When does the rapture occur?

[watcher2013]

18 But not a hair of your head shall be lost.

19 By your patience possess your souls.


Most of the disciples were dead by AD 70, so obviously "hair was lost." Then we come to verse 19 which appears in many places this concept of patience. If by patience you keep your souls would not the opposite apply? In other words if you are not patient do you lose your soul? I don't mean lose it as in don't go to heaven, I mean lose it as in you die. A person only possess their souls while they are living. So, the lesson here seems to be if you are not patient, you die.

Luk 21:16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
Luk 21:17 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.
Luk 21:18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.
Luk 21:19 In your patience possess ye your souls.

What do you think of verse 16...Some of you shall they cause to be put to death?

 

[PlainWord]

Okay, you need to go learn what parallel passages are, and their significance.

Your responses indicate they have no meaning or significance to you.

Parallel passages serve as an explanation where explanations exist in them.
Those explanations of one passage by its parallel passage are Biblical,
not private and uncertain, explanations.

No offense but I understand parallel passages but it is not clear to me that you do. The below is a quote from your post #553:

I see:

Mt 24:4-15 - referring to the second coming, including the deception of vv. 4-5, 11,

Mt 24:15-22 - transitioning to the destruction of the Temple in the destruction of Jerusalem,

Mt 24:23-31 - transitioning back to the second coming, including the deception of vv. 23-25.

I see the deception as coming.

You state unequivocally that verse 15 dealt with the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. I just proved to you that this is FALSE. The Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel COULD NOT have happened in AD 70 just as I proved. Here's what Christ says:

15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),

Jesus makes crystal clear in his reference to Daniel. Thus the answer is found in Daniel and not Luke. Daniel mentions the Abomination of Desolation twice. Here...

31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation.

and here...

11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days.

If you look at the context of these passages you will find them to indeed be future. Titus does not fit as I explained in my last post. There was nothing peaceful or intriguing by the way he took over Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple. Further, Titus was married twice. Titus was said to have NOT wanted to destroy the temple and further that he did NOT want to take credit or celebrate the sacking of the Temple as He recognized it as the Jewish God having passed judgment on His People.

Also, there seems to be no correlation to the 1,290 or 1,335 days to AD 70. Daniel specifically asks this question:

8 Although I heard, I did not understand. Then I said, "My lord, what shall be the end of these things?"

This is the same question the disciples posed to Jesus.

The answer is given to Daniel as this.

12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.

13 But you, go your way till the end; for you shall rest, and will arise to your inheritance at the end of the days."

Here comes the command to wait again.

None of the above passages fit Titus. His attack does not agree with Dan 11-12, his character doesn't fit. His death certainly does not fit as Titus died in Lycia in Turkey and not between the "seas and the glorious mountain!!"

Therefore it is pretty strongly conclusive that TITUS could NOT and WAS NOT the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel and referenced by Jesus in Mat 24:15. Since that is the facts then the verses that follow are also yet future. Thus Jesus was speaking chronologically and not jumping all over the place as you suggest.

 

[Elin]

You state unequivocally that verse 15 dealt with the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. I just proved to you that this is FALSE. The Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel COULD NOT have happened in AD 70 just as I proved. Here's what Christ says:

15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),

Jesus makes crystal clear in his reference to Daniel. Thus
the answer is found in Daniel and not Luke.
Daniel mentions the Abomination of Desolation twice.

And I'm going with Da 9:27, "the overspreading of abominations" and
Jesus "when you see standing in the holy place," and
Luke "when you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies,"
and the Jewish historian, Josephus, who describes the destruction of Jerusalem
in 70 AD in the terms Jesus used,
to be the Roman army in v.15 invading Jerusalem in 70 AD.

 

[GaryA]

Thus Jesus was speaking chronologically and not jumping all over the place as you suggest.

"Sorry, my friend, but..."

There is most definitely some "jumping" -- and, it can be understood by virtue of the "grammar of the language" of the passage.

Looking at the verses in Matthew 24:

Do you think that "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, ..." occurs AFTER "and then shall the end come." ( from the verse before it ) ???

The Abomination of Desolation marks the beginning of the Great Tribulation, right?

Does the Great Tribulation take place AFTER "the end" ???

Does the Great Tribulation take place AFTER "the gospel is preached in all the world" ???

Will false Christs and false prophets 'arise' AFTER "the end" ???

No. Of course not...

The phrase "and then shall the end come" in verse 14 is referring to "the beginning of the end" -- the description of which starts in verse 29.

The phrase "When ye therefore" in verse 15 is a kind of "backing up" in time "by virtue of the explanation that was made before it" - ending in the phrase "and then shall the end come"...


Notice the last part of verse 6:

"...: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet."

At the word "For" in verse 7, there is a 'jump' forward in time. Verses 7-8 are an 'aside' to verse 6 - which constitutes a partial explanation of the last part of verse 6, written above. At the word "Then" in verse 9, the thought process returns to continue after verse 6. Verses 7-8 are describing events further in the future than verses 4-6,9-13.

Also, notice the phrase "But before all these" in Luke 21:12.

Verses 23-26 ( back in Matthew 24 ) are not describing things occurring AFTER the end of the Great Tribulation - after "the days are shortened" as mentioned in verse 22. Verses 23-26 are describing things that occur DURING the Great Tribulation.

Yes --- there is most definitely some "jumping"...

 

[GaryA]

Verses 7-8 are describing events further in the future than verses 4-6,9-13.

Verses 7-8 are describing events that would fall between verses 13 & 14 ( rows 13 & 14 on my chart ) --- otherwise -- at best - they overlap rows 12-14.

 

[GaryA]

Based on my Olivet Discourse chart:

[table="width: 500, align: left"]
[tr][td]Row(s)[/td][td]Place in Time[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]3-4[/td][td]beginning before 70 A.D.[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]5-7[/td][td]beginning "way after" 70 A.D.[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]8[/td][td]aligned with "beginning of the end" (Row 20)[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]9-11[/td][td]beginning "soon after" 70 A.D.[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]12[/td][td]after 70 A.D.; possible overlap of Rows 5-7[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]13[/td][td]overlaps Rows 9-12[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]14[/td][td]after 70 A.D.; marks "beginning of the end"[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]15[/td][td]"beginning of the end", after the gospel is preached to all nations[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]16[/td][td]70 A.D.[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]17[/td][td]70 A.D. until [ time of ] Row 20[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]18[/td][td]after 70 A.D.[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]19[/td][td](explanatory reference)[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]20[/td][td]"beginning of the end"[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]21[/td][td]Christ returns[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]22[/td][td]Rapture[/td][/tr]
[/table]

The phrase "the end" in Row 13 is referring to 'the end of life', and not 'the end of time'.

 

[PlainWord]

And I'm going with Da 9:27, "the overspreading of abominations" and
Jesus "when you see standing in the holy place," and
Luke "when you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies,"
and the Jewish historian, Josephus, who describes the destruction of Jerusalem
in 70 AD in the terms Jesus used,
to be the Roman army in v.15 invading Jerusalem in 70 AD.

I agree with the below commentary taken from Amazing Discoveries:

9:25-27 These verses outline events to take place during the seventy weeks; they also have a definite structure of two groups of three.

1. “unto the Messiah the Prince”
2. “shall Messiah be cut off”
3. “shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease”

1. “the street shall be built again, and the wall”
2. “shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”
3. “and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate”

The first group concerns the Messiah, and takes place within the seventy week time period. The second trio concerns Jerusalem and an opposing prince, and is not limited to the seventy weeks.

Verse 27 jumps ahead. The 70th week is yet future. A clear gap is present and the last week was not discussed previously in verse 26.

27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."

Who is the HE? Who are the MANY? What is the covenant? Some suggest it is Christ and that Christ took away the sacrifice and offerings by His crucifixion. But did Christ make desolate? No. Christ wasn't even there in AD 70. If the crucifixion was the confirming of a new covenant, why did it last just one week or 7 years? Christ's redemption is permanent, it is an everlasting covenant, not a 7 year covenant so that doesn't make sense either. The 62 weeks and 7 weeks tie perfectly to the command to rebuild the temple and to the anointing of Messiah.

So, do we have further details of this HE who make desolate? Of course, it is the King of the North.

Daniel 11:31 (KJV) And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Read on what else this man does:

Daniel 11:36 (KJV) And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.


Does Christ speak against the God of gods? Of course not. Therefore Dan 9:27 refers to the AofD of Dan 11 and 12. Since Daniel's AofD was not Titus then Jesus could not have been referring to Titus either and if Jesus wasn't discussing Titus in Mat 24:15 then He had to be discussing the same AofD that Daniel discusses and this AofD is not only future, it is the same entity that Paul discusses in 2 Thes 2.

Again compare:

Daniel 11:

36 "Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.

and...

2 Thes 2:

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,

4 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.

These descriptions match perfectly. That "Day" is the Day of the Lord - the Day Christ returns and just as that is future, so is the Man of Sin and so is the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel and Christ.

 

[GaryA]

I agree with the below commentary taken from Amazing Discoveries:

9:25-27 These verses outline events to take place during the seventy weeks; they also have a definite structure of two groups of three.

1. “unto the Messiah the Prince”
2. “shall Messiah be cut off”
3. “shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease”

1. “the street shall be built again, and the wall”
2. “shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”
3. “and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate”

The first group concerns the Messiah, and takes place within the seventy week time period. The second trio concerns Jerusalem and an opposing prince, and is not limited to the seventy weeks.

Verse 27 jumps ahead. The 70th week is yet future. A clear gap is present and the last week was not discussed previously in verse 26.

27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."

Who is the HE? Who are the MANY? What is the covenant? Some suggest it is Christ and that Christ took away the sacrifice and offerings by His crucifixion. But did Christ make desolate? No. Christ wasn't even there in AD 70. If the crucifixion was the confirming of a new covenant, why did it last just one week or 7 years? Christ's redemption is permanent, it is an everlasting covenant, not a 7 year covenant so that doesn't make sense either. The 62 weeks and 7 weeks tie perfectly to the command to rebuild the temple and to the anointing of Messiah.

So, do we have further details of this HE who make desolate? Of course, it is the King of the North.

Daniel 11:31 (KJV) And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Read on what else this man does:

Daniel 11:36 (KJV) And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.


Does Christ speak against the God of gods? Of course not. Therefore Dan 9:27 refers to the AofD of Dan 11 and 12. Since Daniel's AofD was not Titus then Jesus could not have been referring to Titus either and if Jesus wasn't discussing Titus in Mat 24:15 then He had to be discussing the same AofD that Daniel discusses and this AofD is not only future, it is the same entity that Paul discusses in 2 Thes 2.

Again compare:

Daniel 11:

36 "Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.

and...

2 Thes 2:

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,

4 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.

These descriptions match perfectly. That "Day" is the Day of the Lord - the Day Christ returns and just as that is future, so is the Man of Sin and so is the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel and Christ.

"In light of all of this..."

Please explain Luke 21:20-24 -- and, especially, verse 24 in particular.

 

[PlainWord]

Gary,

First I think we need to define what the "END" is as Christ intended it to be as the disciples inquired. The End is Judgment Day at which point the saved are saved and the wicked are condemned. The End is NOT the beginning of the Great Tribulation or the moment Christ returns. The end certainly is not the destruction of the Second Temple.

The "Gospel being preached" is a prerequisite to the end, not to the return of Christ. The Gospel is preached even after Christ returns as we see from Rev 14:6. Thus Mat 24:14 tells us that the gospel will be preached all the way to Judgment Day.
_______________________________________________________________

The disciples already know much about the events at the end of the world. Remember Jesus already taught them this back in Mat 13 and they said they understood:

49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth , and sever the wicked from among the just,

50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.

So when the topic came up again the disciples inquired as to WHEN this would happen.

3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately , saying , Tell us, when shall these things be ? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Jesus doesn't give them a date because He doesn't even know, only the Father knows. So instead He tells them of precursor events that will take place prior to the end. The destruction of the second temple was a prerequisite but as we know a long time prior to the end. As I've shown verse 15 does not deal with the destruction of the Second temple. First, Jesus isn't even talking about any temple being destroyed here, instead He is discussing the A of D which I've already shown was not Titus nor was it Jesus, it is the Man of Sin who Paul discusses and it takes place in the future Third Temple.

So, when I say the Olivet is sequential, I mean the events are given in order. This doesn't mean Christ can't give us prerequisites so that we can know the season.

 

[PlainWord]

"In light of all of this..."

Please explain Luke 21:20-24 -- and, especially, verse 24 in particular.

The structure of the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, differ. There are many passages that don't line up between the 3 accounts. Here's a link to a good website which explains various differences, some significantly more different than the one we are discussing, between the Synoptic Gospels.

The Synoptic Problem: The Literary Relationship of Matthew, Mark, and Luke

As I stated before, Luke makes no mention of the Abomination of Desolation nor does he use the word, "TRIBULATION." Luke skips the whole passage about "Not going forth" when they say Christ is in the desert or inner room etc. Luke doesn't talk at all about the ELECT or having the days shortened at all in Luke 21. Luke's account is split in two with some of it in Chapter 17.

Conversely neither Matthew or Mark discuss the armies surrounding Jerusalem.

It seems clear to me that Luke 21:24 is dealing with the Second Temple and that this passage does NOT coincide with Mat 24:15. Luke jumps 2,000+ years after verse 24. But in Luke 17 he does pick up some of the pre- appearance of Christ stuff in verses 17:22-37.

Again, I would not use Luke's account to infer from Matthew and Mark's account that the Abomination of Desolation was Titus or happened in AD70. Rather you should study Daniel (who Christ invoked) and you should easily conclude that the A of D in Daniel 11-12 does not line up at all with Titus.

 

[PlainWord]

First, Jesus isn't even talking about any temple being destroyed here, instead He is discussing the A of D which I've already shown was not Titus nor was it Jesus, it is the Man of Sin who Paul discusses and it takes place in the future Third Temple.

I mis-spoke in the above. The Abomination of Desolation is not the Man of Sin. The A of D is not even a person. It is an image of something blasphemous; "An image to the Beast"

14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.

15 He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed.

I believe this is the same thing Daniel describes below:

31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation.

Which is the same thing Jesus discusses:

15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),

The image speaks and causes those who would not worship the IMAGE of the BEAST to be killed. This IMAGE of the BEAST will be the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION put there (the Sanctuary Fortress) by the armies of the Vile Person, AKA the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, which many call the AntiChrist

 

[PlainWord]

Luk 21:16And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
Luk 21:17And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.
Luk 21:18But there shall not an hair of your head perish.
Luk 21:19In your patience possess ye your souls.

What do you think of verse 16...Some of you shall they cause to be put to death?

They died with perfect hair??? LOL.

Obviously it's spiritual. The word, "Perish" usually refers to spiritual death.

 

[PlainWord]

Just to be clear, I know that a lot of people believe Daniel 11 is mostly fulfilled right up to verse 36. These so-called experts and scholars think that the Abomination of Desolation referred to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC because Jerusalem was taken and the temple was plundered. Further swine was placed on the alter thus polluting it. They believe the Mosaic Covenant was broken because traditions were halted. Jews were forced to worship Greek idols, etc.

However, many problems exist with the notion of a pre-Christ fulfillment of Daniel 11.

1. Christ spoke of the Abomination of Desolation as "SPOKEN OF BY DANIEL the PROPHET STANDING IN THE HOLY PLACE" as a future event to Him. Therefore Christ could not have been speaking of Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC which means Daniel wasn't speaking of him either.

2. The text is clear from Dan 9:27 that "he" will make a covanent with many for 1 week then break the covenant. Antiochus Epiphanes did not make a covanent that he then broke 3.5 years later.

3. There was no significance to 1,290 or 1,335 days to Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC.

Conclusion:

So either the future starts before verse 36 to include verse 31 where the Abomination of Desolation is first mentioned by Daniel or the events back then are a type of the events to come. Because there is NO WAY Christ was speaking of Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC in Mat 24:15 as a future event.

 

[Sec]

They died with perfect hair??? LOL.

Obviously it's spiritual. The word, "Perish" usually refers to spiritual death.

Plainword, the Bible is filled with parables, the "hair of the head" is a parable for the memories or knowledge that was contained within that head. When we die, all of our memories and knowledge is saved by God for our resurrection into the kingdom, when as we will see in Revelation the seals upon them will be opened, and all of our history will be remembered. agreed that the people of the past would never have understood that parable, except for the disciples, but as we are told, 1 Corinthians 13: For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
My glass has been cleaned.

<><===><>
Gary Sechler
With knowledge on loan from God

 

[Sec]

Plain word, Your conclusion, Jesus was speaking of His crucifixion, verse corrected "when you see the desolation of abomination standing in the holy place. The desolation of abomination happened when Jesus died for our sins, since the translators saw nothing but evil in their future, and the world going steadily down hill until it ended, they naturally reversed the words, so that it fit their false theology. another possible translation could be, since there are no "little" word in Hebrew, "abominations desolated" if you don't like the idea of reversing the words, just remove the "of" because it's not there in the Hebrew, and not there in the Greek either. It was added by the translators to get their understanding of the verse, which was wrong.

<><===><>
Gary Sechler
With knowledge on loan from God

 

[watcher2013]

I agree with the below commentary taken from Amazing Discoveries:

9:25-27 These verses outline events to take place during the seventy weeks; they also have a definite structure of two groups of three.

1. “unto the Messiah the Prince”
2. “shall Messiah be cut off”
3. “shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease”

1. “the street shall be built again, and the wall”
2. “shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”
3. “and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate”

The first group concerns the Messiah, and takes place within the seventy week time period. The second trio concerns Jerusalem and an opposing prince, and is not limited to the seventy weeks.

Verse 27 jumps ahead. The 70th week is yet future. A clear gap is present and the last week was not discussed previously in verse 26.

27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."

Who is the HE? Who are the MANY? What is the covenant? Some suggest it is Christ and that Christ took away the sacrifice and offerings by His crucifixion. But did Christ make desolate? No. Christ wasn't even there in AD 70. If the crucifixion was the confirming of a new covenant, why did it last just one week or 7 years? Christ's redemption is permanent, it is an everlasting covenant, not a 7 year covenant so that doesn't make sense either. The 62 weeks and 7 weeks tie perfectly to the command to rebuild the temple and to the anointing of Messiah.

So, do we have further details of this HE who make desolate? Of course, it is the King of the North.

Daniel 11:31 (KJV) And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Read on what else this man does:

Daniel 11:36 (KJV) And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.


Does Christ speak against the God of gods? Of course not. Therefore Dan 9:27 refers to the AofD of Dan 11 and 12. Since Daniel's AofD was not Titus then Jesus could not have been referring to Titus either and if Jesus wasn't discussing Titus in Mat 24:15 then He had to be discussing the same AofD that Daniel discusses and this AofD is not only future, it is the same entity that Paul discusses in 2 Thes 2.

Again compare:

Daniel 11:

36 "Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.

and...

2 Thes 2:

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,

4 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.

These descriptions match perfectly. That "Day" is the Day of the Lord - the Day Christ returns and just as that is future, so is the Man of Sin and so is the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel and Christ.

Just to be clear, I know that a lot of people believe Daniel 11 is mostly fulfilled right up to verse 36. These so-called experts and scholars think that the Abomination of Desolation referred to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC because Jerusalem was taken and the temple was plundered. Further swine was placed on the alter thus polluting it. They believe the Mosaic Covenant was broken because traditions were halted. Jews were forced to worship Greek idols, etc.

However, many problems exist with the notion of a pre-Christ fulfillment of Daniel 11.

1. Christ spoke of the Abomination of Desolation as "SPOKEN OF BY DANIEL the PROPHET STANDING IN THE HOLY PLACE" as a future event to Him. Therefore Christ could not have been speaking of Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC which means Daniel wasn't speaking of him either.

2. The text is clear from Dan 9:27 that "he" will make a covanent with many for 1 week then break the covenant. Antiochus Epiphanes did not make a covanent that he then broke 3.5 years later.

3. There was no significance to 1,290 or 1,335 days to Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC.

Conclusion:

So either the future starts before verse 36 to include verse 31 where the Abomination of Desolation is first mentioned by Daniel or the events back then are a type of the events to come. Because there is NO WAY Christ was speaking of Antiochus Epiphanes in 169-167 BC in Mat 24:15 as a future event.

Plainword:

Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21 all begin with the issue about the destruction of the temple.

Now, which part of the book of Daniel deals about;

1. The destruction of the temple?
2. destruction of the city
3. and Desolation...

Jesus Talks about the destruction of the temple now if Daniel talks of the same destruction of the temple then that is the desolation...that Daniel spoke of.

how about the abomination stand in the holy place???

One reason maybe:
strangers are not allowed to be inside the sanctuary

Eze_44:7 In that ye have brought into my sanctuary strangers, uncircumcised in heart, and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in my sanctuary, to pollute it, even my house, when ye offer my bread, the fat and the blood, and they have broken my covenant because of all your abominations.

The Romans entered every room of the temple and burnt it.

and this is also equivalent to luke version...
Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
ITs about the destruction temple and subsequent desolation of the City...

 

[PlainWord]

Plain word, Your conclusion, Jesus was speaking of His crucifixion, verse corrected "when you see the desolation of abomination standing in the holy place. The desolation of abomination happened when Jesus died for our sins, since the translators saw nothing but evil in their future, and the world going steadily down hill until it ended, they naturally reversed the words, so that it fit their false theology. another possible translation could be, since there are no "little" word in Hebrew, "abominations desolated" if you don't like the idea of reversing the words, just remove the "of" because it's not there in the Hebrew, and not there in the Greek either. It was added by the translators to get their understanding of the verse, which was wrong.

<><===><>
Gary Sechler
With knowledge on loan from God

Sorry, can't go along with your statement in bold above. This is absolutely a false interpretation. Jesus gives a clear command in Mat 24:15:

15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),

16 then let those who are in Judea flee...

Jesus has invoked the "Abomination of Desolation" spoken of by Daniel. Whether or not an "of" belongs in there is immaterial. What is important is that Jesus was speaking of an event future to the time He spoke it as you do not give a command for people in the past to do something. Since it was a future event it could not have been about the Maccabeen Revolt or the events leading up to that.

Secondly, Jesus invoked Daniel so therefore we must look at Daniel and what he said about the Abomination of Desolation.

Dan 11:

31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation. 32 Those who do wickedly against the covenant he shall corrupt with flattery; but the people who know their God shall be strong, and carry out great exploits.
36 "Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.


The above passage does not speak of Christ or any crucifixion. The sacrifices were not taken away at the time of Christ's death. Those who crucified Christ did not defile the sanctuary fortress nor did they place anything in the temple nor did anyone flee (except perhaps the disciples).

I'm sorry, your idea doesn't work.

 

[PlainWord]

Plainword:

Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21 all begin with the issue about the destruction of the temple.

Now, which part of the book of Daniel deals about;

1. The destruction of the temple?
2. destruction of the city
3. and Desolation...

Jesus Talks about the destruction of the temple now if Daniel talks of the same destruction of the temple then that is the desolation...that Daniel spoke of.

how about the abomination stand in the holy place???

One reason maybe:
strangers are not allowed to be inside the sanctuary

Eze_44:7In that ye have brought into my sanctuary strangers, uncircumcised in heart, and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in my sanctuary, to pollute it, even my house, when ye offer my bread, the fat and the blood, and they have broken my covenant because of all your abominations.

The Romans entered every room of the temple and burnt it.

and this is also equivalent to luke version...
Luk 21:20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
ITs about the destruction temple and subsequent desolation of the City...

Correct, all three passages begin with Jesus discussing the Destruction of the Temple. But each passage poses the disciples question a little differently, thus each answer Christ gives is slightly different in each account. Each Gospel similarly gives slightly different accounts just as you would expect witnesses of a car accident to have slightly different versions of what they saw based on their prospective.

We can go around and around trying to determine which passages from each account align in an attempt to figure out what period of time Christ is discussing in various places of the Olivet- temple, His return, the End of the Age. We all have different views on this but my point is you CANNOT locate the Abomination of Desolation in AD 70 because of Luke. Luke never mentions Daniel or the Abomination. He also omits the Elect and the shortening of days.

The key clues about the Abomination of Desolation is that it was future to Christ and it was spoken of by Daniel. It was NOT spoken of by Luke!! As I explained previously, NOTHING in AD 70 fits the description of events Daniel provides in AD 67-73. Events that happened Before Christ must be ruled out because Christ was speaking of future. Events of AD 67-73 must also be ruled out because Titus and the Romans do not fit the events described by Daniel.

 

[TruthFromFrank]

this millennium..are you referring to Rev 20?

Where are again the saints during this period?
Rev 20:9
And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

Sorry I did not answer your first and second question, Yes , it does refer to Rev 20. I am not sure which saints you are referring to. In my opinion, there are the saved that were resurrected with the crucifixion and as far as I know, the rest of the saved are still in their graves or alive. As purgatory is non-existant, non-biblical and a lie, I cannot accept that as an alternative.

 

[watcher2013]

Correct, all three passages begin with Jesus discussing the Destruction of the Temple. But each passage poses the disciples question a little differently, thus each answer Christ gives is slightly different in each account. Each Gospel similarly gives slightly different accounts just as you would expect witnesses of a car accident to have slightly different versions of what they saw based on their prospective.

We can go around and around trying to determine which passages from each account align in an attempt to figure out what period of time Christ is discussing in various places of the Olivet- temple, His return, the End of the Age. We all have different views on this but my point is you CANNOT locate the Abomination of Desolation in AD 70 because of Luke. Luke never mentions Daniel or the Abomination. He also omits the Elect and the shortening of days.

The key clues about the Abomination of Desolation is that it was future to Christ and it was spoken of by Daniel. It was NOT spoken of by Luke!! As I explained previously, NOTHING in AD 70 fits the description of events Daniel provides in AD 67-73. Events that happened Before Christ must be ruled out because Christ was speaking of future. Events of AD 67-73 must also be ruled out because Titus and the Romans do not fit the events described by Daniel.

The only abomination of desolation from the book of Daniel that specifically deals with the destruction of sanctuary is Daniel 9:
Matthew 24, mark 13 and luke 21 about the destruction of the temple:
Matthew and mark refer the abomination of desolation to Daniel while Luke did not...instead He gave the understanding:

Here is my response with regards to the study of Daniel 9

The confirmation of the covenant was fulfilled in the first Jewish-Roman war including the Destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd temple in AD 70 as it was confirmed also when the Babylonian Destroyed the first temple:
Dan 9:12 And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.

The covenant is this:
Live by the Law and you will stay in the Land
Rebel and God will send you famine, pestilence, war and scattered you into many nations and make the land DESOLATE. (See Leviticus 26)