What is the Abomination of Desolation?

[Davidstarr]

We will just have to agree to disagree agreeably...

I'm am going by exactly what Daniel says in what the dream was and the interpretation of the dream.
It's not me you are disagreeing with.
You are arguing against a 2,500 year old vision that is specific verse by verse, word for word of what God was showing to Nebuchadnezzar of what was to come.

 

[Davidstarr]

I wonder now if there is any point in going on to the next vision (chapter 7) if people deliberately refuse to see the plain facts under their noses with chapter 2, the easiest one of the 4 visions in the book of Daniel to understand.

I'm surprised someone hasn't tried to argue that since the head of gold represented Nebuchadnezzar then the chest and arms of silver must have been his stepson Amel-Marduk and the belly and thighs of brass was Belshazzar. So the legs of iron must be Darius the Mede....

I really don't feel like arguing what the bible says vs the writings of Jesuits from over 400 years ago.
Because I know that's what I'm going to run into going over chapters 7 and 8.
Much less the maze of chapter 11 you guys like to make because you cannot stay in the chronological order of the prophecy itself.

 

[Roger316]

So in your understanding the crucifixion is a abomination??

Let me put it this way so as not to be confusing. You and I know that the crucifixion of Jesus Christ became riches for the gentiles as Paul said in Romans 11. But he also argues that the crucifixion was a transgression of Israel. In short, a group of men conspired to murder an innocent man and did so under the color of law. If that isn't an abomination, then I don't know what is.

Do you agree?

 

[lrs68]

The document states:


Hebrew has no grammatical mechanism for an “aside” that breaks antecedent chains.

Daniel does not change subjects mid‑sentence without naming the new one.
The subject introduced in v.26b (“the people of the prince who is to come”) remains the active referent until a new subject is introduced. No new subject is introduced before v.27.
Thus the “aside” theory is not linguistically defensible.

Much of Daniel was actually written in Aramaic. And even though Aramaic is a sister language to Hebrew, Aramaic is structured much more like Greek than Hebrew.

 

[Davidstarr]

Chapt

Much of Daniel was actually written in Aramaic. And even though Aramaic is a sister language to Hebrew, Aramaic is structured much more like Greek than Hebrew.

Chapters 1-6 was written in an Aramaic form of Chaldean if I am not mistaken.
There is even evidence that chapter 4 may not have been written by Daniel himself but by Nebuchadnezzar (or at least a scribe in his employ).
But chapters 7-12 were in Hebrew.

 

[God-fearing]

Let me put it this way so as not to be confusing. You and I know that the crucifixion of Jesus Christ became riches for the gentiles as Paul said in Romans 11. But he also argues that the crucifixion was a transgression of Israel. In short, a group of men conspired to murder an innocent man and did so under the color of law. If that isn't an abomination, then I don't know what is.

Do you agree?

No I dont agree. Scripture tells us that Jesus asked the father to forgive them, and is recorded saying ...no man takes my life but I lay it down several times.
I find this as a perversion of the gospel. A insult to God's greatest gift to mankind.

Was Jesus taken by force ?
Did he voice his defense?
Did the crucifixion take Jesus by surprise?
The sacrifice of Christ was for all jew and gentile alike.
To even suggest murder imo is a abomination. It completely changes the gospels message.

 

[OMC]

Much of Daniel was actually written in Aramaic. And even though Aramaic is a sister language to Hebrew, Aramaic is structured much more like Greek than Hebrew.

Then show where the Arabic changes the meaning. You ppl and your accusations without proof.

 

[Roger316]

No I dont agree. Scripture tells us that Jesus asked the father to forgive them, and is recorded saying ...no man takes my life but I lay it down several times.
I find this as a perversion of the gospel. A insult to God's greatest gift to mankind.

I don't understand your point of view. How is what I said a perversion of the gospel?

Was Jesus taken by force ?
Did he voice his defense?
Did the crucifixion take Jesus by surprise?
The sacrifice of Christ was for all jew and gentile alike.
To even suggest murder imo is a abomination. It completely changes the gospels message.

On the contrary, Paul argues that the long arc of death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and exultation demonstrated God's justice. In Romans 3, he argues that the cross demonstrated God's righteousness so that he might be both just and the justifier of those who believe in Christ Jesus. Most Christians get this wrong. They have been taught to think that God showed his justice by putting his son to death. No. God showed his justice by raising his son, an innocent man, from death. THAT is God's kind of justice.

The gospel teaches that death was defeated and that Jesus Christ became the first of a new humanity.

It is NOT an insult to Jesus to acknowledge that he was murdered at the hands of his own people. You say, "no man takes my life but I lay it down several times." But remember that Jesus didn't commit suicide by cop. He didn't jump in front of a bullet for us. He voluntarily allowed himself to be arrested so that the Father would raise him from the dead. The Chief priests arrested him, tortured him, and listened to false witnesses. They turned him over to the Roman authorities and falsely charged him. The good news, the Gospel, is what happens next. We don't sing hallelujah because Jesus died; no, we sing hallelujah because he is risen.

 

[God-fearing]

I don't understand your point of view. How is what I said a perversion of the gospel?

On the contrary, Paul argues that the long arc of death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and exultation demonstrated God's justice. In Romans 3, he argues that the cross demonstrated God's righteousness so that he might be both just and the justifier of those who believe in Christ Jesus. Most Christians get this wrong. They have been taught to think that God showed his justice by putting his son to death. No. God showed his justice by raising his son, an innocent man, from death. THAT is God's kind of justice.

The gospel teaches that death was defeated and that Jesus Christ became the first of a new humanity.

It is NOT an insult to Jesus to acknowledge that he was murdered at the hands of his own people. You say, "no man takes my life but I lay it down several times." But remember that Jesus didn't commit suicide by cop. He didn't jump in front of a bullet for us. He voluntarily allowed himself to be arrested so that the Father would raise him from the dead. The Chief priests arrested him, tortured him, and listened to false witnesses. They turned him over to the Roman authorities and falsely charged him. The good news, the Gospel, is what happens next. We don't sing hallelujah because Jesus died; no, we sing hallelujah because he is risen.

To be a willing sacrifice is not murder.
And he did that for us...not suicide

Jesus said he had the power to lay down and to pick up his life, that no man takes his life. For this i have come into this world.

Now put murder or suicide into this equation....what does it do to these saying?
What does it do to the title of ..Lamb of God?

Isa 53:1 Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

Isa 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

Isa 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Isa 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

Isa 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Read 53: VERY CAREFULLY

 

[Roger316]

To be a willing sacrifice is not murder.

Is killing an innocent man legal? Think about it.

 

[Davidstarr]

Is killing an innocent man legal? Think about it.

We are all guilty (the entire human race from Adam to us) of the death of God's Son.
There is no other way around that.
But Jesus paid the price for our sins that we may live.
Such is the love and mercy of our Creator that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

Every Christian should know John 3:16

 

[God-fearing]

Is killing an innocent man legal? Think about it.

Don't have to...

Just to let you know Hitler used this same type of argument. The jews murdered Jesus. Hope you dont have the same ambitions.
But of course if you change the narrative from willing to murder then you can justify 70 AD being the abomination that makes desolate. Another error.
It all starts with the perversion of the Gospel.

Think about this

Jesus survived the mob beating, also 39 lashes, 1 short of death. Then proceeded to walk to calvery.
Spiked to a tree but was able to speak. Yet pilate taken by surprise at his sudden death. In fact he died the exact time the Passover
Lamb was slain in the temple.
Quite a conspiracy for a murder victim. But yet no one else on that hill was beaten like Jesus yet he was the first to die at the surprise of pilate

 

[Roger316]

We are all guilty (the entire human race from Adam to us) of the death of God's Son.
There is no other way around that.
But Jesus paid the price for our sins that we may live.
Such is the love and mercy of our Creator that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

Every Christian should know John 3:16

What about it? Did Israel kill an innocent man or not?

 

[Roger316]

Don't have to...

Just to let you know Hitler used this same type of argument. The jews murdered Jesus. Hope you dont have the same ambitions.
But of course if you change the narrative from willing to murder then you can justify 70 AD being the abomination that makes desolate. Another error.
It all starts with the perversion of the Gospel.

Think about this

Jesus survived the mob beating, also 39 lashes, 1 short of death. Then proceeded to walk to calvery.
Spiked to a tree but was able to speak. Yet pilate taken by surprise at his sudden death. In fact he died the exact time the Passover
Lamb was slain in the temple.
Quite a conspiracy for a murder victim. But yet no one else on that hill was beaten like Jesus yet he was the first to die at the surprise of pilate

Jesus’ death was both voluntary (He laid down His life) and violent (He was unjustly killed by human beings).The New Testament insists on both truths simultaneously.

 

[God-fearing]

Jesus’ death was both voluntary (He laid down His life) and violent (He was unjustly killed by human beings).The New Testament insists on both truths simultaneously.

Its obvious you dont know what is ment in scripture.
I pointed out of all that Jesus suffered what did he die from. What was the cause of his death? Mind you again pilate surprised at his death being pre mature. Pilate also known of the brutality jesus under went.
Knowing this what scripture stands out the most?

 

[Researcher]

Sorry I haven't had much time to post. You folks have some great discussions going on.

I wanted to share a thought I had before going to bed...

Correctly interpreting the 'time of the end' is vital to solving Daniel and Revelation. Let me show you folks something:

Daniel 9:24 - Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The 'time of the end' in Daniel has to do with 'sealing up the vision'. Pay attention now.

If all of Daniel 9:24 has happened, then the part about 'seal up the vision' has already occurred, correct?

Now read this:

Daniel 12:4 - But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

The words of Daniel are sealed until 'the time of the end'.

We have two choices now. If all of Daniel 9:24 has already happened, then the time of the end has already happened as well. When would have that occurred? The time of the end would have occurred after the end of the seventy weeks, i.e., right after the Crucifixion.

But wait, there's more...

The phrase 'seal up the vision', I believe, is about ending the Old Testament and beginning the New Testament.

Look at what Revelation says:

Revelation 22:10 - And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

The New Testament is *NOT* sealed because there will never be a "Third Testament". Therefore, the 'time of the end' was about the transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament. That explains why the 'time is at hand'.

In other words, the time of the end had arrived when John wrote Revelation, thus it was now referred to as 'time is at hand'.

Like I have mentioned several times now, the 'time of the end' in Daniel began with the rise of the Roman Empire (Octavian/Augustus) and ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. For anyone living in that era, the time was at hand.

 

[Davidstarr]

Its obvious you dont know what is ment in scripture.
I pointed out of all that Jesus suffered what did he die from. What was the cause of his death? Mind you again pilate surprised at his death being pre mature. Pilate also known of the brutality jesus under went.
Knowing this what scripture stands out the most?

Several things come to mind of what happened to Jesus once the priests ruled that He was guilty of blasphemy.
I do not believe that it was the crucifixion that actually killed Him.

1) He was mocked, beaten, spat on and the priests ripped out some of His beard. They blindfolded Him and told Him to prophesy who would hit Him next. They continued this torture until daybreak.
If anyone needs the references it is in Matt 26; Mark 14 and Luke 22
Humiliating? Yes. Painful? Yes. Life threatening? No

2) Pilate handed Him over to his soldiers. They put a purple robe on Jesus (as a sign of royalty), made a crown of thorns and beat that into Jesus' head with rods while mocking Him.
Humiliating? Yes. Painful? Yes. Life threatening? No

3) Then Jesus was whipped. The standard punishment for sedition was 40 lashes which was life threatening. As a sign of Roman mercy they only gave Him 39 lashes. But still this would be life threatening. After 39 lashes immediate medical attention would be required.
Jesus never got such medical treatment. He was already bleeding to death while having to carry the cross (or at least the cross section) to Calvary. The fact that He kept collapsing and needed help to carry His cross shows He was getting weaker and weaker. He was slowly bleeding to death.
It was only through His sheer willpower that He survived to make it to Calvary. He was already near death by the time He was nailed to the cross.

4) But still, this isn't what killed Jesus. After He died a Roman soldier shoved a spear into His side (apparently directly into His heart). The record shows both blood and water came out. This was the sign of a broken heart. Jesus had taken on the sins of the world and took them to the cross.
Isa 59:2 says "But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear."
This is what prompted the cry "My God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

Jesus died from a broken heart because His Father had hid His face from Him.

 

[Davidstarr]

Sorry I haven't had much time to post. You folks have some great discussions going on.

I wanted to share a thought I had before going to bed...

Correctly interpreting the 'time of the end' is vital to solving Daniel and Revelation. Let me show you folks something:

Daniel 9:24 - Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The 'time of the end' in Daniel has to do with 'sealing up the vision'. Pay attention now.

If all of Daniel 9:24 has happened, then the part about 'seal up the vision' has already occurred, correct?

Now read this:

Daniel 12:4 - But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

The words of Daniel are sealed until 'the time of the end'.

We have two choices now. If all of Daniel 9:24 has already happened, then the time of the end has already happened as well. When would have that occurred? The time of the end would have occurred after the end of the seventy weeks, i.e., right after the Crucifixion.

But wait, there's more...

The phrase 'seal up the vision', I believe, is about ending the Old Testament and beginning the New Testament.

Look at what Revelation says:

Revelation 22:10 - And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

The New Testament is *NOT* sealed because there will never be a "Third Testament". Therefore, the 'time of the end' was about the transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament. That explains why the 'time is at hand'.

In other words, the time of the end had arrived when John wrote Revelation, thus it was now referred to as 'time is at hand'.

Like I have mentioned several times now, the 'time of the end' in Daniel began with the rise of the Roman Empire (Octavian/Augustus) and ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. For anyone living in that era, the time was at hand.

I'm sorry, even from the texts you gave it shows the visions of Daniel remain sealed until the time of the end begins.
This does not indicated that the time of the end begins when the visions are sealed but rather would begin when the visions become unsealed.

 

[God-fearing]

Several things come to mind of what happened to Jesus once the priests ruled that He was guilty of blasphemy.
I do not believe that it was the crucifixion that actually killed Him.

1) He was mocked, beaten, spat on and the priests ripped out some of His beard. They blindfolded Him and told Him to prophesy who would hit Him next. They continued this torture until daybreak.
If anyone needs the references it is in Matt 26; Mark 14 and Luke 22
Humiliating? Yes. Painful? Yes. Life threatening? No

2) Pilate handed Him over to his soldiers. They put a purple robe on Jesus (as a sign of royalty), made a crown of thorns and beat that into Jesus' head with rods while mocking Him.
Humiliating? Yes. Painful? Yes. Life threatening? No

3) Then Jesus was whipped. The standard punishment for sedition was 40 lashes which was life threatening. As a sign of Roman mercy they only gave Him 39 lashes. But still this would be life threatening. After 39 lashes immediate medical attention would be required.
Jesus never got such medical treatment. He was already bleeding to death while having to carry the cross (or at least the cross section) to Calvary. The fact that He kept collapsing and needed help to carry His cross shows He was getting weaker and weaker. He was slowly bleeding to death.
It was only through His sheer willpower that He survived to make it to Calvary. He was already near death by the time He was nailed to the cross.

4) But still, this isn't what killed Jesus. After He died a Roman soldier shoved a spear into His side (apparently directly into His heart). The record shows both blood and water came out. This was the sign of a broken heart. Jesus had taken on the sins of the world and took them to the cross.
Isa 59:2 says "But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear."
This is what prompted the cry "My God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

Jesus died from a broken heart because His Father had hid His face from Him.

I like what you wrote here, and this is the over all picture of the crucifixion according to the scriptures.
But this is what escapes some of the most diligent truth seekers.
The crucifixion of Jesus was very time sensitive. In short it paralleled the sin offering described in the old testament right down to the time of day. Which shows the hand of God's glorious work.

Could it be that Pilate unknowingly spoke prophetic words as what Isaiah 53 describes. Behold the man. Which was taught to be about Israel.
Could it be that Jesus cry to the father was actually pointing to pslam 22 ?
To your reference to a broken heart ....pslams 34:18-20.

Alot happening in the crucifixion. Even after he gave up the ghost/ spirit/ which was the exact time the sacrifice in the temple was slain.
Which shows Jesus by giving up his ghost chose when and how he would die. Into your arms.

A abomination not by a long shot.

 

[Roger316]

Its obvious you dont know what is ment in scripture.
I pointed out of all that Jesus suffered what did he die from. What was the cause of his death? Mind you again pilate surprised at his death being pre mature. Pilate also known of the brutality jesus under went.
Knowing this what scripture stands out the most?

I am very surprised that you don't see the crucifixion as an injustice.