When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

[Timtofly]

Thanks @Timtofly . I used to believe that because I never bothered to double check everything.

Once I did a thorough check, I concluded that the Abomination of Desolation was the Crucifixion.

Why would the disciples flee Jerusalem the day of the Cross? The Cross was God's ultimate accomplishment, and you turn the Cross into Satan's abomination. That is messed up theology.

You have fallen into catholic lies, that it was Satan who planned the Cross from the foundation of the world.

You must have thoroughly checked Catholic textbooks, instead of the Word of God.

 

[Exegesis]

Why would the disciples flee Jerusalem the day of the Cross?

I give up. Why?

The Cross was God's ultimate accomplishment,

Apparently it wasn't according to just about everyone on this forum.

Most people here believe that the 'accomplishment' hasn't happened yet. Moreover, said accomplishment still has another three and a half to seven years to go at 'some future point in time', whenever that is.

So much for 'it is finished'.

...and you turn the Cross into Satan's abomination.

You are obviously offended by Daniel's prophecies. Your complaint is with him and God, not me.

Ironically, you failed to see how you erased such an important event from the Old Testament.

That is messed up theology.

Another ironic statement.

You have fallen into catholic lies, that it was Satan who planned the Cross from the foundation of the world.

Yawn. Ad hominem rubbish.

You must have thoroughly checked Catholic textbooks, instead of the Word of God.

Yawn. More ad hominem rubbish.

Had you provided some verses or some evidence to back up any of the claims you made, maybe I could have taken you seriously.

 

[Douggg]

Yawn. More ad hominem rubbish.

Hi Exegesis,

I am just curious. Are you a Catholic as Timtofly seems to be indicating ? I am not anti-Catholic, although I disagree with some of their official doctrines. Please consider my question friendly.

 

[Exegesis]

Hi Exegesis,

I am just curious. Are you a Catholic as Timtofly seems to be indicating ? I am not anti-Catholic, although I disagree with some of their official doctrines. Please consider my question friendly.

Hi @Douggg . I was baptized into Catholicism as an infant, however I am no longer Catholic or any denomination.

 

[Douggg]

Hi @Douggg . I was baptized into Catholicism as an infant, however I am no longer Catholic or any denomination.

Okay, thanks. I was just curious. I am non-denominational as well.

 

[Timtofly]

LOL. I'm not saying that the two witnesses are the seven churches (two does not equal seven), but I'm saying, to be consistent, they represent churches or congregations of people. In this case they represent the Jew and Gentile congregations of people witnessing as one body of Christ (the church). You just blatantly ignore that candlesticks represent churches in Revelation 1:20 and do not even take that into account when considering what the two candlesticks represent in Revelation 11:4.

The term "individual" is not metaphor meaning church. Had John seen two churches laying dead in a metaphorical city, he would not have used the term individual, but messenger or angel, or candlestick.

You all have too many metaphors and not enough practical application in your interpretation.

That the church is prophecied to be destroyed by Satan is a made up man centered opinion. There is no Scriptural collaboration stating the church is going to be killed by Satan.

As for the application you give about the Jew and Gentile congregations, are you going to categorically demand the Gentile church was going strong in the OT when the prophets recognized the olive trees and candlesticks? That metaphor was already in use hundreds of years before Jesus was born.

No one is arguing the metaphor is in error. Your point is that the term individual is synonymous with the church, instead of allowing any other application.

 

[covenantee]

Thanks @Timtofly . I used to believe that because I never bothered to double check everything.

Once I did a thorough check, I concluded that the Abomination of Desolation was the Crucifixion.

Luke didn't conclude that.

Luke 21
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Parallel verse:

Matthew 24
15 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:)

Armies could and did stand in the holy place.

How could the Crucifixion, an event, stand in the holy place?

 

[IndianaRob]

Obviously, these things would have to be meaning in the literal sense for certain if these things are involving the first century. Which means you then encounter this problem at the time since the timing would be way before 70 AD ever arrives.

Matthew 24:15 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:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.


No one at the time was fleeing to the mountains. This passage says that when one sees the AOD, they are to flee to the mountains, no time to even pack, get it now before it's too late. If the AOD was animal sacrificing continuing, one would have to be plain blind back then to not notice at the time, that animal sacrificing continued. Keeping in mind, the text says when one sees the AOD they are to then flee to the mountains at that time.

Nor was there great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, occurring during this era of time involving Christ's death and resurrection. And I can't even see any of these things recorded in Matthew 24:15-21 applying to 70 AD, let alone the time period you are trying to apply them to, for some of the reasons I mentioned.

The Holy place has always been where the Lamb’s blood was shed for the sins of the world.

Everything before Christ was just a foreshadow of Christ on the cross.

 

[Exegesis]

How could the Crucifixion, an event, stand in the holy place?

@IndianaRob gets it.

 

[IndianaRob]

@IndianaRob gets it.

Yes I get it. Jesus standing on the cross was the abomination that left Jerusalem desolate.

 

[covenantee]

Yes I get it. Jesus standing on the cross was the abomination that left Jerusalem desolate.

So your claim is that Jesus was the abomination of desolation.

Can you quote any recognized source in orthodox Christianity who agrees with you?

 

[IndianaRob]

So your claim is that Jesus was the abomination of desolation.

Can you quote any recognized source in orthodox Christianity who agrees with you?

I’m saying the Jews murdering Jesus was the abomination that left Jerusalem desolate.

It doesn’t matter if all of orthodox Christianity disagrees with me, the Jews rejecting and killing Jesus is why Jerusalem was left desolate.

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!


Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

 

[Timtofly]

The great city is called Babylon in Revelation.

This is yet another example of you failing to use scripture to interpret scripture. It's why you misinterpret most scripture.


LOL. Here you are yet again trying to twist scripture to fit your doctrine. At the time He was crucified, it was outside of Jerusalem. If that place is within Jerusalem now, that is completely irrelevant. Are John 19:20 and Hebrews 13:12 in your Bible? They say Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem. But, naturally, you can't accept that because it doesn't line up with your doctrine.

You may as well apply the prophecy to Jesus on the Cross, as Jesus is the church, both the Jewish and Gentile congregations.

 

[covenantee]

I’m saying the Jews murdering Jesus was the abomination that left Jerusalem desolate.

It doesn’t matter if all of orthodox Christianity disagrees with me, the Jews rejecting and killing Jesus is why Jerusalem was left desolate.

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!


Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

If all of orthodox Christianity disagrees with you, then that is a definition of a cult.

Does your cult have a name?

 

[IndianaRob]

If all of orthodox Christianity disagrees with you, then that is the definition of a cult.

Does your cult have a name?

All orthodox churches told their people to muzzle their faces and put poison in their veins. Did you follow them?

 

[covenantee]

All orthodox churches told their people to muzzle their faces and put poison in their veins. Did you follow them?

And what did you tell your people to do?

 

[IndianaRob]

And what did you tell your people to do?

Don’t listen to orthodox churches.

 

[covenantee]

Don’t listen to orthodox churches.

But the Church is all through the NT. Did you tell your people that you alone are that Church?

 

[IndianaRob]

But the Church is all through the NT. Did you tell your people that you alone are that Church?

I think your confusing 501C with the real church.

 

[covenantee]

I think your confusing 501C with the real church.

Are you the real church?