist is coming to corrupt all of Christendom.

You can't believe I'm not Preterist even when I say I believe in a future Antichrist? You can't believe I'm not a Preterist when I say I believe in the salvation of national Israel? You can't believe it because America was inundated with the Dispensationalist brand of Futurism.

It's sad that you don't really have a grasp of the history of Christian theology and eschatology. But it is a tangled web, and it's something we need to carefully walk through. Thanks for listening.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The 6 promises will not be reality until the 7th Trumpet stops sounding. You are asserting all your marbles into Daniel 9. Revelation is the fulfillment and explanation of Daniel 9. It is not my opinion it is John's written statements of fact in Revelation. At least I am using Scripture.

You have to use Scripture properly. John, in the Revelation, did not reference Dan 9, that I know of? Where does he do this?

I'm not making the 6 promises of Dan 9 be limited to the time of Christ's 1st Coming. The promises themselves indicate that, and the rest of the prophecy indicates that.

None of the early church fathers said 70AD was a point in history. Stop using 70AD if you are going to literally go by the early church fathers. Just call it the destruction of Jerusalem sometime in the first century.

You are getting confusing. 1st you say none of the early church father said 70 AD was a point in history. What does that mean? You obviously don't know what you're talking about, and have little knowledge of what the Church Fathers actually said about this. Clearly they referenced the event of Jerusalem's destruction, which happened in 70 AD. It doesn't at all matter what date they used--it's the event they were pointing to, fulfilling the prophecy in Dan 9. It was the AoD.

I am not one so picky as to not use Josephus as a historical record. Jesus was the Atonement, the Lamb of God. But Jesus was cut off. There has not been a completion of the 6 promises. Not until Jesus is also Prince on the earth.

Jesus was always the prince on this earth. He just hasn't yet had his Kingdom be established on the earth. But you're wrong--all 6 promises were completed in his earthly ministry. I showed you how that took place.

"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince."

"and the people of the prince that shall come."

Jesus was not Prince in the first century. No throne was set up to reign on earth. Gabriel even told Daniel the Prince part was to come, a separate event that would be future from the first coming as Prince. Now you can call that just my opinion, but it is Scripture.

Jesus was prince, and yes his rule is not yet. That's why there is not just one prince mentioned in Dan 9, but 2 princes. The "prince" mentioned as the "anointed one" is the Messiah, and he fulfills the 6 things. The "prince to come" is the Roman ruler, whose people is an army that destroys Jerusalem and the temple. He also confirms the covenant of Messiah by terminating temple worship with the crucifixion of Christ. And he, as well, will later in that same generation destroy the city and the sanctuary.

No NT text gives us Roman armies nor armies as AoDs period.

But I showed you Jesus did identify the AoD as the armies surrounding Jerusalem in his own generation! These armies would "desolate" Jerusalem and destroy the temple completely. So you deny what is clearly stated.

What is different about their word from yours? No one is arguing that Jerusalem was not left desolate. That lasted for way longer than most empires did. So the word desolate hardly describes what an actual AoD is.

This is how weak your argument is. The word "desolate" clearly describes what an actual "Abomination of Desolation" is!
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,504
586
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You can't believe I'm not Preterist even when I say I believe in a future Antichrist? You can't believe I'm not a Preterist when I say I believe in the salvation of national Israel? You can't believe it because America was inundated with the Dispensationalist brand of Futurism.
I am not your garden varity Darby dispensational futurist even more so than you claiming you are not Preterist. There is no future human AC going to rule the world either. So unless you are a dispensational futurist, I am surprised you think there will be an AC, as that is who seems to have attempted to teach that false notion.


So you accept the AC, a dispensational futurist doctrine, though not one yourself. You accept the Preterist claim the AoD happened in 70AD, though not a Preterist. I have never called you one, just pointing out that you pick and choose points based on your comfort level. Being labeled anything is not your comfort level.
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,504
586
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Clearly they referenced the event of Jerusalem's destruction, which happened in 70 AD. It doesn't at all matter what date they used--it's the event they were pointing to, fulfilling the prophecy in Dan 9. It was the AoD.
So if Jerusalem and the Temple were actually destroyed in 120AD, you would be ok with that?

If historical records pointed to that? You call it 70AD as if a fact. No early church father recognized a date, even if they had access to and read Josephus. That is my point.

You would literally not even know the date it happened if you went solely by the early church fathers. Yet you are extremely dogmatic that it happened only on a certain year of the first century.

Your whole point rests on the fact given by Josephus, and then you interpret Scripture based on that one point in time.

And they never used the whole point of an abomination of desolation. They only said Jerusalem was left desolate. A point I agree on. I have no issues with most early church fathers even if they are wrong, or I do not agree with them. You seem to think they agree with you. Except you interpret even them according to your bias, based on loose definitions.

None of them claimed the fulfillment of Revelation and Daniel 9 to the extent you seem to make out. You cannot even see how the 7th Trumpet is the completion of the 70th week. You are biased to a particular year in the first century.

If the blooming of the fig tree is Israel becoming a nation in 1948. If the Second Coming happens soon. If there is a time of GT. Then you are saying the AoD cannot happen, because certainly this generation will only see 3 out of the 4 events?

BTW, if there is an AC in the future, it is the AoD one must get away from as soon as possible. I doubt you call the Roman Army, the AC.

This is how weak your argument is. The word "desolate" clearly describes what an actual "Abomination of Desolation" is!
So every desert on the planet is the AoD, because they are desolate? That is how strong your argument is.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So if Jerusalem and the Temple were actually destroyed in 120AD, you would be ok with that?

I'm not a student of the process of historical dating. I'm supposing it's an actual science? The date was 70 AD, which was Jesus' generation, as I define "generation," and as the Bible defines "generation."

And they never used the whole point of an abomination of desolation. They only said Jerusalem was left desolate. A point I agree on. I have no issues with most early church fathers even if they are wrong, or I do not agree with them. You seem to think they agree with you. Except you interpret even them according to your bias, based on loose definitions.

Not at all. I've supplied all of the pertinent quotes that I'm familiar with on forums like this one. They say what they say. You're not going to get an organized argument for your position or for my position, but you can read through to recognize in the vast majority of the quotes that they had a common viewpoint. They correlated Dan 9 with the Olivet Discourse, and as such saw the AoD as the Roman invasion of Jerusalem in approx. 70 AD, give or take.

None of them claimed the fulfillment of Revelation and Daniel 9 to the extent you seem to make out. You cannot even see how the 7th Trumpet is the completion of the 70th week. You are biased to a particular year in the first century.

You don't even show any familiarity with the quotations of these Church Fathers in this discussion? So why do you assert what you do not know?

If the blooming of the fig tree is Israel becoming a nation in 1948. If the Second Coming happens soon. If there is a time of GT. Then you are saying the AoD cannot happen, because certainly this generation will only see 3 out of the 4 events?

You're not really getting my arguments properly. When Jesus said "all these things will happen in this generation" he meant to answer the 1st of 2 questions. The 1st question regarded *when the fall of Jerusalem and the temple would take place?" And Jesus mentioned birth pangs leading to the fall of Jerusalem in his generation. "All those things" would take place within 40 years of his saying this!

It did not omit the question regarding "when will the Son of Man come?" That was the 2nd question which Jesus answered by saying that event does not have a date, but will come unexpectedly like all judgment. And it will happen after a long period of Jewish Punishment and exile which he called the "Great Tribulation."

The "fig tree" example was intended not to show the rebirth of a nation in future times, but rather, to show how Israel at that time would begin to produce leaves, indicating the nation's ripening towards judgment.

BTW, if there is an AC in the future, it is the AoD one must get away from as soon as possible. I doubt you call the Roman Army, the AC.

No, I don't. Preterists identify the Romans as the Antichrist, I believe? And I would agree with them they were one of many Antichrists in history. But THE Antichrist is in the future, and European Christianity should be as wary of him as the early Jewish Christians were wary of Roman judgment coming against Israel.

So every desert on the planet is the AoD, because they are desolate? That is how strong your argument is.

No, words are connected not because they are the same word, but only when their contexts match. The "desolation" mentioned in Luke 21 matches the "abomination of desolation" in Matt 24 and Mark 13.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I am not your garden varity Darby dispensational futurist even more so than you claiming you are not Preterist. There is no future human AC going to rule the world either. So unless you are a dispensational futurist, I am surprised you think there will be an AC, as that is who seems to have attempted to teach that false notion.

Well, I'm happy to hear you're not a garden-variety anything! ;) I accept proper views from any and all schools of thought on these things. I don't believe any one school has everything lined up perfectly. What gives strengths to some off beat Christian schools is the fact they nat have one major point that other schools have missed.

Never completely align with a theological school. Always be open to possible errors, and be correctable is my motto.

So yes, I do accept a future Antichrist. But I'm neither a Preterist nor a Dispensationalist. I'm a Premillennial Postribulationist who accepts the Preterist position that the AoD was fulfilled in 70 AD. ;)
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,504
586
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It did not omit the question regarding "when will the Son of Man come?" That was the 2nd question which Jesus answered by saying that event does not have a date, but will come unexpectedly like all judgment. And it will happen after a long period of Jewish Punishment and exile which he called the "Great Tribulation."
The Second Coming is one of those things mentioned to happen in the generation you choose to accept.

Certainly one of those things did not happen.

No, words are connected not because they are the same word, but only when their contexts match. The "desolation" mentioned in Luke 21 matches the "abomination of desolation" in Matt 24 and Mark 13.
No, desolation happens all the time. The AoD is not the same thing.

So yes, I do accept a future Antichrist. But I'm neither a Preterist nor a Dispensationalist. I'm a Premillennial Postribulationist who accepts the Preterist position that the AoD was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Which means everything did not happen in that first century generation, that you state lasted 70-80 years.

So if everything did not happen, why did Jesus say it would?
 
Last edited:

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Second Coming is one of those things mentioned to happen in the generation you choose to accept.

That is not my view. 2 Questions. 1 is about the fall of the temple. The other is about the end of the age. Don't mix them up, is my view.

Certainly one of those things did not happen.

The thing that did not happen in Jesus' generation was the Return of Christ. It was not supposed to happen in Jesus' generation. That was an event connected to the 2nd question--not the 1st question. The 1st question involved things to happen in Jesus' generation, and referred to the fall of Jerusalem--not to the return of Christ.

No, desolation happens all the time. The AoD is not the same thing.

No, "desolation" is not always being described in the context of the Olivet Discourse. Luke's "desolation" clearly connects to the "abomination of desolation" in Matthew and Mark. This is not "desolation" happening *all the time!*

If we're just arguing back and forth we're wasting time. I just want to be sure you're properly representing my argument--you certainly don't have to agree with it. Just don't misrepresent what I said, please?
 

Keraz

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2018
5,214
936
113
82
Thames, New Zealand
www.logostelos.info
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
No, your understanding of what he said is mistaken. Don't ask foolish questions like that. I, of course, would never suggest that Paul was ever mistaken. You are the one who has chosen to ignore how Paul described the temple of God in other verses. You should allow other things he wrote to aid your understanding of 2 Thess 2:4, but you don't bother doing that.
In 2 Thess 2:4, Paul referred to a physical act made by a yet to be revealed; wicked one.
That physical act of going into and sitting in the place designated to be holy, has to be physical too.

You are confused by the fact of how we Christians are the spiritual Temple for the present. This truth does not preclude a future, actual Temple being built in Jerusalem. As many prophesies tell us there will be.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,794
2,446
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In 2 Thess 2:4, Paul referred to a physical act made by a yet to be revealed; wicked one.
That physical act of going into and sitting in the place designated to be holy, has to be physical too.

You are confused by the fact of how we Christians are the spiritual Temple for the present. This truth does not preclude a future, actual Temple being built in Jerusalem. As many prophesies tell us there will be.

TBH, I don't think either side can claim certainty based on the reading. Whether Paul is referring to a physical temple or a heavenly temple, or even the Church as a temple is beyond the language itself. It is context that determines the meaning of words.

At the time Paul had a physical temple in Jerusalem. But he also knew Christ had predicted the imminent fall of the temple. And Paul taught that the Church was a temple. It's really a matter of looking at what Paul based his teaching on?

It appears to be the application of principles Daniel applied to Antiochus 4, where he actually took position in God's physical temple. But being that Antichrist, the Little Horn, did not, according to Daniel, actually sit in a physical temple (Dan 9), Paul may be simply stating a principle that positioning one's self in God's temple is an affront to God, which is what Antichrist will do by declaring himself God.

And since in the NT the physical temple was to be destroyed, according to Jesus, I see no basis for a rebuilding of the same. The New Covenant seems to prohibit it.

But this is all pretty much guesswork--your choice. It's difficult to prove anything based on the context for Paul's words. We don't really know where he got his teaching from precisely.
 
Last edited:

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,594
1,873
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
In 2 Thess 2:4, Paul referred to a physical act made by a yet to be revealed; wicked one.
That physical act of going into and sitting in the place designated to be holy, has to be physical too.

You are confused by the fact of how we Christians are the spiritual Temple for the present. This truth does not preclude a future, actual Temple being built in Jerusalem. As many prophesies tell us there will be.

Matthew 23
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2 Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

Musta been one very old and large seat.

You are confused by your inability to discern the difference between Paul's spiritual and physical temples.

For discerning readers, here they are (again):

Paul's temples:

"naos" spiritual:

1 Corinthians 3:16
Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

1 Corinthians 3:17
If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

1 Corinthians 6:19
What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

2 Corinthians 6:16
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

Ephesians 2:21-22
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

2 Thessalonians 2:4
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

"eidóleion" physical:

1 Corinthians 8:10
For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

"hieros/hieron" physical:

1 Corinthians 9:13
Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiritual Israelite

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
4,594
1,873
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
In 2 Thess 2:4, Paul referred to a physical act made by a yet to be revealed; wicked one.
That physical act of going into and sitting in the place designated to be holy, has to be physical too.

You are confused by the fact of how we Christians are the spiritual Temple for the present. This truth does not preclude a future, actual Temple being built in Jerusalem. As many prophesies tell us there will be.

Have fun watching what God does to that temple.

I'll share my popcorn.

Sozomen (ca. A.D.375-447)
"Ecclesiastical History"
Book V, Chapter XXII


Though the emperor [Julian the Apostate] hated and oppressed the Christians, he manifested benevolence and humanity towards the Jews. He wrote to the Jewish patriarchs and leaders, as well as to the people, requesting them to pray for him, and for the prosperity of the empire. In taking this step he was not actuated, I am convinced, by any respect for their religion; for he was aware that it is, so to speak, the mother of the Christian religion, and he knew that both religions rest upon the authority of the patriarchs and the prophets; but he thought to grieve the Christians by favoring the Jews, who are their most inveterate enemies. But perhaps he also calculated upon persuading the Jews to embrace paganism and sacrifices; for they were only acquainted with the mere letter of Scripture, and could not, like the Christians and a few of the wisest among the Hebrews, discern the hidden meaning.

Events proved that this was his real motive; for he sent for some of the chiefs of the race and exhorted them to return to the observance of the laws of Moses and the customs of their fathers. On their replying that because the temple in Jerusalem was overturned, it was neither lawful nor ancestral to do this in another place than the metropolis out of which they had been cast, he gave them public money, commanded them to rebuild the temple, and to practice the cult similar to that of their ancestors, by sacrificing after the ancient way. The Jews entered upon the undertaking, without reflecting that, according to the prediction of the holy prophets, it could not be accomplished. They sought for the most skillful artisans, collected materials, cleared the ground, and entered so earnestly upon the task, that even the women carried heaps of earth, and brought their necklaces and other female ornaments towards defraying the expense. The emperor, the other pagans, and all the Jews, regarded every other undertaking as secondary in importance to this. Although the pagans were not well-disposed towards the Jews, yet they assisted them in this enterprise, because they reckoned upon its ultimate success, and hoped by this means to falsify the prophecies of Christ. Besides this motive, the Jews themselves were impelled by the consideration that the time had arrived for rebuilding their temple. When they had removed the ruins of the former building, they dug up the ground and cleared away its foundation; it is said that on the following day when they were about to lay the first foundation, a great earthquake occurred, and by the violent agitation of the earth, stones were thrown up from the depths, by which those of the Jews who were engaged in the work were wounded, as likewise those who were merely looking on. The houses and public porticos, near the site of the temple, in which they had diverted themselves, were suddenly thrown down; many were caught thereby, some perished immediately, others were found half dead and mutilated of hands or legs, others were injured in other parts of the body. When God caused the earthquake to cease, the workmen who survived again returned to their task, partly because such was the edict of the emperor, and partly because they were themselves interested in the undertaking. Men often, in endeavoring to gratify their own passions, seek what is injurious to them, reject what would be truly advantageous, and are deluded-by the idea that nothing is really useful except what is agreeable to them. When once led astray by this error, they are no longer able to act in a manner conducive to their own interests, or to take warning by the calamities which are visited upon them.

The Jews, I believe, were just in this state; for, instead of regarding this unexpected earthquake as a manifest indication that God was opposed to the re-erection of their temple, they proceeded to recommence the work. But all parties relate, that they had scarcely returned to the undertaking, when fire burst suddenly from the foundations of the temple, and consumed several of the workmen.

This fact is fearlessly stated, and believed by all; the only discrepancy in the narrative is that some maintain that flame burst from the interior of the temple, as the workmen were striving to force an entrance, while others say that the fire proceeded directly from the earth. In whichever way the phenomenon might have occurred, it is equally wonderful. A more tangible and still more extraordinary prodigy ensued; suddenly the sign of the cross appeared spontaneously on the garments of the persons engaged in the undertaking. These crosses were disposed like stars, and appeared the work of art. Many were hence led to confess that Christ is God, and that the rebuilding of the temple was not pleasing to Him; others presented themselves in the church, were initiated, and besought Christ, with hymns and supplications, to pardon their transgression. If any one does not feel disposed to believe my narrative, let him go and be convinced by those who heard the facts I have related from the eyewitnesses of them, for they are still alive. Let him inquire, also, of the Jews and pagans who left the work in an incomplete state, or who, to speak more accurately, were able to commence it.
 

Keraz

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2018
5,214
936
113
82
Thames, New Zealand
www.logostelos.info
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
TBH, I don't either side can claim certainty based on the reading. Whether Paul is referring to a physical temple or a heavenly temple, or even the Church as a temple is beyond the language itself. It is context that determines the meaning of words.
Paul has to be prophesying about a future new Temple that as I say: is well prophesied to be present on the Temple Mount:

The prophetic Scriptures clearly predict that the Third Temple will be built and the sacrifices reinstated, in the final years leading up to the Return of the Messiah. It is clear, too, that there will be more than just the Jewish people living in the Land of Greater Israel. All the Israelites from all 12 tribes of Israel, plus those grafted in, will migrate to New Israel soon after the Lord’s Day of vengeance and wrath, the terrible Day of fire and storms, that will clear and cleanse most of the Middle East.

The place of the new Temple, will be to the North of the existing Dome of the Rock, because this is in the direct line of the now sealed Eastern gate. The Bible, the Torah, and Josephus, all agree that the Temple was in that location. But the Jews are not prophesied to build the new Temple.


The whole scenario of the end times, has a logical sequence to it. Now in the latter days,, we can see how things are happening that will see a confederation of Islamic states and entities that will be motivated to get rid of the ‘ cancer ‘ in their midst, that is the State of Israel. The moment of their attack, is the moment that God will intervene. This great Day of the Lord, will take the form of a natural event: a Coronal Mass Ejection, a massive sunstrike of cosmic particles, causing intense heat and electrical storms. The attacking armies will be destroyed by their own weaponry, as they all explode before firing. This literally fulfils the prayer in Psalms 83:13-18

Many prophesies speak of the regeneration of the Land of Greater Israel, “in a very short while”, Isaiah 29:17, after this great clearance and cleansing of the entire area.
Christian Israelites- “His people, who love the Lord and follow in His ways” will then gather “on the mountains of Samaria”. This is described in Ezekiel 20:34-38, Psalms 107 and fully detailed in Ezekiel 40 to 48.

Over 40 prophesies describe how God’s holy people, every faithful Christian, will live in peace and security in their own Land. At last, they will be as God originally intended, “a light to the nations”, they will “exemplify My Holiness for all to see”. Ezekiel 39:27-29 [The attack by Gog/ Magog will come during this period]

WE will build the Third Temple, Zechariah 6:15, and “the splendour of this latter House will surpass that of the former”. Haggai 2:9
Zechariah 8:9-13 has wonderful promises of restoration and redemption; Courage! Do not lose heart!

Denial or rejection of these plainly stated Prophesies, may lead to unfortunate consequences. We should be aware of God's plans and ready for the future as the Prophetic Word says.