Abomination

[popsthebuilder]

4 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

Supernaturally speaking (difficult as it is stuck in this temporal plane) Daniel accommodates all up to the end of Jeremiah's prophesy. The end of iniquity means the Israelis are forgiven and are back in the land now with a temple.

Then the Antiochus stuff; and after the resurrection the Roman stuff. 

Before the Roman stuff is God returning at Pentecost to Validate Yeshua's presence in the New Temple within the believers. They corporately and individually are called the Temple in Hebrews.

As the AGE progresses, much Tribulation befalls the early church and many millions of Israelis are later killed by the RCC and still later by Nazi death camps. The abominations are from the first century on down and the 'age' or 1000 years is a time span spoken in early times of a vast time in their future.

The falling away really began shortly after the warning was penned and if we see the resultant, we can marvel that 'if it were possible' the true believers would have been deceived. If ever there was an age of deception it is right now.

There is a lot of smoke and mirrors to do with this end times stuff.

"They corporately and individually are called the Temple in Hebrews."

 

I need no reference for the Christ of GOD being refered to as the Holy Temple of GOD, but could you please provide reference for GOD almighty being refered to as the Holy Temple of GOD. Thanks.

 

peace

[popsthebuilder]

5 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

Jesus told the 1st Century Audience He would make a Second Coming.   That does not mean the people who heard Jesus claim this would be there when it happens.   That's how it is with Paul and the AoD.

Then what of Matthew 23:24?

Edited March 18, 2021 by popsthebuilder

[Justin Adams]

2 minutes ago, popsthebuilder said:

"They corporately and individually are called the Temple in Hebrews."

 

I need no reference for the Christ of GOD being refered to as the Holy Temple of GOD, but could you please provide reference for GOD almighty being refered to as the Holy Temple of GOD. Thanks.

 

peace

1Cor 3:16 16 Do you not know that you yourselves are God's temple, and that God's Spirit dwells in you? 

 

[Guest clancy]

2 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

1Cor 3:16 16 Do you not know that you yourselves are God's temple, and that God's Spirit dwells in you? 

 

Amen!!!

[Guest kingdombrat]

7 minutes ago, popsthebuilder said:

Then what of Matthew 23:24?

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important things.

 

What does this have to do with the Second Coming?

[Marathoner]

5 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

Supernaturally speaking (difficult as it is stuck in this temporal plane) Daniel accommodates all up to the end of Jeremiah's prophesy. The end of iniquity means the Israelis are forgiven and are back in the land now with a temple.

Then the Antiochus stuff; and after the resurrection the Roman stuff. 

Before the Roman stuff is God returning at Pentecost to Validate Yeshua's presence in the New Temple within the believers. They corporately and individually are called the Temple in Hebrews.

As the AGE progresses, much Tribulation befalls the early church and many millions of Israelis are later killed by the RCC and still later by Nazi death camps. The abominations are from the first century on down and the 'age' or 1000 years is a time span spoken in early times of a vast time in their future.

The falling away really began shortly after the warning was penned and if we see the resultant, we can marvel that 'if it were possible' the true believers would have been deceived. If ever there was an age of deception it is right now.

There is a lot of smoke and mirrors to do with this end times stuff.

I'm in agreement, brother. You touched upon something crucial:

"...God returning at Pentecost to Validate Yeshua's presence in the New Temple within the believers. They corporately and individually are called the Temple in Hebrews."

The Temple raised without human hands, for the Lord does not dwell in structures built by human hands, nor is He served by human hands. Each of His holy ones are living stones and so together, we are the new Temple. 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Marathoner

[Charlie744]

10 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Yes, of course but the three (or five if we include the two NT texts) passages are not mutually exclusive of one another. Unless someone has some scriptural reason for thinking this phrase alludes to multiple events we should be able to agree it's about a singular even.  For the readers, here's what Daniel 9:27 states in the NAS, 

Daniel 9:20-27
"Now while I was speaking and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God in behalf of the holy mountain of my God,  while I was still speaking in prayer, then the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision previously, came to me in my extreme weariness about the time of the evening offering.  He gave me instruction and talked with me and said, "O Daniel, I have now come forth to give you insight with understanding.  "At the beginning of your supplications the command was issued, and I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed; so give heed to the message and gain understanding of the vision.  "Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.  "So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.  "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.  And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate." 

We also have Daniel 11:31, 

Daniel 11:29-35
"At the appointed time he will return and come into the South, but this last time it will not turn out the way it did before.  For ships of Kittim will come against him; therefore he will be disheartened and will return and become enraged at the holy covenant and take action; so he will come back and show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant.  Forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation.  By smooth words he will turn to godlessness those who act wickedly toward the covenant, but the people who know their God will display strength and take action.  Those who have insight among the people will give understanding to the many; yet they will fall by sword and by flame, by captivity and by plunder for many days.  "Now when they fall they will be granted a little help, and many will join with them in hypocrisy.  Some of those who have insight will fall, in order to refine, purge and make them pure until the end time; because it is still to come at the appointed time."

So we see the abominations are not a person. They are things the person in question brings. And having brought these abominations, the abominations - not the individual himself - makes the people of Israel desolate. That's what the verse actually states. I have not added anything to it nor subtracted anything from it. Those who've been reading the posts have already observed how some posters have introduced the AoD as a person but the observant have noted not a single one of those posters have provided a single bit of evidence showing the AoD to be a person. It has been assumed, not evidenced. 

Furthermore, the futurists will use this passage to justify the building of a new, modern temple in the 21st century but the passage doesn't actually state any such thing. The assume their position because of inferences dictated by the futurist hermeneutic, not what is actually stated in the Bible. The facts of history are that a temple was built after Daniel 9:27. There is no need to infer (imagine) a third temple of stone in our future. In addition, we've also seen the attacks against preterism begin even though no one has yet to appeal to that hermeneutic.  

What did I actually post? 

The question the op asks is, "What is the abomination of desolation?" and "Is it future, prior to Jesus' return?" 

What were my answers to those two questions?

What is the abomination of desolation?  Abomination is desolation. Desolation is abomination. A study of the two words will make this apparent. 
Is the AoD future, prior to Jesus' return? It was future to the apostles of Matthew 24 and Mark 13, but it is past-tense to use in the 21st century. 

And I provided a sampling of verses showing how the prophets prophets prophesied about the coming abomination and anyone familiar with their New Testament (should) instantly recognizes how those events happened in the NT era. 

There just shy of 60 verses mentioning "abomination" or "abominable" in the Old Testament. Remember: neither Daniel not the first century Jew had a New Testament. Jesus' audience would have understood what he was saying as a reference to Daniel but they would not have understood it ONLY through Daniel BECAUSE SEVERAL OF THE OTHER PROPHETS SPOKE OF ABOMINATION AND DESOLATION!!!!! 

So beware. Teachers and preachers who use scripture selectively and do not bring to bear the whole of scripture on the matter are not teaching well because they are not being thorough and if their not thorough then they're teaching - no matter the content - is incomplete. Incomplete teaching likely leads to incorrect conclusions. This is not rocket science. 

If anyone bothers to survey the various verses using "abomination," etc. then they will find the matter of abomination can be narrowed down to two or three conditions: sexual perversion, idolatry, and injustice. Now I assume everyone reading that sentence instantly nodded to themselves and said, "Yep, that's right," because anyone who has read their OT knows these things make God mad. And..... they corrupt God's people. 

It 

 

is

 

NOT

 

brain

 

surgery.

Your study will show the recurring theme of sexual perversion and idolatry as abomination. In many cases the two overlap because pagan religious rituals often included temple prostitution (male and female). In Proverbs we find the theme of injust, dishonesty, and other character issues being referenced. Again, there is an overlap between these three. This isn't rocket surgery . 

Doesn't take a person with computer software or an internet Bible but a few minutes to survey what I have just posted to see if what I have just posted is correct. I invite you all to do so now. 

I have not added to nor subtracted from scripture. 

I have not (yet) argued a single preterist position .

If the readers, my fellow posters who have all been regenerated and endeavor to treat God's word as authoritative ;), will also do the same with the words "desolation," and desolate," etc. they'll find a similar theme. Study this in the Hebrew when time avails itself because there are a couple of different terms used in Hebrew to communicate what we in English translate as desolate.  These passages as a whole inform Daniel's mentions of abomination, desolation, and the abomination of desolation and there isn't a single example in the entire Old AND New Testament that ever states the AoD is a person but there are plenty of verses that tell us in quite plain terms these are conditions of depravity. 

There. I did it. I finally added something to scripture . I called it "depravity." Scripture, as far as I know, doesn't call it that but I do not think that is an invalid interpretation. I infer that label based on other scriptures that I can, again, list in abundance to make the case fo calling abomination, desolation, and the abomination of desolation, "depravity." 

The Jews were brought back to Jerusalem after their enslavement in Babylon during Daniel's time. 

Great. Much of what you just posted is certainly proven veracious by the facts of history. However, what, specifically in the three Daniel texts leads you - or would lead the rest of us - to concluding the AoD is the crucifixion? 

If I may , 

We have the author of Hebrews telling us Jesus entered the holy of holies and sacrificed himself therein (Hebrews chapters 9 and 10). We know from the OT that human sacrifices were abominable to God, gross sin, and prohibited by His law (Lev. 18, Jdg. 11, and elsewhere). This has always been a paradox in Christianity: God Himself sacrificed a human against His own Law. And it has always been understood God made such prohibitions because 1) having been made in God's own image human life is inherently valuable and 2) such sacrifices make mockery of the one true sacrifice that would set us free from Genesis 3:7 and bring Genesis 2:9 and Jn. 11:25/14:6 to bear upon us.  

But is that what Daniel was saying?  

Is that what Jesus was saying? 

Do please feel free to make the case for your position (even if it doesn't build from what I just posted). I'll read it. I hope you won't get too upset when I critique it if I find it wanting in some way(s). I hope you'll rise to that occasion to prove my critique wrong, or if correct then you and I and all other readers can agree that view may have fatal problems and we need to look elsewhere. Win-Win either way. 

And Charlie, I, for my own part, have absolutely no problem with a brother or sister saying an honest, "I don't know the answer to that question," if such an occasion arises please don't feel the need to hide (or get defensive or become unnecessarily adversarial). I don't know all the answers, either . 

 

 

In review: The abomination of desolation is NOT a person. Abomination is desolation and vice versa. The relevant OT prophesies were fulfilled in the NT era, as evidenced in scripture and known history, so what was future for the gospel-era apostle and NT-era convert is past-tense to us in the 21st century. 

Not all prophesy has been fulfilled. Let nothing I have posted here be construed to say any such thing. Anyone who says or implies otherwise is asserting a red herring or arguing a straw man and their post treated accordingly. Look at the scriptures I have assembled and examine them exegetically. Test my posts to see if they bear consistency with God's word, as written, plainly read and exegetically examined.

It is not rocket surgery . 

First of all let me tell you unequivocally just how wrong you are..... TO ME Daniel IS ROCKET SURGERY.  I can not tell you how many times I read and reread Daniel and all the "accepted interpretations" and walked away thoroughly frustrated... It certainly was not because I had more intelligence or problem solving skills... on and on, but I believe I continued to see a serious breakdown in the story given to us through Daniel... Now Daniel's story is sound and true and I believe it carries seamlessly from chapter 1 to 12, but I believe our interpretations go left or right when we move out of the purely (or almost purely) historical chapters.

Now, before I try and continue with my thoughts on Daniel, please understand I realize how completely foreign my interpretations are to you and everyone.... and I greatly appreciate your time, consideration and willingness to explain / teach / offer your understanding of Daniel as well as those references and patterns found throughout the Scriptures... That is gold and I own known of it....

To respond to your comment "it is not rocket surgery" in a serious way, I do find Daniel to be quite difficult, confusing, certainly impossible at times...

Paul himself did not see the Messiah coming in the manner He did... He knew the Scriptures inside and out.... but NO ONE could possibly study Daniel, even Paul for a 1000 years and come away with an interpretation that God would come to this earth and be rejected and crucified... inconceivable.... The Messiah would save them ... perhaps from the Romans... but they could not see Him saving them in the manner He designed.

For me, I will need to take baby steps here.... as Justin had mentioned earlier (and assuming I understood his response), I will have to ask we take one topic or sub-topic at a time and move forward if possible without completely frustrating you and everyone... especially since I am deeply aware your interpretations and understandings of Daniel are comfortable with you already.So, without attempting to address all your terrific points and references and connecting the many "themes and patterns" discovered throughout the Scriptures that will / must / should also be followed within Daniel, I think we might stay with the first issue only:  What is the Abomination in Daniel 9:27?  (and at this time I would ask we  (I) do not try and defend or discuss the "abomination" in Daniel 11... this and other mentions in the NT are not separate events... can not speak to Revelation until I get there - Daniel moves from the very physical writings to the spiritual as we move towards chapter 12...).

I have read so many of your responses and have learned so much.. not only a specific interpretation but the supporting information and connective tissue that surrounds it... nothing is found to be isolated or on its own. That is something few are able and willing to complete or prepare.  And please forgive me here...whether someone responds with a brief comment or would include all his / her supporting reasons for his / her findings, or anywhere in between, it does not guarantee their conclusion is always correct.  Imagine how completely overwhelmed, frustrated and inadequate I felt (most of the time) in my reading (not yet trying to study) Daniel in the beginning. It was relatively tame during the historical chapters but then Daniel flipped a switch (not immediately) but I could no longer just read his stories in an enjoyable and casual manner... I had to sit up and think... not just enjoy these sometimes child like and entertaining stories.

 If I may, let me jump to today and leave all the frustrating experiences, the sleepless nights, etc., and look back at Daniel.... 

Daniel does not start with chapter 1 but with the Jews many years before his time. The overall theme that I have followed was the consistency and frequency the Jews would return to idolatry and disobedience of their God. Whether we are going back to Adam or prior to Jeremiah's days, we choose to disobey.  That is the overall theme in the Scriptures and we just can not seem to NOT repeat history. 

Jeremiah warned his people over and over of the consequences that would befall them if they did not repent... And we know how that worked out for them. Jeremiah had taken the ARK and hid it so the Babylonians would not have it and take it to Babylon... but it is interesting (not to be discussed here) but God did allow them to take the vessels.... 

The theme of course is the Jews disobeyed God and He had enough and needed to punish them... but of course He would fold this punishment into such an unbelievable layer cake (bad analogy but..) called the Book of Daniel. The entire book is dedicated (my opinion) to the restoration of the Jews as a result of their disobedience. From the beginning, the Babylonians took their people, destroyed their city, their Temple, their land was virtually abandoned... almost completely removed from the planet). This is the theme of Daniel and how and when God would restore them.

Their punishment in captivity would be 70 years. Daniel is given a 70 week prophecy and (to me) this entire 70 weeks describes how God is going to restore His people, His city, His Temple, His land, etc., back to Jerusalem. Those 70 weeks or 490 years are broken down into 3 separate sections.... and for me, it is so purposeful and unbelievable. The first two sections amount to 483 years and represent the first 69 weeks of the 70. Here we see all the physical restorations fulfilled - the people, the buildings, the city, the Temple... all completed and restored as though they never left in captivity. All but the most important piece of restoration!  The ARK that Jeremiah hid from the Babylonians would never be found again and this is because it was to be replaced  / restored by the coming Messiah Himself. Now, when He arrived, and they indeed expected Him to arrive around the time He had come, everything would be restored and ready for HIM to enter HIS Temple, in HIS land, in His city... This would be a final and complete restoration of all things.

But unfortunately, it did not turn out that way (of course Jesus knew this and this is why He had Daniel write about this / Him in his book). Daniel chapter 9 tells us (well me definitely), beginning with 9:24, Gabriel tells Daniel of the 70 weeks and the 6 things / requirements that will be fulfilled during that period. The next few verse to 9:27 break down the 70 weeks into their fulfillments with the final week or 7 years the most important and incomprehensible - especially to Daniel. None of the 6 fulfillments mentioned in 9:24 will be completed in any of the first two sections or the first 69 weeks. God wanted us to see clearly just what He intended to accomplish during His first coming and when He would fulfill them.... Like He was drawing us a circle within a circle.... here pay attention, this is where you need to focus... the last week... this is where you must aim for in your understanding.

 

²⁶ Then after the sixty-two weeks (the 62 weeks had come after the first 7 weeks, so this is at the end of the 69^th week), the ^[a]Messiah will be cut off (Crucified) and have ^[b]nothing, and the people of the prince (this is Titus and the Romans) who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary (This is in 70 AD). And ^[c]its end will come with a flood; even to the end ^[d]there will be war; desolations are determined (The Romans will leave no stone unturned. Destroy everything!).

 

 ²⁷ And he (Messiah) will confirm a covenant  (This is His New Covenant – He will be the sacrificial Lamb of God… like God’s other covenants this will also be “conditional”, God will ALWAYS fulfill His side of the agreement but we MUST fulfill our side by accepting Jesus as our Lord and Savior and He died to pay for our sins – Jeremiah 31 (full circle…. Jeremiah takes the ARK and tell us when it will be returned / restored) with the many for one week (I cannot speak to the translation issue here…. But for me this can only refer to Daniel’s last week of the prophecy and not a 7 year period thrown some 2,000 years into the future… this is a perfect example of where the overall theme or message within Daniel breaks completely down if we accept the RCCs interpretation associated with their claim the “he” in 9:27 an AC figure and NOT the Messiah), but in the middle of the week (Jesus indeed was crucified 3.5 years into His 7 years ministry or the last week in the 70 week prophecy) he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering (His sacrifice on the Cross indeed eliminated any further need for a Passover festival where animals would be sacrificed. He was the perfect offering -  this is why He came and it is unconscionable (my opinion) for us to take this unbelievable act and think to assign it to some AC character far into the future as a means to remove the title of the “little horn” from the papacy) ; and on the wing of ^[a]abominations (Here is when Daniel refers to this horrific act - he of course would never have any possible idea what this is / would be referring to – hidden by God. This, to me, continues with the same theme and message WITHIN DANIEL and the 70 week prophecy. I do understand your comments where you don’t find an “abomination” being referred to a person, but that does not or should not exclude its relationship and its second mention of the most important / horrific event in man’s history. The “abomination” of our High Priest, our Lord and Savior, our Messiah, the ONE claiming to be “The I AM” to the Jews in their Temple, in their city, during their Holy Passover Festival MUST be found to be this “abomination”…. Viewed and considered by all different audiences; The Pharisees would have NO problem seeing Jesus as and “abomination – One calling Himself the “I AM”, they would have NO problem calling HIM a “blasphemer” or even a HOLY MAN – He never studied under anyone… He is a carpenter from Nazareth. What was done to Jesus was certainly an “abomination”… no if’s or but’s about it and it completes Daniel’s message and his prophecies to us and it always stays within this theme of restoration and unfortunately, once again, the Jews disobedience to God and their ultimate rejection of Him)   will come the one who ^[b]makes desolate, until a complete destruction, one that is ^[c]decreed, gushes forth on the one who ^[d]makes desolate.”(Here again we come full circle when Titus will come in 70 AD and destroy everything….This is the result of their rejection of their Messiah….. Their act, this abominable act which could not possibly be equaled by any of their many acts of disobedience or idolatry, is the CAUSE OF THEIR DESOLATION.)

 

Okay, I think I said enough here.... this is obviously my basis for who or what this "abomination" is referring to and the consequences that causes their desolation.

For me, the most important concern is my attempt and desire to identify the message and purpose within Daniel in the later chapters. When I read all of today's commentaries and interpretations that seem to immediately steer the focus of Daniel away from the Messiah and send it out to some mythical boogeyman labeled the AC the more I realized there is such a disconnect going on here....  But this disconnect or redirection or slight of hand that magicians typically employ to try to distract you to what is really going on in front of you is owned by the "little horn" of Daniel... our problem is we need to understand his interpretations are meant to destroy and keep us from seeing the truth (once again my opinion but I am very comfortable with this interpretation).

So, have at it.... but please, if you will, stay within Daniel and hopefully chapter 9 ... it makes no sense in discussing anything else since so much depends on this interpretation..... and I do understand this interpretation MUST not be found to be in conflict with other subsequent verses in the Scripture...

Thank you very much, Charlie

 

 

  

[Charlie744]

2 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

Perfectly reasonable and coherent brother. I just send a link to you via PM. It might blow your mind. Tell me what you think.

I just finished my response to Josheb... took longer than I expected.... but I believe I saw you attached a link for me to read?  I will have to read it later on tonight if you do not mind...  and thanks for sending it.

I have just scheduled a visit to my personal metal smith here where I will be ordering a made to fit suit of armour .... I told him I will need it before Josheb's response...

 Charlie

[Charlie744]

1 hour ago, Josheb said:

Not according to the plain reading of scripture; it was future to the Matthew 24 audience, but it is not future to us. 

 

I'll go through why this is so later, when I have time, because my next client just showed. Do please feel free to post the case for your view in the interim. 

 

 

.

I have just sent Josheb my response and I do not expect he will be able to consider it until after his client's... but in my response it should be clear that Matthew was writing to those folks in his time... There is no way any of the Apostles including Paul could possibly recognize the coming of the Messiah and His crucifixion.... they were looking for a more military type figure .... but the Gospels were certainly a "look back" to Jesus and would open up what was clearly missed by all... 

Charlie

[Charlie744]

6 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Let me tell you how that reads. 

We have a difference of opinion on the difficulty of Daniel and you, Josh are wrong.  

 

If that is actually a fair reflection of your view of me, my faculties, of our exchange then I'll be choosing not to trade posts with you further because I do not believe cogent discourse is possible with anyone who thinks and then posts that content. If, however, that was a  poorly worded view then I will ask you to amend and clarify it and to do so in a manner that provides me and the other readers with the belief the conversation can continue without you making it personal and derisively so. 

Furthermore, This conversation is specifically and explicitly about the AoD. Nothing else. Nothing more. AND... I did invite you to provide a rationale - an exegetical rational rooted in scripture - for the view the crucifixion was the AoD. I meant it. See how quickly you got yourself off-topic? Just tell us how and why you see the crucifixion as the answer. We're all waiting.

 

I'll address the rest of your post, where relevant, later.

Josheb, I just read the first line of this response and I immediately went to the bottom to respond and comment... should it be needed... I definitely should have placed a bunch of emoji's to ensure my intent / humor was revealed. When I think there is an opportunity to insert humor (which of course does not always work - in the written world... much more effective and received in the face to face world), I take it... in this case I was trying to show the Grand Canyon type space between your comment "not a rocket surgery" or something like that to MY perception of "rocket surgery"... now, I will go back up  to your comments, Charlie