We know that John wrote Revelation after the temple’s destruction, yet he was still led to write about the Abomination of Desolation—just as Daniel had centuries earlier.
I'm not aware of where John writes about this.
We know that John wrote Revelation after the temple’s destruction, yet he was still led to write about the Abomination of Desolation—just as Daniel had centuries earlier.
I agree that there are many similarities. Let me ask you this—in the context of the Abomination of Desolation that both Daniel and Revelation speak about, do you see two distinct events prophetically?
- The first being the destruction of the temple, when Pompey became the first Roman to enter the Holy of Holies.
- The second being Crassus, who also entered and plundered the temple.
the abomanation that causrs desolation, do you know what desolation means? how could the crucifiction of Christ cause desolation?I don't believe that is the abomination that made desolate. I believe the crucifixion of Christ was. The temple really had no significance after the cross, or one could even argue after Christ appeared
You quote it in Rev 20I'm not aware of where John writes about this.
the abomanation that causrs desolation, do you know what desolation means? how could the crucifiction of Christ cause desolation?
You quote it in Rev 20or excuse me Rev 13:14-15
I disagree 1. Because Jesus is not the abomination that made desolate. He is the fulfillment of of the final sacrifice As Jesus said "it is finished" John 19:28-30I don't believe that is the abomination that made desolate. I believe the crucifixion of Christ was. The temple really had no significance after the cross, or one could even argue after Christ appeared
I wouldn't have even thought to connect the two.
no it didn't that was the romansIt caused the utter destruction of Jerusalem and Judea
I don't believe that is the abomination that made desolate. I believe the crucifixion of Christ was.
I disagree 1. Because Jesus is not the abomination that made desolate. He is the fulfillment of of the final sacrifice As Jesus said "it is finished" John 19:28-30
2. The temple holds significant importance because Jesus prophesied its destruction in Matthew 24.
no it didn't that was the romans
Not in the context of Defiling, then Temple Jesus did not defile the Temple. He opened the holy of holies for all to come; this is why the curtain was torn from top to Bottom. When did any sacrifice God has accepted become known as an abomination? Never.Yes, but the act of crucifying the messiah was an abomination.
It was destroyed because it was insignificant/obsolete and no longer served God's purposes
Not in the context of Defiling, then Temple Jesus did not defile the Temple. He opened the holy of holies for all to come; this is why the curtain was torn from top to Bottom. When did any sacrifice God has accepted become known as an abomination? Never.
Yes, but the act of crucifying the messiah was an abomination.
Except that it isn't what it says in scriptureWhy did the Romans destroy Jerusalem? Because God sent them in judgement against Jerusalem for their wickedness, the chief sin of which was their petitioning the Romans to crucify Christ
Except that it isn't what it says in scripture
And the point is?
Jesus was not the abomination; he was the temple and wicked men defiled it by committing the abominable sin of murdering him.