Events that took place in September!

[WilliamL]

On 6/28/2016 at 0:46 AM, George said:

 

Dan 11:45  And he shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the glorious holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with none to help him.

As mentioned before, what does verse 45 indicate?  A Temple, a Tabernacle, ... this is the question?

I read this as,

And he shall plant the tents of his pavilion between [the Mediterranean and Dead] seas [the word is in the plural] at the glorious holy mountain [= Temple Mount].

The preposition lamed/l- before mountain is tricky, because it generally means to/unto, or for; but is sometimes used as "at." It definitely doesn't mean "and" -- though many translators put that in to try to make sense of the passage.

Going back to Daniel 11:29, we find a cryptic statement concerning Antiochus Epiphanes, which was only partially fulfilled in 168 BC:

At the appointed time he shall return and go toward the south [Egypt, in the context]; but it shall not be like the former or the latter.

Antiochus invaded Egypt twice, not three times. The first time --  "the former" --he successfully carried off plunder. The second time he was met by the Romans ("ships of Kittim," verse 30), who drove him out in humiliation -- "it shall not be like the former" ; after which returned to Judah, looted the Jerusalem Temple, and thereafter "placed there the abomination of desolation," verse 31.

That leaves the third time, "the latter" invasion of Egypt, to be fulfilled by the King of the North in Daniel 11:42 --

He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape.

He then returns to the Holy Land, and plants the tents of his אַפֶּדֶן ʼappeden: a pavilion or palace-tent, at the Temple Mount. Just like Moses and David earlier erected tents to designate the Holy Place of God. Therefore, I take this act as being the Abomination of Desolation itself. It is immediately followed by --

12:1 At that time...there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time...

which is essentially the same words Jesus used to describer the Great Tribulation:

Matt. 24:21 ...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.

Neither Daniel 11:45 nor Daniel 12:11, the latter which mentions the "abomination of desolation," speak of any Temple being (or having been) erected, nor of blood-sacrifice taking place at this time.

 

[George]

2 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Neither Daniel 11:45 nor Daniel 12:11, the latter which mentions the "abomination of desolation," speak of any Temple being (or having been) erected, nor of blood-sacrifice taking place at this time.

 

True -- as the Daniel says -- its' sealed up until the time of the end.  What it exactly means, will be obviously apparent by those who know the WORD!

[Diaste]

On 6/30/2016 at 9:33 AM, WilliamL said:

I read this as,

And he shall plant the tents of his pavilion between [the Mediterranean and Dead] seas [the word is in the plural] at the glorious holy mountain [= Temple Mount].

The preposition lamed/l- before mountain is tricky, because it generally means to/unto, or for; but is sometimes used as "at." It definitely doesn't mean "and" -- though many translators put that in to try to make sense of the passage.

Going back to Daniel 11:29, we find a cryptic statement concerning Antiochus Epiphanes, which was only partially fulfilled in 168 BC:

At the appointed time he shall return and go toward the south [Egypt, in the context]; but it shall not be like the former or the latter.

Antiochus invaded Egypt twice, not three times. The first time --  "the former" --he successfully carried off plunder. The second time he was met by the Romans ("ships of Kittim," verse 30), who drove him out in humiliation -- "it shall not be like the former" ; after which returned to Judah, looted the Jerusalem Temple, and thereafter "placed there the abomination of desolation," verse 31.

That leaves the third time, "the latter" invasion of Egypt, to be fulfilled by the King of the North in Daniel 11:42 --

He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape.

He then returns to the Holy Land, and plants the tents of his אַפֶּדֶן ʼappeden: a pavilion or palace-tent, at the Temple Mount. Just like Moses and David earlier erected tents to designate the Holy Place of God. Therefore, I take this act as being the Abomination of Desolation itself. It is immediately followed by --

12:1 At that time...there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time...

which is essentially the same words Jesus used to describer the Great Tribulation:

Matt. 24:21 ...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.

Neither Daniel 11:45 nor Daniel 12:11, the latter which mentions the "abomination of desolation," speak of any Temple being (or having been) erected, nor of blood-sacrifice taking place at this time.

 

I generally agree with most of what you post. In fact I also appreciate the depth of the study presented. There are too many who interpret through emotion or caprice. I fully agree with your take on the beast and where he establishes his base. I thinks it's an imperative. But I also think there's ample evidence that some liturgy on the part of the Jews is occurring at the time. Whether the Temple is rebuilt or not, or if it's just a tent or the Jews are going through the motions of OT ritual, something is happening, and the beast puts an end to those acts.

[WilliamL]

On 7/2/2016 at 5:25 AM, Diaste said:

Whether the Temple is rebuilt or not, or if it's just a tent or the Jews are going through the motions of OT ritual, something is happening, and the beast puts an end to those acts.

With all due respect, you are misunderstanding the sequence. The Beast Kingdom does not come until after the King of the North = the Son of Perdition "shall come to his end, and no one will help him" (Dan. 11:45):

2 Thes. 2:8 ... the lawless one [= Son of Perdition] will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the Spirit of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His Presence.

Only some time after the Lord comes for his Church -- at which time "every eye" (all mankind) will see "the brightness of His Presence" -- will the Abyss be opened, and the Beast ascend out of it to establish his reign. The Abyss is not opened until the 5th Trumpet.

The Abomination of Desolation precedes the Rapture; the Beast Kingdom follows it, during the Wrath.

[Diaste]

18 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

With all due respect, you are misunderstanding the sequence. The Beast Kingdom does not come until after the King of the North = the Son of Perdition "shall come to his end, and no one will help him" (Dan. 11:45):

2 Thes. 2:8 ... the lawless one [= Son of Perdition] will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the Spirit of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His Presence.

Only some time after the Lord comes for his Church -- at which time "every eye" (all mankind) will see "the brightness of His Presence" -- will the Abyss be opened, and the Beast ascend out of it to establish his reign. The Abyss is not opened until the 5th Trumpet.

The Abomination of Desolation precedes the Rapture; the Beast Kingdom follows it, during the Wrath.

I used to think the trumps were sequential. But it seems the trumps are heralds or harbingers to some extent. The first four for instance could simply herald the impending advent of the circumstances in question. I don't see the trumps, in every instance as being a 'starting gun'. The possibility of several trumps sounding and the events they represent could occur many months or years apart, there is no comprehensive timeline set in stone in the scripture for the events of the 70th week. What we do know for certain from scripture is a beginning and a culmination as both are quite clearly stated. A sensible approach could easily place the onset of the beast at the beginning, or just prior to the beginning, of the 70th week. This would be when the deadly head wound is healed and all the world is in awe. At this point the world believes no one can fight and prevail against the beast and only then does he have the authority in the eye of the world to confirm covenant and make it stick. All scripture points to the renewal of the old Jewish ways during the time of the end and just before the A of D. This is obvious as daily rituals are stopped in context with Israel. In context this is likely the Temple rituals, whether in a Temple or not, practiced by the Jews for thousands of years and reborn and practiced on the Temple Mount. This is the whole sticking point denying peace in the region. The Jews want the Temple to renew the OT worship of God, and Muslims are insulted to the point of war by the mere suggestion. Solve this and peace is guaranteed. These rituals would clearly inflame the Muslim world and only a very strong warlord could stop an attack on Jerusalem. This is where the beast comes in, after the wound that was healed, and after the world reveres and fears him, he will have the power to command the entire Muslim world and confirm the covenant. Now you're going to say he is only given power to continue 42 months. But you have to realize that he is given authority to 'continue' 42 months. This tells us he has already been operating and could have been a player on the world stage for 3.5+ years. If he was only to be a player for the 42 months, he would not be 'continuing' he would be beginning. Now you're going to say that the 'continue', or 'do', means only from the beginning through his given authority of 42 months.  This could well be the case but my reasoning is less then merely speculative. At the onset  the rider of the white horse goes forth. This is the Antichrist/beast. Clearly the beast is on the scene. Remember, I said the trumps could be omens and not starting guns except there is a clear beginning and ending. Obviously the first seal is a beginning. The white horse and rider is going forth to conquer from the onset. When does the first seal open? Could have already opened and the rider is already gone forth with the intent to conquer. The A of D occurs in the middle of the week, 42 months after the confirming of the covenant, and the same person that confirms also breaches. So it must be the beast is the rider and the desolater. Since this rider is the beast, and the beast is given special authority at a later date to continue for 42 months, the beast is on the scene from beginning to end.

So in the beginning the beast is healed and the world reveres him and the dragon. He establishes and confirms the covenant and allows the Jewish liturgy to commence. Once the time/space moment of the A of D is reached the beast is allowed to institute the mark, slaughter Jews and make war against the saints for the 42 months he is allowed by God to operate thusly. 

I have to disagree with the second half of your quote. "The Abomination of Desolation precedes the Rapture; the Beast Kingdom follows it, during the Wrath."  The beast kingdom ensues from the onset.

There is another thing I have heard a million times from just about everyone that I have to disagree with as well. The beast is not the king of the north. The beast is the middle king. Look:

Daniel 11

36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. 37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. 38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things. 39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.

It's ubiquitous Dan 11:36-39 is the beast. But look at Dan 11:40

40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

Are you saying the King of the North fights against the King of the North? 11:40 does not support this. 11:40 shows us a middle king. This middle king is the beast from v 36-39 This verse shows the KOTN and the KOTS  fighting against the king of the middle kingdom. Further v 40 tells us the middle king will be unstoppable. Further in v 44 tiding of the north tick him off and he destroys many. I just can't see the KOTN fighting against himself in v 40 and then turning back on his own land in v 44 and destroying and killing many. In fact with the rise of Islam and IS, we are seeing Dan 11 come to pass. The king of the north in context is Turkey and the king of the south is Egypt, both from the historic account of the division of Greece and the four notable ones that arose. Since Dan 11 follows events from the region of the Seleucids it makes sense to conclude that at some point both Turkey and Egypt are going to fight against the Seleucid region. We see that today. Turkey has just declared war on IS. Egypt resists IS. Scripture says Turkey comes after IS with a great army while Egypt 'pushes'. Check the news. We are seeing the beginning of Dan 11:40.

[WilliamL]

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

A sensible approach could easily place the onset of the beast at the beginning, or just prior to the beginning, of the 70th week.

That would presume the 70th week has not already been completed, which presumption I reject.

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

All scripture points to the renewal of the old Jewish ways during the time of the end and just before the A of D.

"All scripture"?? Nothing in Daniel 11:40-12:12 says any such thing, nor does anything in Daniel 2 or 7, nor anything that Jesus said. Just for starters. You are arguing on the basis of presumptions, not Scripture.

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

Daniel 11

36 And the king [OF THE NORTH, BEGINNING IN VERSE 6] shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, ETC.

It's ubiquitous Dan 11:36-39 is the beast. But look at Dan 11:40

40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

Are you saying the King of the North fights against the King of the North? 11:40 does not support this. 11:40 shows us a middle king.

There is no middle king: there are only the Kings of the North and South throughout Daniel 11. These are heavenly spirits/Powers having authority over earthly nations, and these Powers rule via a long line of human kings. The whole story from verses 6 through at least 32 tell the accurate history of the human rulers of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt [King of the South], and the Seleucid Kingdom of Syria and Mesopotamia [King of the North]. But these are only possessed puppets of those spiritual Powers. When Michael rises up in Daniel 12:1 = Rev. 12:7, these rebellious spiritual princes will be thrown down from their places of heavenly authority, which is why the King of the North's human ruler upon earth "will come to his end." All of this will take place before "the Beast will ascend out of the Abyss," Rev. 17:8, 11:7.

 

[Diaste]

 

5 hours ago, WilliamL said:

That would presume the 70th week has not already been completed, which presumption I reject.

And why would that be? Because a person rejects some thing or another makes no impact on reality. Clearly we have Matt 24 where the A of D occurs, then great tribulation, then the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, then the gathering of the elect, in that order and, three events that have not taken place as yet. Since the last three events follow the first it's safe to assume; since the example is Daniel's A of D, the three events following the A of D occur in the second half of the week. That would mean the whole 70th week is not complete. And if that's true then the first half is not complete either. That would be based on the beginnings of sorrows comment by Jesus in Matt 24. Plus a gut feeling tells me the triple 7's in Rev are somehow related to a full 7 year time period at the end. But I admit the correlation is just speculation.

"All scripture"?? Nothing in Daniel 11:40-12:12 says any such thing, nor does anything in Daniel 2 or 7, nor anything that Jesus said. Just for starters. You are arguing on the basis of presumptions, not Scripture.

Apologies. I should have proofread before posting. What I was thinking and should have said was, "All relevant scripture points..." Your point that, "...nor anything Jesus said." is a bit off. Jesus breathed all of scripture. But it's not an assumption. Since an A of D is yet to happen and the beast is yet to commit this atrocity, there must be a renewal of the OT liturgy the beast abolishes. In Dan 11:31 there is a pollution of the sanctuary and abolishing the daily sacrifice. This is OT Jewish liturgy taken away and polluted by the willful king. Since Dan 11:6 records, "And in the end of years..." we are near the end of the age. Dan 11:14 alludes to the same thing saying, "And in those times..."

And even if you reject all that, Jesus told us to look to the A of D as spoken of by Daniel the prophet. Meaning the same event is going to take place at the end of days. Alluding to a Temple, an OT priesthood, and ritual. 

There is no middle king: there are only the Kings of the North and South throughout Daniel 11. These are heavenly spirits/Powers having authority over earthly nations, and these Powers rule via a long line of human kings. The whole story from verses 6 through at least 32 tell the accurate history of the human rulers of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt [King of the South], and the Seleucid Kingdom of Syria and Mesopotamia [King of the North]. But these are only possessed puppets of those spiritual Powers. When Michael rises up in Daniel 12:1 = Rev. 12:7, these rebellious spiritual princes will be thrown down from their places of heavenly authority, which is why the King of the North's human ruler upon earth "will come to his end." All of this will take place before "the Beast will ascend out of the Abyss," Rev. 17:8, 11:7.

 

Well no. Antigonus, would be the the King of the North geographically. He ruled Asia Minor while Ptolemy ruled Egypt and Seleucus ruled from the Mediterranean to Pakistan right between Antigonus and Ptolemy. And there is a clear reference to a middle king. I thought Dan 11:40 would be clear enough but there is another reference in Dan 11. In the following two verses the north comes against the south and defeats the south and then is attacked by another king.

15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand.

16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.

In verse 15 the KOTN is victorious. He has defeated the KOTS and his people. But in v 16 there is a 'he that cometh' to fight against the victor. Now that can't be the KOTS as he is defeated. Neither is it the KOTN as he is the victor and not going to fight against himself. Maybe you believe v 16 reads, "But the KOTN that cometh against the KOTN shall do according to his own will and none shall stand before KOTN:" That would mean the KOTN comes against himself and the KOTN cannot stand before the KOTN. No, this is the middle king, and a kingdom, fighting against the north and the south which eventually gives birth to the beast down the line in v 21, the vile person. After v 21 the whole narrative switches to the willful king. 

Since I have read the historic accounts of Cassander, Lysimachus, Antigonus and Seleucid, I know the parallels and prophetic fulfillment. I can assure you Antigonus ruled in Asia Minor and attempted to unify the kingdom and was at war with both Seleucid and Ptolemy and to a lesser extent with Cassander. This is reflected in Dan 11 to a highly accurate degree, including the use of ships as Daniel predicts. To emphasize the point Turkey just declared war on IS. That's the king of north coming against the middle king. 

 

[WilliamL]

51 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Clearly we have Matt 24 where the A of D occurs, then great tribulation, then the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, then the gathering of the elect, in that order and, three events that have not taken place as yet. Since the last three events follow the first it's safe to assume; since the example is Daniel's A of D, the three events following the A of D occur in the second half of the week. That would mean the whole 70th week is not complete.

Lovely example of circular reasoning. " since the example is Daniel's A of D " -- yes, the AD spoken of in Daniel 12:11, yet to come: no mention there of any blood sacrifice, meal offerings, or Temple at all.

The AD spoken of in Daniel 11:31 was fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 BC: all competent biblical historians recognize this. The Hebrew does not mention the AD term at all in Daniel 9:27, though many try to twist the words there to say it does.

One of the foundational teachings of Scripture, OT and NT, says that "in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." There is no other witness than the claimed witness of Daniel 9:27 that speaks of blood sacrifice taking place in Jerusalem before the Messianic Temple is built; which is only built after Messiah Yeshua fights for and delivers the city.

Those who build their whole End Time doctrine upon an End Time interpretation of Daniel 9:27 violate the above-mentioned tenet of Scripture, and base their belief upon a thin reed indeed. Everything in Daniel 9:26-27 was fulfilled in perfect detail within 66-73 AD, including the bringing to an end of blood sacrifice and meal offering in the Temple.

Again, no undeniable End Time biblical passage, let alone two, speak of blood sacrifice during either the Trib or the Wrath.

As for the history of Daniel 11:5-32, many Bible reference works will provide you the very names and historical verification of events for this entire period, lasting from 323 BC to 168 BC. You clearly reject such sources, and have constructed your own unique history for the era. I hope others reading this will consult the more knowledgeable sources. But I recognize that few people these days want to take the time to study history.

An accurate understanding of Daniel's prophecies is impossible without a thorough knowledge of the relevant history.

[Diaste]

9 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Lovely example of circular reasoning. " since the example is Daniel's A of D " -- yes, the AD spoken of in Daniel 12:11, yet to come: no mention there of any blood sacrifice, meal offerings, or Temple at all.

The AD spoken of in Daniel 11:31 was fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 BC: all competent biblical historians recognize this. The Hebrew does not mention the AD term at all in Daniel 9:27, though many try to twist the words there to say it does.

One of the foundational teachings of Scripture, OT and NT, says that "in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." There is no other witness than the claimed witness of Daniel 9:27 that speaks of blood sacrifice taking place in Jerusalem before the Messianic Temple is built; which is only built after Messiah Yeshua fights for and delivers the city. (Not true)

Those who build their whole End Time doctrine upon an End Time interpretation of Daniel 9:27 violate the above-mentioned tenet of Scripture, and base their belief upon a thin reed indeed. (Glad I'm not doing that.) Everything in Daniel 9:26-27 was fulfilled in perfect detail within 66-73 AD, including the bringing to an end of blood sacrifice and meal offering in the Temple.(Agreed. Until the Temple exists again. Which it will.)

Again, no undeniable End Time biblical passage, let alone two, speak of blood sacrifice during either the Trib or the Wrath.(Oh yes there is.)

As for the history of Daniel 11:5-32, many Bible reference works will provide you the very names and historical verification of events for this entire period, lasting from 323 BC to 168 BC. You clearly reject such sources, (Do not. I just understand them.) and have constructed your own unique history for the era.(Did not.) I hope others reading this will consult the more knowledgeable sources. But I recognize that few people these days want to take the time to study history.(I appreciate the ad hom.)

An accurate understanding of Daniel's prophecies is impossible without a thorough knowledge of the relevant history.(That's the very thinking pervasive in the christian community. An accurate understanding of Daniel's prophecies in impossible without the Spirit of God. What you say is akin to trying to understand Quantum Theory by reading 'See Spot Run'.)

Not the point. I fully understand the fulfillment of the A of D in ancient history. The reality is Jesus directed us to look at the A of D as spoken of by Daniel to understand what is coming. Look at this from  http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1589-antiochus-iv-epiphanes

 Antiochus had no time for Palestine; but when the Romans compelled him to forego his plans of conquest, his rage at the unexpected impediment was wreaked upon the innocent Jews. An officer, Apollonius, was sent through the country with an armed troop, commissioned to slay and destroy. He first entered Jerusalem amicably; then suddenly turning upon the defenseless city, he murdered, plundered, and burnt through its length and breadth. The men were butchered, women and children sold into slavery, and in order to give permanence to the work of desolation, the walls and numerous houses were torn down. The old City of David was fortified anew by the Syrians, and made into a very strong fortress completely dominating the city. Having thus made Jerusalem a Greek colony, the king's attention was next turned to the destruction of the national religion. A royal decree proclaimed the abolition of the Jewish mode of worship; Sabbaths and festivals were not to be observed; circumcision was not to be performed; the sacred books were to be surrendered and the Jews were compelled to offer sacrifices to the idols that had been erected. The officers charged with carrying out these commands did so with great rigor; a veritable inquisition was established with monthly sessions for investigation. The possession of a sacred book or the performance of the rite of circumcision was punished with death. On Kislew (Nov.-Dec.) 25, 168, the "abomination of desolation" (, Dan. xi. 31, xii. 11) was set up on the altar of burnt offering in the Temple, and the Jews required to make obeisance to it. This was probably the Olympian Zeus, or Baal Shamem.See Abomination of Desolation.

The above is a matter of history. Jesus told us to look to this and understand. Since the A of D happened, and Jesus told us it would happen again, we have a perfectly valid reason to think the exact circumstances will exist in the future. To elaborate: The original acts of the desolater were murder of the Jews, abolition of the national religion, plundering the Temple, Sabbaths and festivals abolished, religious books surrendered, circumcision outlawed, sacrifices to false gods instituted and the greatest affront to the Jews and the profaning of the Temple occurred when the statue of Zeus was placed on the altar, in the Temple. This act was the abomination that maketh desolate. At the time Antiochus turned his rage on the Jews to subjugate the nation of Israel the Temple was standing, filled with the holy vessels and icons, the first covenant rites were in full swing as well as all the sacrifices and oblations required by God through the Law of Moses. Antiochus put an end to all the above. Obviously the A of D cannot be placed if the altar of burnt offerring didn't exist and that was in the Temple. Further, Antiochus could not stop all the ritual sacrifices if they were not occurring. 
Jesus said, " When you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place..." This is exactly what occurred during the rage of Antiochus when the statue was placed on the altar in ancient Jerusalem. This reboot of the A of D that occurs just prior to great tribulation, the sign of the coming of the Son of Man and the gathering of the elect, must also stand in the holy place, as Jesus said. That holy place was in the Temple when the original desolater committed this atrocity and that holy place will exist again, in the Temple, on the Temple Mount. It's imperative. This then puts the rebuilt Temple on the Temple Mount before the A of D and not after the return of Jesus, as you contend. If then, the Temple stands and the holy place exists (it must if Jesus said the A of D "stands in the holy place") it's obvious the OT rites will again take place as they did in the time of Antichous IV. Dan 11:31 says, "and shall take away the daily sacrifice," The daily sacrifice was two lambs of the first year without spot. Since Dan 11:31 concerns the beast and the A of D it seems unequivocal blood and burnt offerings are indeed occurring just before the A of D happens in the midst of the last week.  Another point is Rev 11:1-2. John is told to measure the Temple, the altar, and the worshipers in the Temple, yet leave out the outer court. This makes little sense if the Temple is not going to exist in the future. So we see Jesus again foretelling the existence of the Temple, and the altar, in the end of the age along with all the ritual of the OT.

No Jewish blood sacrifice will occur during great tribulation or the wrath of God and I did not say it would. All that will end in the midst of the week when the A of D 'stands in the holy place'. So yeah, no end time biblical passage supports that idea cause it ain't gonna happen. I said that the beast will rise at the beginning either before the onset or at the onset of the last week. The Temple will be rebuilt and the old Jewish ways will begin so as to be in operation before the A of D occurs in the 'midst of the week'. After that all worship of the Most High will be shut down and most of Jews who remain in Israel will not survive.

As I said before. I have read the histories, both secular and religious reference works, listened to the lectures and read the papers, and all agree on the points I brought up earlier. Immediately after the death of Alexander the empire was fractured by dozens of satrapies in Asia Minor, the Mideast, and Mesopotamia to the farthest reaches of the old empire. Antigonus consolidated his reign in Asia Minor while Seleucus did likewise throughout the region he would rule; Ptolemy had no such trouble in the south. Before Seleucus died in 280 BC he attempted to take Macedonia with the assistance of the ruler in Asia Minor (Antigonus died in 301 BC) but was unsuccessful. Before 301 BC the kingdoms were already established. Antigonus in Asia Minor (north) Ptolemy in Egypt (south) and Seleucus in the Mideast and Asia. Three kings as recorded in Dan 11. Plus you ignored my points about the illogic of the king of the north fighting against himself and instead disparaged the historic sources. As it stands today Turkey is in the north, analogous to Antigonus, Egypt in the south, Ptolemy, and the descendants of Seleucus are in the Mideast. Just recently Turkey declared war on IS. This is Asia Minor against Mesopotamia. Egypt has been engaged with IS for some time now. This is analogous to Ptolemy at war with Seleucus and not Antigonus. But we do agree the beast is coming from the ancient empire of Seleucus, and that from the Mideast. 

[WilliamL]

27 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Jesus said, " When you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place..." This is exactly what occurred during the rage of Antiochus when the statue was placed on the altar in ancient Jerusalem. This reboot of the A of D that occurs just prior to great tribulation, the sign of the coming of the Son of Man and the gathering of the elect, must also stand in the holy place, as Jesus said. That holy place was in the Temple when the original desolater committed this atrocity and that holy place will exist again, in the Temple, on the Temple Mount.

The red is where you make your presumptive error. The Holy PLACE is just that, a PLACE: it may, or it may not, be covered by a building. It may be covered by a tent.

It may be covered by nothing. Daniel (9:17) spoke of the miqdash/holy place as being such when it was totally desolate, after the Babylonians had totally destroyed the Temple. David said of that same spot, before anything was upon it, "This is the house of the LORD God..." 1 Chr. 22:1

36 minutes ago, Diaste said:

it's obvious the OT rites will again take place as they did in the time of Antichous IV. Dan 11:31 says, "and shall take away the daily sacrifice,"

No, it is not obvious. Daniel 12:11 mentions nothing about such things. You are again arguing from presumption: Daniel 11:31 does not apply to the future.

39 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Another point is Rev 11:1-2. John is told to measure the Temple, the altar, and the worshipers in the Temple, yet leave out the outer court.

John speaks of the naos/sanctuary, never a heiros/Temple. All of the naos references in John are to the heavenly one: not one is said to be upon earth. Again, your argument is from presumption.

43 minutes ago, Diaste said:

So we see Jesus again foretelling the existence of the Temple, and the altar, in the end of the age along with all the ritual of the OT.

Again, the part in the red is totally unsupported by any scripture.

45 minutes ago, Diaste said:

But we do agree the beast is coming from the ancient empire of Seleucus, and that from the Mideast. 

No, we do not agree. The Beast only comes after the King of the North has met his end, after Christ has returned in the clouds in glory to rapture his elect.