Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[WilliamL]

8 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Again, in Matthew 23:13-36 is spoken to the Pharisees.  ... 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.

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."

This was a clearly a desolation of far more than "the presence of God... be[ing] removed from the Temple." It was a vengeance of blood [see below] -- "all this" refers to blood. And that blood of the righteous was not requited until the Jewish War of 66-73 AD.

And to say that all of the Pharisees of that generation died before 70 AD is simply ridiculous. Paul was a Pharisee, who would have easily lived until then unless martyred beforehand, and there were certainly many others of his same age who were killed during the rebellion.

8 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Where is the written prophecy?  ... it's not in the OT.  It's in the NT.

So you are telling us that when Jesus said --

"But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. ... “For these are the days of vengeance [see above], that all things which are written may be fulfilled...

-- he was referring to Scripture that had not yet even been written??? Surely you are grasping at straws to avoid the truth of the matter. The verb is γεγραμμένα = having been written, a Perfect Passive Participle. The Perfect participle "indicates a completed action with results continuing into the present." Basics of Biblical Greek, p. 276. Jesus was undeniably speaking about a Scripture written in the past.

And the truth of the matter is, that Jesus was referring to Daniel 9:26-27, the only Scripture/writing of his day that prophesied about the destruction and desolation of Jerusalem and Temple and blood sacrifice and meal offering, after the Messiah was to be cut off.

[WilliamL]

13 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

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

Daniel 9:26 NASB ...and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end [qets] will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

Taken in context, anyone can see that was nothing said about "wars," only about one war, that which destroyed Jerusalem and its Temple.

The latter use of qets/end refers back to the previous use: 'the end of the destruction of Jerusalem and sanctuary will come like a flood = with an overflowing military force; and up unto that qetz/end there will be milchamah/war(fare)/fighting and desolations that have been decreed.'

Jesus spoke about, and decreed himself, those very desolations:

Matthew 23:37 ...upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth...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 19:43 “For the days will come upon you [Jerusalem] when your enemies will throw up a barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side, 44 and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation.”

These are quite simply decrees of desolation.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

On 6/22/2016 at 11:47 AM, WilliamL said:

Total spec. Going back to the Hebrew, we read "...And upon a wing/corner/extremity, appalling/desolating abominations [plural]..." 

However, שִׁקּוּצִים does is not always used to mean idolatry, despite what your reference book says:

Nahum 3:6 And I will cast abominable filth ^H8251 upon thee, and make thee vile, and will set thee as a gazingstock.

Zech 9:7 And I will take away his blood out of his mouth, and his abominations ^H8251 from between his teeth: but he that remaineth, even he, shall be for our God, and he shall be as a governor in Judah, and Ekron as a Jebusite.

Actually, the Theologial Wordbook of the Old Teatament, edited by R. Laird Harris, GLeason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke deals with the Hebrew/Aramaic words in the Old Testament that have a theological significance. It gives a short definition to most Old Testament words, but goes theologically in depth on the words that are important. The TWOT stands as the premier study for word understanding we have and it is a Ph.D. level reference work.

What you have cited here is from the generic Strongs' numbering.  It is not the same word as detailed in the TWOT.  The cited professor is correct: every instance that siqqus Is used in the OT refers to idols or idol worship.  The examples you've cited refer to siqquwts, and that is a separate word which is also expounded upon as one of a few related to the root word - but not the same.

Roman Standards are not idols, nor is making an offering idol worship as described by the Bible.  Daniel 9:27 describes an idol, and the plural can describe magnitude as well as number.

Edited June 26, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius

[WilliamL]

18 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

What you have cited here is from the generic Strongs' numbering.  It is not the same word as detailed in the TWOT.  The cited professor is correct: every instance that siqqus Is used in the OT refers to idols or idol worship.  The examples you've cited refer to siqquwts, and that is a separate word...

Sorry, that is simply not correct. It is the same word in the Hebrew text.

18 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Roman Standards are not idols, nor is making an offering idol worship as described by the Bible.  Daniel 9:27 describes an idol, and the plural can describe magnitude as well as number.

Roman standards/ensigns were called aquilae because of the eagle perched on top of them, an idolatrous image, a symbol of Jupiter. When Herod put a Roman eagle over the gate of the Temple he had newly rebuilt, it caused a riot among Jews, who saw it for what it was, an idolatrous image.

Therefore, if you want to insist that shiqqutzim means an idolatrous image in Daniel 9:27, there it was once again in the Temple:

"1. AND now the Romans, upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings round about it, brought their ensigns to the temple (24) and set them over against its eastern gate; and there did they offer sacrifices to them..."  War, VI.vi.1

Such was the standard practice among pagan cultures who overthrew their enemies: they displayed the superiority of their god over the god of their defeated enemy, by displaying it in the temple of the just-defeated. Just as Antiochus Epiphanes did when he put his idol in the Jewish Temple previously, after his own capture of Jerusalem and Temple.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

2 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Sorry, that is simply not correct. It is the same word in the Hebrew text.

Sorry, no it is NOT.  The H8251 words you cite go to TWOT 2459a - sheqes - (the author's spelling)  The root word is TWOT 2459 - shiqqes.

I've looked at the Hebrew and they are spelled differently.  You simply do not have the credentials to override the best word definition available.  You also have an agenda to confuse word meaning between verses so as to say this might not be an idol, and faced with the fact it is, are now trying to take an graven image used in a standard and make that a full-blown idol which Jesus and Paul said was set IN the Temple - and whatever the Romans did after the Temple was burned did not comport with their prophetic utterances!

The author of the word study in the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament is:
Hermann J. Austel, Ph.D., Dean, North West Baptist Seminary, Tacoma, Washington.

His Bibliography on the three shades of H8251 in the TWOT references R. L. Harris, Man--God's Eternal Creation, Moody, 1971, pp. 139-44. 

About TWOT 2459b - HE SAYS as the very first thing about shiqqus (his spelling) is: This noun is always used in connection with idolatrous practices, either referring to the idols themselves as being abhorrent and detestable in God's sight, or to something associated with idolatrous ritual.  TWOT p. 955 (Emphasis added)

Get the book and look it up.  You can order it through your Christian Life Bookstores.

[WilliamL]

35 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

a full-blown idol which Jesus and Paul said was set IN the Temple

Neither Jesus nor Paul mentioned a heiron.

The vast majority of Israelis would oppose any restoration of blood sacrifice (required by Daniel 9:27), Temple or not. So in order to see your beliefs fulfilled, it is going to take a lo-o-ong period of time to change a whole lot of minds; and from what I see going on in the world, we don't have that long period of time.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

4 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Neither Jesus nor Paul mentioned a heiron.

Ahhhh... That's too bad.  Neither Jesus nor Paul spelled it all out for you.  Or did they for those who are not ultra-literal?
The Bible does not have a single linear narrative that covers everything, nor does it regularly 'spell things out for you.'

Jesus references the abomination/desolation "spoken of through the prophet Daniel" - which is an idol in Mt 24:15.
Paul goes right to the man: the Man of Lawless, in 2Th 2:4 who he "takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God."
Both are in the Temple; Jesus specifies the location as the Holy Place, which is in front of the Curtain.

We know from Daniel 11:45 and Luke 21:20 that the King of the North will surround Jerusalem, and Luke sets this as coming before the Great Tribulation.
This Luke uses instead of the AoD as Matthew and Mark do.
What this does is add information: Before the Man of Lawlessness takes his seat and the abomination is set up: he surrounds the Capital: Jerusalem.
The direction to flee is not for the Elect in Jerusalem, but those in Judea.  Why?  Because the King of the North hasn't overridden their part - yet.
Remember, he comes like a flood, and on wing, or with wings, the abomination is revealed, and so too the Man of Lawlessness.

We know from John's writing of Jesus' Revelation to him that after the 42 months of the "beast of a man" is given authority to act and oppress the Saints.
We also know from John's writing of Jesus' Revelation to him that another character is introduced: the false prophet - who ostensibly has control of the Temple.
We also know from John's writing of Jesus' Revelation to him that after the false prophet rains fire down from the sky that the false prophet sets up the talking image of the beast of a man.

There are three players at this capitulation/tribute ceremony (which will be on CNN):
The anti-Christ, the false prophet, and the talking image abomination(s).

This is the seminal event of Daniel 9:27 which punctuates the one 'seven' in half.
It is the tripwire for God's Response seen in Daniel 12:1 with "one-who-is-like-God" "Michael" - arising.

Let's put it all together:

• (He) causes a covenant with many to be prevailed for one 'seven'.  (Dan 9:27)
• The Temple is rebuilt with the help the Gentiles (like they did with the Israeli Supreme Court building).  (Rev 11:1-2)
• The anti-Christ is given authority (ostensibly by God, the "one" removed from the midst) for 42 months - the first half.  (Rev 13:5; 2Th 2:6)
• At the end of that period, the false prophet causes a breach of the treaty, ostensibly nuking Iran who still poses a threat. (Rev 13:13)
• In retaliation, the King of the North sweeps from Gog/Magog to surround Jerusalem. (Dan 11:45; Luke 21:20; Eze 38)
• In capitulation, and probably orchestrated beforehand, the false prophet concedes to the King of the North and in honor of him, sets up the talking image of him. (Dan 9:27; Mt 24:15; Rev 13:14-15)
• .....The Jews did much the same thing to Alexander the Great, and he spared the city because of their tribute to him.
• Now with this all important midpoint abominations (the plural showing how terrible it is) comes two laws - which make the Great Tribulation so hard on the Elect. (Rev 13:15-16)
• The "first responders" arrive: the Two Witnesses (Rev 11:3-6)
• God shortens the Great Tribulation so not all the Elect die (the wicked were never threatened - they worshiped and took the mark). (Mt 24:22)
• This happens with the sun/moon/star event which heralds the Day of the Lord: sixth Seal. (Rev 6:12-17)
• Jesus Returns, the 144,000 are mustered, the Dead in Christ are raised, and the latter comes with Him to gather the Elect = the sudden arrival of the Great Multitude in Heaven. (Rev 7:1-8; 14:1-5 / Rev 7:9-17; 14:14-16)
• The seventh Seal is broken, and the first Trumpet is blown supplying fire and blood for the Day of the Lord's Wrath. (Rev 8:7; Rev 14:17-20)
• Jesus scourges the Land of Israel, and even invades the Temple. (Eze 9; Joel 2)
• This begins a long process which results in the complete destruction of the earth, with the last of God's Wrath being poured out on the desolator: the anti-Christ at Armageddon. (Rev 8:8-9:21 / Rev 16)
• Coincidental with the end is the resurrection of the last two martyrs - the Two Witnesses (who were the "first responders" with the AoD and who preceded Jesus' parousia). (Rev 11:11-12)
• The Great Earthquake which levels mountain ranges and obliterates islands.  (Rev 11:13; Rev 11:19; Rev 16:20)
• The anti-Christ and the false prophet are thrown into the Lake of Fire. (Rev 19:20)
• Satan is thrown into the abyss. (Rev 20:1-3)
• The fifth Seal number is, and when they are made alive, all the parties to the First Resurrection are now in one body: the 144,000, the Dead in Christ, the Elect, and the Martyrs. (Rev 20:4-5)
• And the Saints give an account for themselves and are rewarded.  (Rom 14:12)
• Meanwhile on earth, the long march to Mount Zion is made, and the temporary encampment is accomplished. (Zec 8:23; Isa 4)
• Then comes the Millennium reign of Christ on earth. (Rev 20:4)
• The same Temple is used as the center of worship to the Messiah King for the Remnant Jews and the meek who inherit the earth.  (Eze 43-44)
• Only after that is Satan released, a short-lived uprising staged, and all are eliminated.  (Rev 20:7-9)
• Finally comes the all-inclusive second Resurrection where the righteous are separated from the wicked.  (Mt 13:41-42; 13:47-50; Mt 25:31-46; Rev 20:11-15)

So it doesn't really matter if neither Jesus nor Paul mention an idol per se; they are tied together as the same event, and referenced back by our Lord to Daniel, specifically: Daniel 9:27.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

5 hours ago, WilliamL said:

The vast majority of Israelis would oppose any restoration of blood sacrifice (required by Daniel 9:27), Temple or not. So in order to see your beliefs fulfilled, it is going to take a lo-o-ong period of time to change a whole lot of minds; and from what I see going on in the world, we don't have that long period of time.

Pure speculation on your part.  It is just as speculative to say that the Orthodox demands it, while the Liberals can take it or leave it.  It is just as speculative to say that all would want it if the Ark of the Covenant is produced.

You don't know how God will move their hearts and minds so as to accomplish His Plans.  It is written that this will happen in the Temple, and it will interrupt the Ritual Law.  That is what we do know.

Besides, the Jews are moving along quite nicely with their plans to rebuild the Temple.  You should watch what's happening in Jerusalem: https://www.templeinstitute.org/ 

[WilliamL]

3 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

That is what we do know.

No, that is what  you say you know. Not a single thing you claim has come to pass, nor is likely in the foreseeable future. All you can show is a long chain of circular reasoning. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and your chain has an abundance of weak links.

Whereas the destruction of Damascus, and an invasion of the Levant and North Africa, is a much more likely occurrence in the near future. But nothing in Daniel 11:40-45 even hints about a Temple, let alone the building of one, before the "time of trouble such as never was"  = the Great Tribulation begins.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

It is not circular to link this seminal event to all the other times it is mentioned in prophecy.

The seventy 'sevens' covers major highlights in God's overall plan of salvation: Jerusalem rebuilt, the coming of the Messiah, His being cut off which is the Crucifixion of the New Covenant, the First Jewish Revolt - Jerusalem sacked - as pointing to the anti-Christ, the start of the one 'seven', it's pivotal midpoint abomination, and the destructive desolations God has decreed being poured out onto that desolator to end it, and war too as a condition of man.

The talking image of the Man of Lawlessness is so big, it runs through prophecy.  The ha-siqqus of Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 of Daniel 11:31 is the dual focus going to a greater abomination in Daniel 9:27, so that the narrative in Chapter 11 shifts from the near future to the end-time.  That same seminal event becomes a counting point in 12:11.

Jesus uses 9:27 to begin His detailed Keystone Olivet Discourse to describe when He will return.

Paul uses it to assure the Thessalonians that they have not missed the Day of the Lord Rapture.

The abomination is so big an event, so pivotal that it is again a focus for God's Revelation to John in Chapter 13 of that book.

No, we KNOW a lot about this event because it IS so huge in the overall redemptive plan God has for us: those who are in the book.

Edited June 28, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius