Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[Marcus O'Reillius]

4 hours ago, WilliamL said:

And I say he certainly did answer it, both in Matthew 23 and in Luke 21:20-24 and 19:41-44.\

Matthew 23 is not in the context of Matthew 24.

Luke 19 is not after the question was posed, but before it with the Triumphal entry, which is when I think the Messiah comes, and that marks the end of the sixty-two 'sevens'.

Luke 21 is his compilation of testimony concerning the Olivet Discourse.  It differs somewhat from Matthews in some minor details, which adds nuance, but overall, it is not as complete, and I prefer to use Matthew's as his Gospel, written to the Jews, centers around Jesus' five major discourses, this being the fifth and last.  Like Matthew, though, it does not say leave Jerusalem, but for those in Judea in the south to flee when they see the encircling happening.  Now why is that?  Because when the King of the North comes and encircles Jerusalem, he does so from the north, and so Judea, lying to the south, is momentarily spared.  But they have no time to wait; they must flee immediately or risk being caught in this dragnet.

Read Matthew 24: Jesus did NOT answer their first question.

[WilliamL]

15 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

To say I am indulging in circular reasoning runs square into your assertion that everything was fulfilled in the first century.

False witness. Saying that Daniel 9:27 has been fulfilled is far from "everything being fulfilled."

16 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

What if I am wrong?  ...

What if you are wrong? 

Already answered first question --

17 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

If you and others who teach these things convince people that Christ will not return before the Temple is rebuilt and/or blood sacrifices are re-instituted, but the Great Tribulation instead comes upon you all "like a snare," you will bear some responsibility for a deceptive doctrine that will have put milk-dependent babes in great jeopardy.

If I am wrong, there will be plenty of time -- 3-1/2 years+ -- to prepare for the alternative. That is the big difference between our teachings.

23 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

As far as blood sacrifice - Neither you nor I have any power to stop the Sanhedrin, who have reconstituted themselves, from performing them.  They are actively seeking to rebuild the Temple, and they are actively equipping themselves to fulfill all the requirements of the sacrificial law system.

The current Sanhedrin is a laugh. From a post last year: "The New Sanhedrin established 13 years ago is the sixth attempt to restore this institution, and like previous efforts it has thus far failed to receive the approval of most mainstream Jewish religious authorities." http://www.mjaa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=rd_media_israelnews

The vast majority of Israelis reject any thought of returning to blood sacrifices, required by your teaching on Daniel 9:27. The only people who give the concept any credit are American Christians such as yourself.

30 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

6 hours ago, WilliamL said:

If you and others who teach these things convince people that Christ will not return before the Temple is rebuilt...

Hey William - It is not I who taught that the abomination / desolation would be in the "Holy Place!"  Jesus did!  

Exactly: the Holy Place -- nothing at all about a Temple. As Daniel made clear in 9:17 -- "...your miqdash/holy place, which is desolate..." -- the site is holy whether or not any Temple exists upon it.

Nothing in the "time of the end" prophecy of Daniel 11:40 - 12:12 mentions any Temple or blood sacrifice. For you to claim one for the End Times puts your doctrine in a very tight box.

 

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

I disagree in blanket protest.  Nothing much to do here; you will continue to evade specificity saying this fulfills that even if it falls far short of the language used.  We will always be at odds.  Daniel 9:27 was not fulfilled in the first century - far from it.

Holy Place is defined in the Bible as in the Temple.  That is what Paul said in 2Th 2:4 as well.

Exodus 26:33 You shall hang up the veil under the clasps, and shall bring in the ark of the testimony there within the veil; and the veil shall serve for you as a partition between the holy place and the holy of holies.

I'm pretty sure Jesus knew exactly what He was saying...

[WilliamL]

35 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

No.

I stated that Jesus' statement was in the context of the detailed parallel portion of His answer to the Disciples as to when He would come again.

"This" generation is tied to "all these things" and those things are the events He listed as happening with the abomination of desolation being in the Holy Place!

You have taken a passage about the End Times from Matt. 24 and applied it to "this generation" passages from Luke 21 and Matt. 23 about the destruction of the Temple of the first century AD.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

1 minute ago, WilliamL said:

You have taken a passage about the End Times from Matt. 24 and applied it to "this generation" passages from Luke 21 and Matt. 23 about the destruction of the Temple of the first century AD.

No I didn't.  I took the passage from Matthew within context.  All these things refers to the five seminal, specific and unique events which begin with the midpoint abomination.

[WilliamL]

3 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

No I didn't.  I took the passage from Matthew within context.  All these things refers to the five seminal, specific and unique events which begin with the midpoint abomination.

Matthew 24 is totally irrelevant to the passages I quoted from Matthew 23 and Luke 21, except for the question Jesus did not answer about the 1st century AD destruction of the Temple. You changed the subject to avoid my point, being that --

Matt. 23:29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! ... 35 ...upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I tell you, all this will come upon this generation. ... 38 Behold, your house [i.e. the Temple] is left to you desolate."

Luke 21:20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. ... 22 “For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written [only in Daniel 9:26-27] may be fulfilled."

JESUS SAID THE PROPHECY THAT WAS WRITTEN WOULD BE "FULFILLED" IN "THIS GENERATION".

IF DANIEL 9:26-27 IS NOT WHERE THE FULFILLED PROPHECY OF JERUSALEM AND THE TEMPLE'S DESTRUCTION AND DESOLATION IS WRITTEN -- ENDING ALL MOSAIC-LAW BLOOD SACRIFICE AND MEAL OFFERING, 9:27 -- THEN SHOW US WHERE THAT WRITTEN PROPHECY IS!

 

Luke provided the answer to the question in Matthew 24 that Matthew did not, about when all the stones of the very Temple they were looking at would be thrown down. The armies surrounding Jerusalem, and the desolation of Jerusalem, Jesus said would take place "before all these things" that Matthew prophesied about for the End Times. Then Jesus said, these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled."

The destruction of Jerusalem and Temple, and the siege by the armies -- were the FULFILLMENT of "THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN."

 

So one more time, Marcus, where in the OT was it written that the city and Temple of Jesus' day would be destroyed, if not in Daniel 9:27? 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Are you always in the habit of shouting at people in all caps?

I asked you when wars ended and never got an answer and you're bugging me for the prophecy about the destruction of city and the sanctuary?  Really brother...

The only reason for Gabriel mentioning the destruction of the city and the sanctuary is to point to the origin for the ruler who will come: the King of the North - the anti-Christ.

Now "this generation" as is used in Mt 24:34 IS in relation to all the specific and unique events Jesus puts in order - which begin with the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel.

None of those things happened in the First Jewish Revolt, nor did they happen in the Second Jewish Revolt.  And war continues... - the end is not yet.

The reference Jesus made to the ruling rabbis of His day as "this generation" is at the end of a long harangue in which He calls them all sorts of names, and lists their failings in exacting detail.  Of course their house will be left desolate!  Jesus knows the presence of God is going to vacate the premises as evidenced by torn curtain!  That most certainly did pertain to them; it was fulfilled in just a few days!  But those old men weren't around four decades later, so how could that personal message pertain to them?

[WilliamL]

2 hours ago, WilliamL said:

So one more time, Marcus, where in the OT was it written that the city and Temple of Jesus' day would be destroyed, if not in Daniel 9:27? 

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

3 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

I asked you when wars ended and never got an answer.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

On 6/21/2016 at 4:58 PM, WilliamL said:

JESUS SAID THE PROPHECY THAT WAS WRITTEN WOULD BE "FULFILLED" IN "THIS GENERATION".

IF DANIEL 9:26-27 IS NOT WHERE THE FULFILLED PROPHECY OF JERUSALEM AND THE TEMPLE'S DESTRUCTION AND DESOLATION IS WRITTEN -- ENDING ALL MOSAIC-LAW BLOOD SACRIFICE AND MEAL OFFERING, 9:27 -- THEN SHOW US WHERE THAT WRITTEN PROPHECY IS!

Again, in Matthew 23:13-36 is spoken to the Pharisees.  It is important to note that Jesus did not shrink from open confrontation with the religious authorities of His day.  He excoriates them eight times over and literally pronounces their death sentence sending them to Hell.  It is to them that their house is left desolate - and I am not the only who thinks being desolate refers to the impending absence of God because Jesus knows that the presence of God is going to be removed from the Temple.  You, however, have drawn an entirely different conclusion based on the similarity of the English translation and place the adjective desolate to A.D. 70.  This does not negate an immediate abandonment because those Pharisees, being as old as they were, didn't live to see the Zealots take over their Temple!  Thus, their generation only saw their Temple rendered desolate when the Curtain is torn in two, and the Most Holy Place is violated, manifesting the absence of God.

From the Expositor's Bible Commentary:
Note 38 This verse may allude to both Jeremiah 12:7 and 22:5 (cf. Notes). "Your house" in this context could refer to Jerusalem, since the lament is first addressed to her (Klostermann; McNeile; Trilling [p. 86]), to Israel (Schniewind; Green; cf. Gal 4:25- 26 for a similar use of "Jerusalem"), or to the temple in whose precincts Jesus was preaching (21:23; 24:1) and whose destruction was about to be predicted (24:2; cf. Manson [Sayings, p. 127]; Davies [Setting, p. 298]). There seems to be no need to choose only one of these options; all three are closely allied and rise and fall together. If "desolate" (eremos) is not part of the text (cf. Notes), the verse means "your house is abandoned to the consequences of your misdeeds" (Plummer). More probably eremos is original and makes the implied destruction explicit. Your "house" is left to you (i. e., abandoned), whether by God (as in Jer 12:7) or Jesus (cf. 24:1), who is "Immanuel," "God with us" (1:23; cf. Garland, pp. 202- 3). The verb "left" (aphietai) can mean "abandoned to enemies," not just "abandoned." But since the ideas are related, a choice is unnecessary.

You also make an assumption that the physical cessation of lawful sacrifice and offering complicit with the destruction of the sanctuary in A.D. 70 is of course, the final stoppage.

It neglects any idea that the Jews resume sacrifice and offering with a rebuilt Temple. - I'll use all caps for you with this disclaimer - NOTHING IN THE JEWISH RESUMPTION OF THE SACRIFICIAL LAW NECESSITATES THAT CHRISTIANS PARTICIPATE, NOR AM I ADVOCATING THAT WE NEED TO RETURN TO A SACRIFICIAL WORSHIP SYSTEM AS IS ESPOUSED IN EZEKIEL (WHICH IS SLATED FOR THE MILLENNIUM).

Where is the written prophecy?  First of all, your harassment or repeated questioning is a straw man ruse; it's not in the OT.  It's in the NT.  If you want to puff your chest out and say no reference can be found in the OT, what you have is a non-sequitur.  Just because it's not found anywhere else in the OT doesn't mean it's not there.

1. In Revelation 11:1-2, John is sent out to measure the Temple.  In this passage, the Temple is under the "foot" of the Gentiles, the world is mentioned, and also, most notably, this Temple is associated with one half (the first half as I can prove) of the one 'seven' which is split in half in Daniel 9:27.  It is in this third Temple, whose dimensions are given in Ezekiel chapters 40 to 42 that the Jews resume their sacrificial system within the one 'seven' - only to have it interrupted by the sudden installation of a talking image of the anti-Christ and this idol is most abhorrent - IT SPEAKS!

2. In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus puts the abomination, the very abomination in Daniel 9:27, which is linked by its reference in 12:11, in the "Holy Place."  That you don't receive this fact that Scripture sets the Holy Place inside the Temple, doesn't change this fact - which Jesus said - and if anyone is keenly aware and sensitive to how the House of the Lord is to be kept - it is the Lord who gave Moses the blueprints for it having him copy the Temple in Heaven!

3. Furthermore, in 2Th 2:4, in speaking about the Day of the Lord and our gathering up to Him, Paul delineates some of the action which precedes it: the departure from the Law and the revealing of the anti-Christ - who - he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. 

4. In Revelation 13:14-15, Jesus reveals to John the true nature of the abomination so that it receives added emphasis with the plural in the Hebrew language.  This idol speaks!  NONE of the idols that the prophets rail against ever did that!  The abomination of Daniel 9:27 breaches the trip wire of God's Response, and from there on, consequences fall upon the anti-Christ leading ultimately to his eternal destruction, being thrown while still alive in his flesh into the Lake of Fire that is Hell.

So asked and answered twice now.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius