Mystery Babylon

Titus, truly a prince being the son of the Emperor of Rome Vespasian, who destroyed not only Jerusalem and the Temple but also
the nation of Judah.
Here is a clear reference to Jesus' atonement and crucifixion after three-and-a-half years of ministry - it is finished.
This equals 7 years made up of three-and-a-half years of Jesus' ministry and bringing to and end the need for Temple sacrifices
and another three-and-a-half years later when Cornelius and his household receive the Holy Spirit with the sign of speaking in
tongues just as the Jews.
& years from Jesus preaching to the Jews (his own) to salvation poured out to both Jews and Gentiles - truly a New Covenant
is now put into action.

This five minute rule can be annoying at times - let's try writing correctly this time
7 years from Jesus preaching to the Jews (his own) to salvation poured out to both Jews and Gentiles - truly a New Covenant
is now put into action.

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
Ephesians 2:

26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Matthew 26: (KJV)
28 for this is my blood which is to be poured out for many for the remission of sins--the blood which ratifies the Covenant.
(Weymouth)

tsk , tsk

Lets see the flaw in your reasoning

1. Gabriel said the “People of the prince who is to come destroy the city and sanctuary”

2. You said the Prince himself DESTROYS the sanctuary.

See the flaw? Titus is included in the PEOPLE of the PRINCE who is to come not the prince himself

Titus also did not commit the abomination, Gabrield tells us events would happen between the time the temple is destroyed, and the abomination occures. Simple logic should show you that, But...


Again your thinking is flawed

1. Jesus did not confirm a covenant 3.5 years before his death, The prince here does.
2. Sacrificie and offering is put to a stop by the temple being made inclean with the abomination of desolation (what is with you all and not knowing what an abomination of desolation is? Antiochus epiphanes is the example back when he put an end to sacrifice and burnt offering by slaughtering a pig in the holy place Use scripture to interpret scripture. Not your belief system.

Blah Blah Blah

Nothing here has anything to do with Daniel 9. Jesus told you as. Much in Matt 24. immediately AFTEr the abomination of desolation occured, the great tribulation started, Nothing happened after the death of christ. And tongues is not even mentioned.

Each to their own.
In a democracy you have the right to be wrong.

3.5 years BEFORE, this was days before
This covenant was ETERNAL, the prince in dan 9 made a 7 year covenant

I am sorry, But what you are claiming is not logical, it is like trying to put a round ball in a square hole. It does not fit.

Ps. Dan 9 was concernign ISREAL and the city and temple of God who lied desolate and was scattered. That is the context. The fulfilment of Gods answer to his beloved daniel will be when Israel is NO LONGEr scattered, they have repented, and The city and sanctuary are no LONGER desolate.

Daniel did not pray for the SALVATION of all the world. So using it as context is taking the passage out of context.

Once again, Take the WHOLE CHAPTER, and not just a few verses to form your interpretation. Thats why you miss the point being made

Yes you do. And the topic of end times prophesy will not condemn you, even the tongues debate

But the gospel it will be major if your wrong. There is only ONE gospel. All others will be rejected.

That should be your primary worry.

"By so much also, Jesus has become the guarantee [/a surety] of a better covenant." Hebrews 7:22

This is why no Christians were killed during the destruction of Jerusalem. When the Christians saw "the abomination of desolation" "standing in the holy place", they fled to the mountains (a place called Pella), as Jesus had instructed, and were saved, while those who heeded not the words of Jesus perished.

There was no abomination of desolation in AD 70, there was total destruction, just as jesus and gabriel prophesied.

Learn the difference between the two and what they mean. And you will see what is really going on.

Wasn't the Roman army the abomination which caused desolation, and the holy place (where the abomination ought not to stand) Jerusalem?

This reading certainly makes these scriptures consistent with each other.

Matthew 24:15-22 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.

Mark 13:14-20 “So when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not” (let the reader understand), “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down into the house, nor enter to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! And pray that your flight may not be in winter. For in those days there will be tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the creation which God created until this time, nor ever shall be. And unless the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake, whom He chose, He shortened the days.

Luke 21:20-24
“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

An abomination of desolation is an idle or unclean thing, which is placed in the most holy place of a temple. Rendering it ceremonially unclean. Which in fact, puts an end to sacrifice and burnt offering, until the holy place is cleansed.

So no. The roman army is not the abomination. The roman army is the PEOPLE OF THE PRINCE WHO IS TO COME who would DESTROY THE CITY AND SANCTUARY (see dan 9) the prince who is to come is the one who PLACES the abomination of desolation in the holy place. (See dan 9 with Matt 24) (when you see it standing in the holy place)

When titus came, The people of Israel did not see the abomination STANDING in the holy place. That would have been impossible. Considering the Holy Place was DEEP inside the temple. And ONLY certain priests were even allowed to come close. Believe you me, when the prince who is to come enters. There will be new jews in site of the Holy Place to see anything. (At least not face to face)

Again, STUDY what the term means.

IMO, it's not enough just to "match phrases" without taking note of other surrounding contexts that reveal "chronology" and so forth. Here's what I've posted before on this section ^ :

[quoting]

The "SEE" then "FLEE" is indeed following the "beginning of birth pangs [plural]" in Matthew 24.

But in Luke 21, THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

--"the beginning of birth pangs" = Matt24:4-8 / Mk13:5-8 / and DESCRIBED in Lk21:8-11...

[but then verse 12 says, "BUT BEFORE ALL THESE" (and then [vv.12-24a] describes the 70ad events which must come BEFORE the "beginning of birth PANGS [PLURAL]/and 1Th5:2-3 is the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]"--with many more that follow on from there)]

so...

in Luke 21 the order is not "birth pangs" THEN "SEE" THEN "FLEE," but instead is "SEE [Jeru compassed with armies]" THEN "FLEE" [BEFORE ALL OF THESE--->] "beginning of birth pangs" [which is Matt24:4-8/Mt13:5-8/Lk21:8-11 and then followed by much more...].

Completely distinct and wholly different SEQUENCE (not to mention the specific thing they were/are to "SEE" in each)

____________

Luke 21:24 [in the SECTION re: events surrounding 70ad (vv.12-24a)] "And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all the nations..."

Matthew 24:29-31 [re: their gathering] parallel to Isaiah 27:12-13 [at the "GREAT" trumpet], where Isaiah says, "ye shall be gathered ONE by ONE, O ye children of Israel" and..."and shall worship the Lord in the holy mount AT JERUSALEM"

Completely opposite things. (And neither of them are speaking of our Rapture, per contexts.)

[end quoting]

Eternally grateful your logic doesnt make any sense I know you trying to argue it to fit in with your rapture theory, but you miss so many things.

Also, you claim nothing happened after the death of Christ well actually thats not true Jesus was resurrected! That is basic fact you completely ignore. Another fact you ignore is the temple itself is no longer there! GO to iSrael and see for yourself. What is in the spot deemed holy of holies now? Its the dome of the rock. An islamic monument!

Come now do you expect any of us to believe Jesus did not confirm the covenant, with his own blood, that we celebrate with communicion each time we gather?

Do you expect any of us to believe that someone else aside from Jesus confirms this covenant, and then breaks it?

You are grasping at straws. You are making up another covenant out of your own imagination.

Plus, Jesus is the King of Israel..he came for Israel first. He is also a light for the gentiles but its clear in the Bible he came for jews As he himself was from Judah...and bring salvation to israel first. He is the seed of abraham.

The old abrahamic convenat was renewed theough Jesus Christ. Recall back in Genesis how abraham offered various animals and cut them in half and God walked through them. JEsus blood was given when he was crucified to renew THIS convenant. The promises and blessings now extend through Jesus and that now includes gentiles.

concerning Jerusalem
And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord
was crucified.
Revelation 11:8

Oh
He fully believes baptismal regeneration and that salvation can be lost.....and if you do not speak in mumbo jumbo you are not saved

Going back to mystery Babylon...the topic of this thread.

What would be the wealthiest city in this day and age Im wondering. The one thats the most influential and the one where its ok to sin and blaspheme God.

Full of names of blasphemy, what would those be I wonder.

Sodom and egypt...why was that name given to Jerusalem...spiritually.
Would Babylon be the spiritual name also given to Jerusalem? We do know Jeruslaem was taken over by Babylonians in the past. The jews were taken captive...the psalmist lamented by the rivers of Babylon, where we sat down, yea we wept, when we remembered Zion. It wasnt a place that they wanted to go.

Even though it may have had beautiful hanging gardens and all sorts of luxury goods. It wasnt home.