Does the BIBLE describe a coming Nuclear War?

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

VCO said:

Context Orv?
Isaiah 40:9-31 is prophesy about Jesus Christ is it not?.......

Isaiah 40:9-13
9O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!
10Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.
11He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young.
12Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?
13Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counseller hath taught him?

Isaiah 40:28-31
28Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.
29He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength.
30Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall:
31But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.

The verse you quoted in the op....... "they will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary; they will walk and not faint" is a reference to those who would wait on and trust in Christ (have faith) to save them after His coming,....... they will have renewed strength for trusting and waiting on Him....... the word eagle is used as a metaphor for strength given to those who put their faith in Jesus Christ.......this is NOT about "mechanized infantry", nuclear war, or fighter jets....... that's a huge leap from truth Orv and can only be drawn by taking Isaiah 40 way out of context.

Isaiah 13:20 is about judgement against Babylon for it's sacking of the kingdom of Judah. History and the bible record Cyrus the great ("the Medes").......who sacked Babylon (modern day Iraq) and as it is written " It will never be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation as it is to this day.

Image source:

Also one more thing to take into consideration when pulling verses out of the OT.......In the east the language is different than the west. Word's and statements in languages express emotion often in a metaphoric sense. Emotion is often over exaggerated metaphorically in speech in eastern languages in comparison to the west. We might say in the west to describe a woman as such......a woman has natural beauty; her long flowing hair, her sparkling eyes, and soft skin makes her beautiful and to be desired in the hearts of men. In the East they might say.......a woman's beauty is likened to the delicate flower blossom set beneath the light of heaven elegantly flowing with the warm embrace of the gentle winds; what man would not desire a wife?.......Language and context is important. Besides the obvious that the op is speculative at best it is based on cherry picking verses out of context to paint a picture of fear and future nuclear war. This kind of topic does not edify in love, it just attempts to distort the truth.

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

Just a thought here but could the cult of the sacred name and the idols associated with worshiping a counterfeit false god in place of God be the abomination that brings desolation? .......i ran in to a article recently from the Biblical Archeology Society that is dated 2001. The article talks about several artifacts dug up in and around the former kingdom of Judah prior to it's collapse that seems to claim that at and around the time of the collapse of the kingdom of Judah....... Hezekiah and Josiah tried to centralize the cult of Yahwism.......
" Of course in the background was the central monotheistic cult practiced in the Jerusalem Temple by its priests and preached by the Biblical prophets. And some of the kings of Judah—especially Hezekiah and Josiah—made efforts to centralize the monotheistic cult in Jerusalem. But looking at the archaeological evidence, we must conclude that they were less than 100 percent successful. Indeed, until the Babylonian destruction of Judah and the end of the Israelite monarchy in 586 B.C.E., pagan Yahwism was common even in Jerusalem, to say nothing of the rest of Judah."

"Inscriptions also confirm the existence of cultic installations dedicated to Yahweh, some even outside the country. At the cult site of Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, in the Sinai, inscriptions were found that mention “Yahweh of Samaria and his Asherah” and “Yahweh of Teman” and his Asherah.c4"

Source:

This is a topic that should be discussed somewhere else and at a different time perhaps.......no disrespect intended towards you Brother VCO.......
just made me think about that article reading your comment here EG.

eternally-gratefull · Mar 16, 2015

GracethroughfaithinChrist said:

Just a thought here but could the cult of the sacred name and the idols associated with worshiping a counterfeit false god in place of God be the abomination that brings desolation? .......i ran in to a article recently from the Biblical Archeology Society that is dated 2001. The article talks about several artifacts dug up in and around the former kingdom of Judah prior to it's collapse that seems to claim that at and around the time of the collapse of the kingdom of Judah....... Hezekiah and Josiah tried to centralize the cult of Yahwism.......
" Of course in the background was the central monotheistic cult practiced in the Jerusalem Temple by its priests and preached by the Biblical prophets. And some of the kings of Judah—especially Hezekiah and Josiah—made efforts to centralize the monotheistic cult in Jerusalem. But looking at the archaeological evidence, we must conclude that they were less than 100 percent successful. Indeed, until the Babylonian destruction of Judah and the end of the Israelite monarchy in 586 B.C.E., pagan Yahwism was common even in Jerusalem, to say nothing of the rest of Judah."

"Inscriptions also confirm the existence of cultic installations dedicated to Yahweh, some even outside the country. At the cult site of Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, in the Sinai, inscriptions were found that mention “Yahweh of Samaria and his Asherah” and “Yahweh of Teman” and his Asherah.c4"

Source:

This is a topic that should be discussed somewhere else and at a different time perhaps.......no disrespect intended towards you Brother VCO.......
just made me think about that article reading your comment here EG.

the abomination is placed their by the revived roman empire, or final beast. so not sure how that would relate.

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

Mary of the Roman catholic church (not sister Mary from the bible)....... may be a modern asherah?......"queen of heaven"

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

i would have to do a lot more research but just a thought.......

eternally-gratefull · Mar 16, 2015

GracethroughfaithinChrist said:

yea, I think the final beast, who scripture says blasphemes God and holds himself up as God may be the abomination himself. a statue of himself or something.

He also destroys the roman church and her harlotries.

eternally-gratefull · Mar 16, 2015

GracethroughfaithinChrist said:

I have studied this for years. Still learning, It is my favorite subject

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

Me too, almost 9 years at this point, still learning as well,living is learning and learning is living

VCO · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

Or is the Abomination that which Antichrist will put ON the wing of the Temple, but then we would abandoning the subject of this thread and going to a Discussion of Antichrist's reign, which belongs in ANOTHER THREAD:

Daniel 9:27 (HCSB)
[SUP]27 [/SUP] He will make a firm covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and offering. And the abomination of desolation will be on a wing of the temple until the decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator.”

eternally-gratefull · Mar 16, 2015

VCO said:

Or is the Abomination that which Antichrist will put ON the wing of the Temple, but then we would abandoning the subject of this thread and going to a Discussion of Antichrist's reign, which belongs in ANOTHER THREAD:

Daniel 9:27 (HCSB)
[SUP]27 [/SUP] He will make a firm covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and offering. And the abomination of desolation will be on a wing of the temple until the decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator.”

see matt 24. Jesus tells us where this will be, the holy place. there is only one holy place in the temple.

VCO · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

I think you are totally wrong about who is the Harlot Church.

HERE IS YOUR HARLOT CHURCH IN ACTION, the Church that isn't a Church:

ISIS' dark agenda: Terror group's tweets show more destruction of sacred Christian sites | Fox News

prove-all · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

but is now not our body his temple, and believer become delosate from in his body, and church?

yaright · Mar 16, 2015

Willie-T said:

I carefully considered your answer for flaws, shortsightedness, over the top, underhanded, misinterpreted conjecture; nope....

kennethcadwell · Mar 16, 2015

Yes there will be a nuclear war, that will lead to around 2.3 billion people being killed.
The Mystery Babylon of the end times is Saudi Arabia, as the wine that the world gets drunk off of is oil as the whole world relies on oil. And Mecca its capital city means mother, which is a description given in the bible. The other thing is that in Ezekiel 28-30 we see the nations that Gods judgment comes against and they are all Muslim nations, or have very high populations of Muslims that live in them.
The bible does show the final beast kingdom composed of a ten kings/kingdoms that follow him, and in Daniel 2 in the statue it shows the iron mixed with clay. Not the iron alone, and if you look at the Eastern nations that were part of the Roman empire they are majority Muslim. Turkey for one is mainly Muslim...................

VCO · Mar 16, 2015

GracethroughfaithinChrist said:

Context Orv?
Isaiah 40:9-31 is prophesy about Jesus Christ is it not?.......

Isaiah 40:9-13
9O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!
10Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.
11He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young.
12Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?
13Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counseller hath taught him?

Isaiah 40:28-31
28Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.
29He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength.
30Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall:
31But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.

The verse you quoted in the op....... "they will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary; they will walk and not faint" is a reference to those who would wait on and trust in Christ (have faith) to save them after His coming,....... they will have renewed strength for trusting and waiting on Him....... the word eagle is used as a metaphor for strength given to those who put their faith in Jesus Christ.......this is NOT about "mechanized infantry", nuclear war, or fighter jets....... that's a huge leap from truth Orv and can only be drawn by taking Isaiah 40 way out of context.

Isaiah 13:20 is about judgement against Babylon for it's sacking of the kingdom of Judah. History and the bible record Cyrus the great ("the Medes").......who sacked Babylon (modern day Iraq) and as it is written " It will never be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation as it is to this day.

View attachment 101069

Image source:

Also one more thing to take into consideration when pulling verses out of the OT.......In the east the language is different than the west. Word's and statements in languages express emotion often in a metaphoric sense. Emotion is often over exaggerated metaphorically in speech in eastern languages in comparison to the west. We might say in the west to describe a woman as such......a woman has natural beauty; her long flowing hair, her sparkling eyes, and soft skin makes her beautiful and to be desired in the hearts of men. In the East they might say.......a woman's beauty is likened to the delicate flower blossom set beneath the light of heaven elegantly flowing with the warm embrace of the gentle winds; what man would not desire a wife?.......Language and context is important. Besides the obvious that the op is speculative at best it is based on cherry picking verses out of context to paint a picture of fear and future nuclear war. This kind of topic does not edify in love, it just attempts to distort the truth.

LOOK AGAIN at Isa. 13:19, the prophecy is clearly about the KINGDOM of Babylon, not the City of Babylon. BESIDES, look at the City again, and it certainly looks inhabited again to me:

Even U.S troops dwelled there for awhile:

Now let's and look at the entire area from a little bit farther away, note the ruins you pictured are in the middle of the scene, but ALSO notice the farm fields just beyond the city and the STREET LIGHTS ON THE HIGHWAY, I would say that is not the total ghost town you think it is. In fact this following picture is taken from Saddam Hussein's Summer Palace, so even Saddam was a resident of Babylon at times:

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

VCO said:

Daniel 9:27 is a very complex verse to be interpreted.......Just a little info on it for another time and discussion perhaps?
Pulpit Commentary

Verse 27. - And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. The verse in the Septuagint corresponding to this is evidently mixed up with confluent readings and notes as to earlier verses, "And the covenant shall be strong upon many, and again he shall turn ('repent') ἐπιστρέψει), and it shall be built in breadth and length, and according to the end of times until the end of the war, and after seven and seventy times and sixty-two years until the end of the war; and the desolation shall be taken away in confirming (or 'when he shall confirm') the covenant to many weeks; and in the end of the week the sacrifice and the oblation shall be taken away, and upon the temple shall be the abomination of desolation until the end, and an end shall be given to the desolation." In this mass of confusion this much is clear - the clause, "the covenant shall be strong (δυναστεύσει) upon many," is a doublet of the clause, "when he shall confirm the covenant to many weeks." The clause, "and after seven and seventy times and sixty-two years," is a doublet of the beginning of the twenty-sixth verse; "Till the end of the war, and the desolation shall be taken away," is an alternative version of the last clause of the twenty-sixth verse. When those extraneous elements are got rid of, we have left a rendering of the twenty-seventh verse, which may afford us light as to the text. "The covenant shall be strong upon many" is a possible rendering of the Hebrew (see Psalm 12:5). The alternative reading, "when he shall confirm (ἐν τῷ κατισχῦσαι) the covenant during many weeks," implies the infinitive with the preposition בְ, and "weeks" in the plural, and one omitted - the latter is omitted, indeed, by both. "And in the end of the week" - reading קֵצ (qaytz) instead of חֲצִי (hatzee) - "sacrifice and offering shall be taken away, and upon the temple shall be the abomination of desolation" - reading קֹדֶשׁ (qodesh), "holy," instead of זֶבַח (kenaph), "wing," "outspreading," or it may be tendered "wing of temple" - "until the end, and an end be given to desolation" - reading תֻּתַּן (toottan), "is given," or "appointed," instead of תִּתַּך (tittak), "poured out." Theodotion is closer to the Massoretic, "And one week shall confirm (δυναμώσει) a covenant to many, and in the middle (ἡμίσει) of the week my sacrifice and offering shall be taken away" - reading זִבְחִי (zebehee) instead of זֶבַח (zebah), and possibly min hath, instead of minhah - "and upon the temple (shall be) the abomination of desolations, and till (at) the end of the time an end is set (given) to the desolation." It will be observed that Theodotion agrees with the LXX. in reading קֹדֶשׁ (qodesh) instead of כֵּנַפ (kenaph), and תֻּתַּן (toottan) instead of תִּתַּך (tittak) The Peshitta is closer still to the Massoretic, but the last verb the translator seems to have read as tanah, "shall rest." Tertullian, in his quotation from the Vetus, shows that in this verse it follows Theodotion, or rather the version which he made his basis. He, however, connects "half a week" with "one week." The Vulgate rendering is, "One week also shall confirm the covenant to many, and in the middle of the week sacrifice and offering shall cease" - reading יִשׁבַת: (yishbath) - "and in the temple shall be the abomination of desolation" - therefore reading with the Greek versions and the Vetus, קדֶשׁ instead of כָנָפ - "and even to the consummation and end shall the desolation continue" - reading, therefore, תֵּשֵׁב instead of תִּתַּך, and omitting the preposition עַל ('al), "upon" - the latter is not a probable reading. From this examination of the versions one thing is clear - we must accept, with all its difficulties, "confirms." Gratz would change one letter, and translate, "he shall cause many to transgress the covenant." The wilder supposition of Professor Bevan, which would change two letters, and translate, "the covenant shall be annulled for many," is equally out of court. The next point is kenaph, "expansion." Here the Greek and Latin versions, including that in Matthew 24:15, but excluding the doublet mixed up in the text of the Vatican and Alexandrian Codices, have read קֹדֶשׁ. The Peshitta and the author of the reading intruded into the Alexandrian Codex have read כְּנַפ. (kenaph). However, these two are not agreed as to the interpretation. The Peshitta renders "wings," the Vatican and Alexandrian scribes render πτερύγιον, the word used (Matthew 4:5) for a pinnacle of the temple. There is, whichever is preferred, not the slightest justification for the suggestion of Kuenen that we should read כּנּו instead of כְּנַפ Professor Bevan thinks "this emendation is well-nigh certain." If that is so, any suggestion of any critic may be equally commended. We have practically four Greek versions here, two Syriae if we include Paulus Tellensis, two Latin, and not one of them gives the slightest hint that this "well-nigh certain" reading was in existence. The balance of evidence is decidedly in favour of קֹדֶשׁ (qodesh), especially so in the light of our Lord's words. Had the text with which his hearers were familiar contained the suggestive word כִּנַפ, "wing," it was impossible, speaking as he did of the setting up of the Roman eagles in the temple, to have avoided remarking on the word used. Our Lord in this case must have had the Hebrew before him, as he does not render as the Greek versions do, ἐπὶ τὸ ἱερόν, but ἐν τόλῳ ἁγίῳ. We must thus hold קֹדֶשׁ to have been the original text. And he shall confirm the covenant with many. What is the subject of the verb here? Hengstenberg, Hitzig, and yon Lengerke make the one week the nominative of the verb. Professor Bevan objects that to represent a week making a covenant, or making it burdensome, is without analogy. Both Hitzig and Hengstenberg appeal to Malachi 3:19; Isaiah 22:5; Job 3:3, where a "day" is represented as acting. Theodotion translates thus. The natural meaning, according to the Hebrew, if we do not pass beyond the clause before us for the subject of the verb, is בְּרִית, (bereeth), "covenant." Thus we ought naturally to render either - taking the hiphil in its causative sense - "a covenant," or "the covenant shall confirm;" i.e. secure "one week to many," or - and this is better, as supported by Psalm 12:5 (4), in the sense given to the hiphil of גָבַר (gabar) - "the covenant shall prevail for many during one week." This agrees with the first version we find in the Septuagint, The covenant - God's covenant with Israel, and this it must be here - "prevails with many;" his covenant to send a Messiah, a part of the eternal covenant with Israel, would prevail with the hearts of many of Israel during one week. If we reckon our Lord's ministry to have begun in the year A.D. , and the conversion of St. Paul A.D. , we have the interval required. After the conversion of St. Paul, the Gentiles more than the Jews were brought into the Church. Another theory is that it is the coming prince who is referred to. This is assumed by critics to be Antiochus; e.g. Ewald. Moses Stuart, who adopts this view, refers to the covenant made with Antiochus by many of the Jews. But bereeth thus absolute, is used not of alliances, but of the Divine covenant. The theory that the coming prince is Jason the brother of Onias does not suit with the idea of confirming the Divine covenant, so the interpreters that hold this view - e.g. Bevan - do not make "the prince" the subject of the verb. If bereeth is the Divine covenant, as by usage it is, then the prince whose people were to lay waste the temple and city cannot be he that confirms the covenant. We might take the last clause of ver. 26 as in a parenthesis, and regard the subject of the verb "confirm" as the Messiah who was cut off. It seems, however, preferable to take the construction as we have done above, and make bereeth the subject of the verb. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. In accordance with our interpretation of the previous clause, we would interpret this, "The covenant shall cause offering and oblation to cease." What covenant is this? The new Messianic covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 8:8) quotes this passage as Messianic, and as proving that sacrifice and offering had ceased with Christ's sacrifice of himself. Interpreters of the critical school are reduced to considerable difficulties in their endeavours to square this passage with their preconceived notions Bevan admits that the natural subject of the verb yashbeeth is the "prince who shall come;" but having come to the conclusion that this coming prince is Jason, he could not be said to make sacrifice and offering cease. Professor Bevan is constrained to change the reading from hiphil into the kal. He has certainly the justification that the Septuagint and Theodotion both make the word passive. Ewald regards the coming prince as Epiphanes. If so, then he must be the subject all through. In that case we are obliged to contradict usage and maintain that the covenant confirmed refers to an alliance made with apostate Jews; but this, as we have said, contradicts the usage in regard to "covenant" in this absolute position. Further, we have, in the end of ver. 26, the "end of the war" referred to. Yet, according to this interpretation, after the war is over the prince is making sacrifice and offering to cease. Ewald, recognizing the difficulties of his interpretation,declares, "As soon as the discourse touches upon the man and his projects, it is at once agitated with the profoundest disorder." The midst of the week. On the ordinary Christian interpretation, this applies to the crucifixion of our Lord, which took place, according to the received calculation, during the fourth year after his baptism by John, and the consequent opening of his ministry. Hitzig and many critical commentators see a reference in the half-week to the time, times, and half a time, and they identify that with the time during which Antiochus had set up the heathen altar in the temple. It is to be observed that this view has the support of 1 Macc. 1:54, which applies the next clause to Antiochus. If the traditional view is correct - that the prophecy published in the days of Cyrus applied to the coming Romans - then it was but natural that a writer in the clays of John Hyrcanus should be prone to interpret the prophecy of events in his own time. As we have already seen, the reference cannot be to Antiochus. The extreme popularity of Daniel by the time 1 Maccabees was written, probably about B.C. 100, is to be observed. For the overspreading of abominations, he shall make it desolate. This is rendered in the Revised Version, "And upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate;" in the margin the rendering is, "upon the pinnacle of abominations." We have seen that the great balance of evidence was in favour of inserting קֹדֶשׁ, "holy place," instead of כָּנָפ, "wing." Even if we take the Massoretic reading, and render it according either to the text or the margin, we have difficulties. We have no instance of a bird supporting itself by one wing. If כְּנָפ. (konaph), "wing," is retained, the reference to the Roman eagles can scarcely be resisted. The word has several derivative meanings: "The edge" of the earth, as Isaiah 24:16; from this is derived the rendering in the Revised. In the present passage, Gesenius, Furst, and Wirier regard it as equivalent to πτερύγιον; but no such meaning is elsewhere found in Hebrew. "He shall make it desolate." In Hebrew, this is only one word, meshomaym, the participle. The word occurs twice in Ezra 9:1, 4, and there means "astonished," "stupefied." It is imitated in Daniel 11:31, but the preceding word, שִׁקּוּצ (shiqqootz), is in the singular, and agrees with meshomaym. Here we have the noun shiqqootzeem in the plural while the participle is in the singular. In Daniel 12:11 we have another variation, שִׁקוּצ שֹׁמֵם. The versions translate as if the word had been in the singular; hence we may doubt whether the noun was not originally singular, all the more that in the parallel passage (Daniel 11:31) we have the singular used. An accidental reduplication of the מ, which begins מְשׁמֵם, would explain the present reading. Professor Bevan suggests that we read מֻשָׁמִים, the hophal participle plural from שׂוּם, "to sit;" but the evidence of the versions is decisive against this. The rendering of the clause would be thus, "and upon the temple the abomination of desolation." The usage of shiqqootz leads us to think of heathen idols, as 1 Kings 11:1, Chemosh, the abomination of Moab; Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon, 2 Kings 23:13; Ashtoreth, the abomination of the Zidonians. More important is Jeremiah 32:34, "They set their abominations in the house that is called by my name, to defile it." We have here the combination suggested by Professor Bevan. From the fact that Daniel seems to have been saturated with Jeremiah, his suggestion might have had weight; but the utter want of any hint in the versions that the reading was even doubtful, compels us to be against this view. There is no case where shiqqootz means "altar," but many where it means" idol." So the setting up of a heathen altar is not what would naturally be thought of in this connection. The traditional opinion, that this refers to the Roman eagle standards, which were in a sense "idols," and were regarded especially as such by the Jews, is certainly at least plausible on grammatical grounds, and may be regarded as certain from other reasons; e.g. its suitability to the meaning of the other verses. Even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured out upon the desolate. The Revised Version is very different here, "And even unto the consummation, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolator." We have already seen that תִּתַּך (tittak)," poured out," must be abandoned, as not present in any of the versions. Most of them have read 1 Samuel 2:15. The generality of the phenomenon is due to the normal structure of the Hebrew clause. An end shall be set some time to the desolation of Zion, although that end may coincide with 'the end of all things.

Jeff_56 · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

true, never-the-less, yhwh let thy will be done; peace be to jerusalem ! blessed is he who comes in the name adonai!

come quickly lord jesus !

VCO · Mar 16, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

I agree, and mainly because I listened to a lot sermon tapes by Dr. John MacArthur on both Revelation and the book of Daniel. The Revelation Series had 36 one hour tapes in it and the Book of Daniel had almost as many, and I listened to each tape four times, while working the night shift, years ago. He convinced me the Revival of the Roman Empire is the European Union, and they still have not selected a single RULER to reign over them, but they will. Sure there are more than ten nations now, but once a Dictator takes over, several will pull out, leaving 10. Then three of those horns will be torn up by their roots. What does that mean? We have seen it happen in our lifetime to one country for sure. East Germany was torn up by her roots. It is as if it NEVER existed.

GracethroughfaithinChrist · Mar 16, 2015

VCO said:

lol, an excavation by the U.S. military to find artifacts in a former desolated and uninhabited skeleton of the city of Babylon while temporarily occupying another country does not establish re-habitation. It's a dig site Orv not the making of a city to be inhabited in. Sorry but try and sale this rubbish somewhere else. Also the next time you create a thread you might want to speak truth instead of cherry picking verses way out of context to support a theory some man taught you that can not be verified. You are trying to sale a lie here and i'm not buying it one bit. Someone may have sold you a sour pack of bologna but i'm not buying it.......Adios muchacho!

VCO · Mar 17, 2015

eternally-gratefull said:

He the Antichrists sits where GOD would sit in the Holy of Holies, but it is a different object that he puts ON the wing of the Temple:

2 Thessalonians 2:2-4 (NKJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come.
[SUP]3 [/SUP] Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day (the Second Coming) will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, (the Antichrist)
[SUP]4 [/SUP] who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

Daniel 9:27 (HCSB)
[SUP]27 [/SUP]He will make a firm covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and offering. And the abomination of desolation will be on a wing of the templeuntil the decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator.” {NOT - IN a wing}

NOTE the Curtain is between the Altar of Incense and the Ark of the Covenant at the back of the Temple. That space between the two angels attached to the Ark of the Covenant is where GOD symbolically SITS. I believe that is where Antichrist sits when he demands that the whole world bows and worships himself, or be beheaded.

Does the BIBLE describe a coming Nuclear War?

Senior Member

Senior Member

eternally-gratefull

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

eternally-gratefull

Guest

eternally-gratefull

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

eternally-gratefull

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

yaright

Guest

kennethcadwell

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member