Events that took place in September!

[Diaste]

21 hours ago, WilliamL said:

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

It doesn't matter whether the Temple is destroyed or not at the time of the prophecy. The fact is Antiochus carried the implements and treasures of the Temple away, set up the statute of Zeus on the altar, and abolished the daily sacrifice and all other Jewish Temple rites and traditions, just as foretold by Daniel and is a matter of recorded history. Clearly the Temple was standing in the example we are told to look to for understanding. These event are going to occur again as foretold by Jesus in Matt 24. The Holy Place is an area within the Temple so named, which is just before the Holy of Holies, where stands the altar of burnt offering, upon which Antiochus placed the statue of Zeus. Since this is true, the Temple is going to stand again and soon and will be built under the protection of the beast.

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.

It does apply to the future in Light of Jesus' prophecy in Matt 24. We are told to look to the example of the A of D in ancient times. I agree that the A of D in Daniel has been fulfilled. We are not told to look at the prophecy of Daniel for a future fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy. It's Jesus' prophecy of the A of D that has a future fulfillment and Antiochus' atrocity is the example.

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.

In looking at this again to give you the benefit of the doubt I found no presumption. But I do see an error in what you say. Jesus said to leave out the outer court for it is given to the Gentiles. That's not possible if the Temple or the Mount in question is in heaven. Further, the city is trodden under foot by the Gentiles for 42 months. In context the sanctuary and the city are both on earth. 

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

You keep saying that but the evidence says otherwise. The original A of D took place in the Temple and the acts of the desolater are recorded in Daniel and Jewish history. Jesus said this would happen again and so we look to Daniel and history for the example, and we see the OT rites in the Temple being abolished hence, the same events will occur again.

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.

Not making sense here. The beast commits the atrocity of the A of D and is the prosecutor of great tribulation. The gathering of the elect happens only after the A of D and great tribulation, per the order in Matt 24. The beast is in power well before the sign of the coming of the Son of Man.

 

 

[WilliamL]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

It doesn't matter whether the Temple is destroyed or not at the time of the prophecy. The fact is Antiochus carried the implements and treasures of the Temple away, set up the statute of Zeus on the altar, and abolished the daily sacrifice and all other Jewish Temple rites and traditions, just as foretold by Daniel and is a matter of recorded history. Clearly the Temple was standing in the example we are told to look to for understanding. These event are going to occur again as foretold by Jesus in Matt 24.

Again, Jesus said not such thing: you are adding your presumption to the Word.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

We are told to look to the example of the A of D in ancient times.

Who told us this?

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

Jesus said to leave out the outer court for it is given to the Gentiles. That's not possible if the Temple or the Mount in question is in heaven. Further, the city is trodden under foot by the Gentiles for 42 months. In context the sanctuary and the city are both on earth. 

Jesus said nothing about it: it was "the angel." You are lax with your facts, not a good sign.

Second, the literal Greek says "cast-out outside the court..." This is something entirely impossible to do with a physical court: the words would seem utter gibberish to John if taken in the physical sense. But it would be entirely possible to do with a spiritual place, one for the gathering of anyone not allowed into the places of the elect: such was the Court of the Gentiles in the OT Temple. So yes, the city here IS on earth, but the naos is clearly spiritual, in heaven.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

The beast commits the atrocity of the A of D and is the prosecutor of great tribulation.

Again, nothing in the Scriptures says this. You presume it.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

The beast is in power well before the sign of the coming of the Son of Man.

Again, nothing in the Scriptures says this. You presume it.

Consider the following prophecy in the literal Greek:

2 Thes. 2:4 [The Son of Perdition will...] sit as a god in the naos of God, showing/exhibiting himself that he is a god.

According to your definition of the Abomination of Desolation, this act of the Son of Perdition would not qualify. Whereas I say that this act IS the Abomination of Desolation.

[Montana Marv]

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

It could happen, however if they built a 3rd Temple it would be WW3.  I see prophetically, a regional war -- whereby the AC comes to power and is heralded by the Jews as the Messiah when he defeats Islam (also in the midst of this war, I see some Jewish writings that describe the "death" of the leader and a subsequent resurrection that will give him the "authority" so to speak to destroy Islam.)

The Key Verse --

Dan 11:44  But news from the east and the north shall alarm him, and he shall go out with great fury to destroy and devote many to destruction.

This proceeds this verse --

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?

Don't mind if I jump in.

This Scripture from Dan 11:36-45 has boundaries.  This person is successful until the time of Wrath is complete.  I take this holy mountain as Mt Carmel (where Elijah challenged the prophets of Baal). Mt Carmel is also on the boundary of the Valley of Megiddo where Armageddon will be fought.  A prime viewing position for moving troops.  He is alarmed from the great army from the North and the 200 million army from the East.  The King of the South (Africa) will engage him.  He is mustering his troops (Europe/West) to battle these other armies.  Then someone gets in the way, Christ begins waging war against all these armies from overhead.  The Valley of Megiddo occupies approx. 180 sq miles.  Thus this could be the winepress.  Grapes are gathered from the outside and put into the press.  The wine was collected from the inside of the press.

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Diaste]

 

On 7/5/2016 at 10:12 AM, WilliamL said:

 

Again, Jesus said not such thing: you are adding your presumption to the Word.

Jesus did say such a thing. Matt 24:15 15 "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

The above verse says we are to look the A of D as spoken by by Daniel the prophet, not WilliamL. The A of D from Daniel took place in the Temple in Jerusalem on the altar in the Holy Place and is recorded in history. You're fond of the historical records, why are you ignoring Jewish history? First you say one must know the histories to have an accurate understanding of Daniel 11 and now you just ignore the history of the Jews and the A of D because it doesn't fit your bias. Jesus clearly said "When you see Daniel's A of D..."(paraphrase) This A of D took place in the Second Temple before 164 BC. Jesus also said,.."whoso readeth...understand:)" Obviously to understand the future A of D we must look to the past A of D for understanding.  If the previous occurred in the Temple, with an altar, a holy place, priests, sacrifices, vessels then the next must occur under the same circumstances. Why? Well, if it took place in a tent in a back alley it would be ignored, because it would not fit the clear example given by Jesus in Matt 24:15.

 

Who told us this?

Jesus. In Matt 24. It's not a good things ignoring biblical truths that don't fit presuppositions.

Jesus said nothing about it: it was "the angel." You are lax with your facts, not a good sign. 

Excuse me sir, but no angel prophesies nor speaks of their own accord. Every angel of God brings the words of God, not their own words. The entire book of Revelation is the words of God and reveals the purposes and acts of God, as spoken by God, and given to Jesus Christ. So every word spoken by Jesus and/or the angels in Revelation, are the words of God the Father. You are twisting the scriptures. That may work on the weak and the unlearned but I am neither. 

Second, the literal Greek says "cast-out outside the court..." This is something entirely impossible to do with a physical court: the words would seem utter gibberish to John if taken in the physical sense. But it would be entirely possible to do with a spiritual place, one for the gathering of anyone not allowed into the places of the elect: such was the Court of the Gentiles in the OT Temple. So yes, the city here IS on earth, but the naos is clearly spiritual, in heaven.

Impossible? In an insular world ruled by personal agenda that would be true. As is typical in your posts you dissect and focus on minutiae and miss either the function or the concept, or both. 

Again, nothing in the Scriptures says this. You presume it.

I presume you just don't like the idea. It's quite clear in scripture but posting the proof would just fall on deaf ears. Yours.

 

Again, nothing in the Scriptures says this. You presume it.

Consider the following prophecy in the literal Greek:

2 Thes. 2:4 [The Son of Perdition will...] sit as a god in the naos of God, showing/exhibiting himself that he is a god.

According to your definition of the Abomination of Desolation, this act of the Son of Perdition would not qualify. Whereas I say that this act IS the Abomination of Desolation.

One must employ sound logic when reading scripture and you miss the boat here. You say the naos is in heaven earlier but here you say the naos is on earth. It would be ludicrous to contend the son of perdition is in heaven sitting in the naos but this is exactly what you suggest. So which is it? Is the naos in heaven along with the man of sin sitting in the naos? Or is the naos on earth where the son of perdition can sit in the naos proclaiming he's god?

And it's not my definition of the A of D. I know it's confusing. When you make up your own story about biblical truth you assume everyone else is doing the same thing. I'm not 'defining' the A of D. I'm looking to the 'description' of the A of D from Daniel and Jewish and Middle eastern history. You should try it. The description of the A of D is recorded in Daniel, Thessalonians and in recorded history. We are told to look to this by Jesus in Matt 24. I would also say that a man sitting in the naos and stating he is god is abominable and is a part of the whole of the acts of the beast surrounding the A of D. It's not just one act. Since you admit the naos is on earth so the beast can indeed sit there and proclaim himslef to be god, then it's also true that the rituals and liturgy of the Temple are taking place and the beast ends all that. Now, it's true that sitting in the Temple and proclaiming godhood is a disgusting rebellious act of utter desolation, but this act does not preclude erecting a statue to oneself and this is exactly what Jesus alludes to, among the rest of the acts of desolation that will take place. It's a simple matter to place an idol on the altar and then place a throne in the holy place and sit there as god. 

[WilliamL]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

Matt 24:15 15 "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

The above verse says we are to look the A of D as spoken by by Daniel the prophet, not WilliamL. The A of D from Daniel took place in the Temple in Jerusalem on the altar in the Holy Place and is recorded in history. ...Jesus clearly said "When you see Daniel's A of D..."(paraphrase) This A of D took place in the Second Temple before 164 BC. Jesus also said,.."whoso readeth...understand:)" Obviously to understand the future A of D we must look to the past A of D for understanding.  If the previous occurred in the Temple, with an altar, a holy place, priests, sacrifices, vessels then the next must occur under the same circumstances.

"The" -- no, AN abomination of desolation took place under Antiochus. Jesus makes no obvious reference to it -- that is only your presumption. Jesus was referring to the prophesied End Times AD of Daniel 12:11, wherein neither Temple nor blood sacrifice are mentioned; not a past AD.

"The next must occur under the same circumstances." Then why didn't Gabriel mention anything about a Temple or blood sacrifices in Dan. 11:45 and 12:11? Both things are notably omitted. They are likewise omitted in Matthew 24 and 2 Thes. 2. Your PRESUME them, I don't. Could they happen? Perhaps. Should people teach the things that you do as a CERTAINTY? Not on your life. Well, not on mine anyway.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

One must employ sound logic when reading scripture and you miss the boat here. You say the naos is in heaven earlier but here you say the naos is on earth.

I said the naos of Rev. 11 is in heaven, an entirely different naos than the one Paul was speaking of in 2 Thes 2. You are the one abandoning sound logic, by again PRESUMING that they are the same. Context says they are different. John was not told to measure an earthly temple that did not yet exist, rather one that existed at that time, the heavenly one.