The Rapture

[Nehemiah6]

Daniel 9:27 makes no claim about a temple being rebuilt. It only mentions the abomination of desolation.

Why would Daniel talk about a temple being rebuilt? He was simply given a limited view of the future. But the Lord Jesus Christ gave us the complete picture. Firstly, He prophesied of the destruction of the existing temple (the second temple). Then He prophesied about "the Holy Place". Since He knew that the existing Holy Place would be destroyed in AD 70, He saw -- by Divine foreknowledge -- another Holy Place where the Abomination of Desolation would be set up, and which would then trigger the Great Tribulation.

Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14

claims the abomination of desolation, standing in the holy place where he ought not to stand. There is nothing about a temple being rebuilt. This is another case on how man made dogma twists scriptures.

There's no need to talk about "man made dogmas twisting the Scriptures". Paul talks about the Man of Sin sitting in the temple of God and claiming to be God. And that would be in the distant future. So Paul was corroborating what Christ said about the Abomination of Desolation. The Antichrist (the Beast, the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, the Little Horn) will not only set up a blasphemous idol within the temple and introduce the worship of the Devil and himself, but he will blatantly and blasphemously oppose Christ and claim to be God and Christ. And that is what will trigger the Great Tribulation.

The Lord made it perfectly clear that the Great Tribulation would be a future UNIQUE EVENT -- such as has never been nor yet shall be. So none of this was fulfilled in the first century, and that is why there must be a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem in order to have these prophecies fulfilled. The fact that there are preparations being made in Israel -- as we speak -- for the rebuilding of the temple is further confirmation that there will indeed be a temple standing in Jerusalem which will be hijacked by Satan adn the Antichrist for their own evil purposes.

Please note the following prophecies from the Olivet Discourse to substantiate what has been stated:

DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE
And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. (Mt 24:2)

FUTURE SETTING UP OF THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION
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) (Mt 24:15)

THE GREAT TRIBULATION AS A RESULT OF THAT
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (Mt 24:21)

 

[Ahwatukee]

Daniel 9:27 makes no claim about a temple being rebuilt. It only mentions the abomination of desolation.
Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14 claims the abomination of desolation, standing in the holy place where he ought not to stand. There is nothing about a temple being rebuilt. This is another case on how man made dogma twists scriptures.

Matthew 24:15 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

Mark 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

Good day Louis,

You are correct in that neither Dan.9:27 nor Matt.24:15 directly state that a new temple will be built. But it is deduced from the fact that Jesus quoted Dan.9:27 as still being future. In between the time He quoted it until the temple was destroyed, none of the characteristics of Dan.9:27 have been fulfilled. In addition, from the setting up of the abomination in the middle of the seven years, 3 1/2 years later is when the Lord returns to the earth to end the age and that surely hasn't happened, unless of course you talk with a preterist.

The "He" in the verse is who establishes that seven year covenant, he also causes the sacrifices and offerings to cease and he sets up that abomination in the holy place within the temple in the middle of the seven years. All of these events take place during the seven years prior to Christ's return.

Therefore, since these events have not yet taken place, and there is currently is no temple, then one must be built in order for these events to be fulfilled. Simple, scriptural deduction.

 

[louis]

Good day Louis,

You are correct in that neither Dan.9:27 nor Matt.24:15 directly state that a new temple will be built. But it is deduced from the fact that Jesus quoted Dan.9:27 as still being future. In between the time He quoted it until the temple was destroyed, none of the characteristics of Dan.9:27 have been fulfilled. In addition, from the setting up of the abomination in the middle of the seven years, 3 1/2 years later is when the Lord returns to the earth to end the age and that surely hasn't happened, unless of course you talk with a preterist.

The "He" in the verse is who establishes that seven year covenant, he also causes the sacrifices and offerings to cease and he sets up that abomination in the holy place within the temple in the middle of the seven years. All of these events take place during the seven years prior to Christ's return.

Therefore, since these events have not yet taken place, and there is currently is no temple, then one must be built in order for these events to be fulfilled. Simple, scriptural deduction.

Good day Ahwatukee,
According to the angel in Daniel 8:17 & 19, and in Daniel 12:4 & 9, the events described to Daniel regard the end times, not 70 AD. Below is a copy from my post.

The reason theologians in the past could not decipher the meaning in the book of Daniel (much of which appears in Revelation), is that the visions shown Daniel were sealed and meant to be understood in the age the visions corresponded to (Daniel 8:17 & 19; 12:4 & 9). We are now entering the time appointed, and so knowledge of these events is increasing.

Daniel 8:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

Daniel 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

 

[louis]

Why would Daniel talk about a temple being rebuilt? He was simply given a limited view of the future. But the Lord Jesus Christ gave us the complete picture. Firstly, He prophesied of the destruction of the existing temple (the second temple). Then He prophesied about "the Holy Place". Since He knew that the existing Holy Place would be destroyed in AD 70, He saw -- by Divine foreknowledge -- another Holy Place where the Abomination of Desolation would be set up, and which would then trigger the Great Tribulation.

There's no need to talk about "man made dogmas twisting the Scriptures". Paul talks about the Man of Sin sitting in the temple of God and claiming to be God. And that would be in the distant future. So Paul was corroborating what Christ said about the Abomination of Desolation. The Antichrist (the Beast, the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, the Little Horn) will not only set up a blasphemous idol within the temple and introduce the worship of the Devil and himself, but he will blatantly and blasphemously oppose Christ and claim to be God and Christ. And that is what will trigger the Great Tribulation.

The Lord made it perfectly clear that the Great Tribulation would be a future UNIQUE EVENT -- such as has never been nor yet shall be. So none of this was fulfilled in the first century, and that is why there must be a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem in order to have these prophecies fulfilled. The fact that there are preparations being made in Israel -- as we speak -- for the rebuilding of the temple is further confirmation that there will indeed be a temple standing in Jerusalem which will be hijacked by Satan adn the Antichrist for their own evil purposes.

Please note the following prophecies from the Olivet Discourse to substantiate what has been stated:

DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE
And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. (Mt 24:2)

FUTURE SETTING UP OF THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION
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) (Mt 24:15)

THE GREAT TRIBULATION AS A RESULT OF THAT
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (Mt 24:21)

You are adding to scriptures by claiming the holy place being a rebuilt temple. There is no such affirmation to a rebuilt stone, brick and mortar structure representing the holy place where the abomination of desolation should not stand.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Good day Ahwatukee,
According to the angel in Daniel 8:17 & 19, and in Daniel 12:4 & 9, the events described to Daniel regard the end times, not 70 AD. Below is a copy from my post.

I really hate it when people misquote me. Please read my post again, as it says nothing about me believing that Daniel's prophecy has anything to do with 70 AD. What I did say is that, in Matt.24:15, Jesus quoted Dan.9:27 regarding the abomination as still being a future event. From the time that Jesus quoted Daniel until the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, there has been no fulfillment of Dan.9:27. Therefore, since the temple has been destroyed and Dan.9:27 has not yet been fulfilled, then a new temple must be built in the future.


Therefore, I am in agreement with you that the events of Daniel 9:27 are still future. I don't know how you could have concluded the opposite from my post.

 

[louis]

I really hate it when people misquote me. Please read my post again, as it says nothing about me believing that Daniel's prophecy has anything to do with 70 AD. What I did say is that, in Matt.24:15, Jesus quoted Dan.9:27 regarding the abomination as still being a future event. From the time that Jesus quoted Daniel until the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, there has been no fulfillment of Dan.9:27. Therefore, since the temple has been destroyed and Dan.9:27 has not yet been fulfilled, then a new temple must be built in the future.


Therefore, I am in agreement with you that the events of Daniel 9:27 are still future. I don't know how you could have concluded the opposite from my post.

Sorry to have misunderstood your quote. You are correct that the Daniel prophesies are future. But I also have reservations as to whether the temples destruction in 70 AD fulfilled the Lords statement about the temple.
According to the Lord, not a single stone of the temple will stand upon another.
The current Wailing wall happens to be the foundation for the old temple, of which all the stones remain on top of each other.
I therefore believe, that the current Wailing wall will come down in the foreseeable future, as the events regarding the he-goat and little horn in Daniel 8 come to fruition with much of the Middle East being destroyed (by the abomination of desolation), which will include Judea.

 

[Endoscopy]

Why would Daniel talk about a temple being rebuilt? He was simply given a limited view of the future. But the Lord Jesus Christ gave us the complete picture. Firstly, He prophesied of the destruction of the existing temple (the second temple). Then He prophesied about "the Holy Place". Since He knew that the existing Holy Place would be destroyed in AD 70, He saw -- by Divine foreknowledge -- another Holy Place where the Abomination of Desolation would be set up, and which would then trigger the Great Tribulation.

There's no need to talk about "man made dogmas twisting the Scriptures". Paul talks about the Man of Sin sitting in the temple of God and claiming to be God. And that would be in the distant future. So Paul was corroborating what Christ said about the Abomination of Desolation. The Antichrist (the Beast, the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, the Little Horn) will not only set up a blasphemous idol within the temple and introduce the worship of the Devil and himself, but he will blatantly and blasphemously oppose Christ and claim to be God and Christ. And that is what will trigger the Great Tribulation.

The Lord made it perfectly clear that the Great Tribulation would be a future UNIQUE EVENT -- such as has never been nor yet shall be. So none of this was fulfilled in the first century, and that is why there must be a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem in order to have these prophecies fulfilled. The fact that there are preparations being made in Israel -- as we speak -- for the rebuilding of the temple is further confirmation that there will indeed be a temple standing in Jerusalem which will be hijacked by Satan adn the Antichrist for their own evil purposes.

Please note the following prophecies from the Olivet Discourse to substantiate what has been stated:

DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE
And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. (Mt 24:2)

FUTURE SETTING UP OF THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION
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) (Mt 24:15)

THE GREAT TRIBULATION AS A RESULT OF THAT
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (Mt 24:21)

The abominabomi of desolation is the temple being desecrated. How does that take place without the temple? All we have is the Bible.

 

[Nehemiah6]

You are adding to scriptures by claiming the holy place being a rebuilt temple...

"You are adding to Scriptures" is foolish talk. I am drawing valid, logical conclusions from Scripture which you are resisting because you yourself are locked into "man made dogmas". Kindly tell us which temple Paul was speaking about in 2 Thessalonians?

 

[Nehemiah6]

The abomination of desolation is the temple being desecrated. How does that take place without the temple? All we have is the Bible.

Are you asking me or confirming that what I have posted is correct? Yes, there will be another temple in Jerusalem for the Antichrist and Satan to desecrate.

 

[Locutus]

Paul was talking about the temple that was standing when he wrote....

 

[Endoscopy]

Are you asking me or confirming that what I have posted is correct? Yes, there will be another temple in Jerusalem for the Antichrist and Satan to desecrate.

I agree. I mistook what you said.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Sorry to have misunderstood your quote. You are correct that the Daniel prophesies are future. But I also have reservations as to whether the temples destruction in 70 AD fulfilled the Lords statement about the temple.
According to the Lord, not a single stone of the temple will stand upon another.
The current Wailing wall happens to be the foundation for the old temple, of which all the stones remain on top of each other.
I therefore believe, that the current Wailing wall will come down in the foreseeable future, as the events regarding the he-goat and little horn in Daniel 8 come to fruition with much of the Middle East being destroyed (by the abomination of desolation), which will include Judea.

The Western wall is not a part of the temple itself but an outer wall of the temple complex. The temple was completely destroyed just as The Lord prophesied.

 

[Endoscopy]

The Western wall is not a part of the temple itself but an outer wall of the temple complex. The temple was completely destroyed just as The Lord prophesied.

Some people have to argue with everything in ignorance !

 

[Nehemiah6]

Paul was talking about the temple that was standing when he wrote....

That would have been totally impossible since the Great Tribulation would have been triggered at that time. There is no such unique event ever having been recorded.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Some people have to argue with everything in ignorance !

Argue?.......

 

[Endoscopy]

Argue?.......

What else do you call it when they say the opposite of what somebody else posted? Some even have "I'm right the world is wrong!" attitude!

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

What else do you call it when they say the opposite of what somebody else posted? Some even have "I'm right the world is wrong!" attitude!

Why are you harassing me? I wasn't addressing one of your posts, I was merely pointing something out. Your response is OTT
Butt out.

 

[heartofdavid]

Why are you harassing me? I wasn't addressing one of your posts, I was merely pointing something out. Your response is OTT
Butt out.

I believe you are correct. That wall is not part of the temple

 

[CeCe0000]

I've always thought we are at the end of the revelation. We are human and even though we study we cannot always fully understand the scriptures.

 

[Locutus]

That would have been totally impossible since the Great Tribulation would have been triggered at that time. There is no such unique event ever having been recorded.

Of course there was - Jesus himself stated that the great tribulation would occur along with the destruction of Jerusalem.

Mat 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Luke describes the same events surrounding the encampment of Jerusalem.

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Luke 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Jesus is not describing two commands to flee Judea at two different time. There was only one command and that was for the 1st century AD.