The Abomination of Desolation

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

ComeLordJesus

Senior Member
Dec 26, 2017
372
39
28
I answered you in post 158 but here it is again.

To start with the grammar says it's Christ. The subject of verse 26 is the Messiah and the bit about the prince to come is a side note. Verse 27 continues with the subject of verse 26 which is Christ.

But the main reason I believe that is because Christ according to Paul confirmed the Abrahamic covenant.

Gal_3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Also when Christ was crucified he became the ultimate sacrifice and ended the need for animal sacrifices.
V.25 Jesus is Messiah the (P)rince with a capitol P. The prince in v.26 is a small p and is not the same person of v.25, it is the Antichrist.

All Galatians 3:17 proves is there was there was 430 years from Abraham until the giving of the law to Moses.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
Num 28:3 And thou shalt say unto them, This is the offering made by fire which ye shall offer unto the LORD; two lambs of the first year without spot day by day, for a continual burnt offering.

Are you sure about the daily sacrifice thing not being daily? Isn't numbers 28:3 saying that 2 lambs should be sacrificed every day?
I'm very sure daily sacrifice has nothing to do with animals but worshiping in truth and spirit.

1. God is not unreasonable- if sacrifices were to be offered daily then people would not work. Weekly is a little reasonable.
2. Day by day doesn't mean daily, it only sets the requirements to be met every time they are to offer the sacrifice.
 

ComeLordJesus

Senior Member
Dec 26, 2017
372
39
28
If you look at the first part of Chapter 9, Daniels prayer concerns Israel, and Gods punishment of them, which is at the end of the 70 years. The answer responds to this prayer. Thus it can not be about jesus.

I have him and some of his budies on ignore and can not see what they post. If he answers. Please share.. I am interested to see what he says,
Absolutely, it's about Israel. Most of the stuff I've seen him post really makes no sense.
 

luigi

Junior Member
Dec 6, 2015
1,222
216
63
I think it's figurative and that's why go with the straight forward verses to understand the passages in Luke. To me Jesus coming with clouds isn't as definitive as "this generation shall not pass away till all be fulfilled".

Luk 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.
So you are claiming that the Lord was referring to the then generation in the first century having witnessed all the events described in Mark 13; Luke 21; and Matthew 24; all of which before the end came?
If so, I see you are one who believes the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem as the end that came.
Do you realize that the Jews who remained in Jerusalem in 70 AD, were those who rejected Christ and had exiled all believers from the land of Judea years earlier (Acts 8:1)?
The faithless who were around in Jerusalem in 70AD were those upon whom the wrath of God came down hard upon (1 Thessalonians 2:15). Do you think the Lord in Mark 13; Luke 21; and Matthew 24, was providing warning to the faithless in 70 AD Jerusalem?

Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.

1 Thessalonians 2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
I'm very sure daily sacrifice has nothing to do with animals but worshiping in truth and spirit.

1. God is not unreasonable- if sacrifices were to be offered daily then people would not work. Weekly is a little reasonable.
2. Day by day doesn't mean daily, it only sets the requirements to be met every time they are to the sacrifice.
The bible plainly says in Leviticus that they were to offer two lambs DAILY, I have to stick with that. Also I have to leave for a while and will be back later.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
I'm very sure daily sacrifice has nothing to do with animals but worshiping in truth and spirit.

1. God is not unreasonable- if sacrifices were to be offered daily then people would not work. Weekly is a little reasonable.
2. Day by day doesn't mean daily, it only sets the requirements to be met every time they are to offer the sacrifice.
Sorry about this post. Numbers 28 is indeed talking about daily sacrifice but it was not done for remission of sins.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
The bible plainly says in Leviticus that they were to offer two lambs DAILY, I have to stick with that. Also I have to leave for a while and will be back later.
Yes you are right about that but it was not for atonement of sins.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
V.25 Jesus is Messiah the (P)rince with a capitol P. The prince in v.26 is a small p and is not the same person of v.25, it is the Antichrist.

All Galatians 3:17 proves is there was there was 430 years from Abraham until the giving of the law to Moses.
Galatians 3:17 also says that Christ confirmed that covenant.
 

luigi

Junior Member
Dec 6, 2015
1,222
216
63
The Bible uses the word generation to indicate a beginning in two difernt ways.

One in respect to a household in respect to a father, mother and children a unit as the generation of evil, natural man as those who walk by sight or called the generation of Adam (.approx. 40 years) And another the supernatural as the generation of Christ in respect to the spiritual seed(one ) Christ.

The supernatural shown in Genesis 3:15 prophesying beforehand in respect our husband Christ. He crushes the head of the serpent.

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed;( Christ) it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.Genesis 3:15

The generation of Christ (the spiritual seed) making a new creation out of the evil generation of natural unconverted man .

The evil generation as that which will not pass away until all is fulfilled is the generation of man (Adam) in respect the literal seeds (flesh)

Mathew give us the genealogy of the unseen, the generation Christ ending with Christ

Matthew 1 :1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Matthew 1 :16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3 give us the genealogy of the temporal seen the generation that began in Adam. One forward the other backward.

Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.Luke 3:38
And the way the Lord describes generation in Luke 21 is in regards to they who see all the events described therein being fulfilled.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
lol, Me either EG!!!!

In the past many who do believe that way would give a challenge to Read the writings of Josephus(a whole lot of reading) because they thought it would help in proving their eschatology but most wont do it. Why is that it is not scripture and so it puts a foul taste in many's mouth and so they refuse to read it or see it even as a historical document.

I am (NOT a preteist) and do not believe the AOD,the mark of the beast ect. were fulfilled between ad66-70. Why is because many years ago my thoughts were in that "I did not care if this camp or the other was correct I just wanted to know what was". In the same I am also (NOT M.A.D.) and so have no desire to deny that Jerusalem was destroyed in ad70.

Locutus I count as a dear friend of mine(a brother in Christ) although we differ on this(AOD,mark of beast ect.) and see him as very intelligent and has shown me he is honest about things we have discussed. So the post between me and him might seem rash but bare in mind he referred to me as Markus and changed from Dispensational to futuristic because he knew it was accurate(bless you brother,lol).

You have the scriptures to work with which are a type of scale to weigh anything against. They are what any document is compared to in Christian eschatology. Again though as in this case Adam Clarke was quoted,quoting Josephus so anyone who has never read the things from Josephus will agree without reading it or read it to see if it is so.

In Wars 2 from Josephus http://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-2.html (if you read it,lol) you will find a weapon that will completely change how you look at the AOD and the mark of the beast. Look for this,,, "piety",,"offerings",, but why?

In the bible(scale) those who worship the beast are who it says receive his mark. In wars2 the Jews are accused of impiety meaning they did not worship nor hold any regard to Caesar/Rome as any type God/Holiness ect. (opposite from scripture).

In wars 2 the Romans try several times to have their images set up in Jerusalem and other synagogues(other cities in Judah) and the Jews riot every time because it would pollute the temple of God (again opposite to scripture those who receive the mark worship the image).

Look at wars2 chapter 18,find "Pella"(notice the place you are told they fled to is sacked and its people killed between ad66-70),lol not such a safe place to flee to right?

In the Scriptures Revelation 13:17 no one can buy or sell unless they do so with the beast mark. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish_Revolt_coinage (notice the Jews are not using the Romans money any more)? So if Rome is the beast they did not buy and sell with their money.

Much more I could say but Ask yourself if the Jews worshiped Rome/Caesar or if they revolted against it/him and notice that in Scripture the ones who receive the mark and worship the image of the beast are the ones within the walls of Jerusalem during the siege...
Thanks for your reply bro.

Josephus, as with other things, may be used as a guide;. But since it is not scripture. Should not be used to determine or prove your theology. That would be having your theology rooted in the words of men, and not the bible. Maccabees is another non scripture writting which I personally have used, as it shows the maccabean revolt. Which was caused by the little horn of dan 8, which I believe is a precurser to the future king of rome which will commit the abomination of desolation in the middle of the 7 weeks.

I am not M.A.D either..lol Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD as fortold by Daniel, and its desolation will continue until the time aloted (the end of war desolations, which has been present in the middle east since) as per Dan 9 And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined.


As for Locutis, I have him on ignore also. This topic gets heated. And some people I do not think can handle it with out getting bent out of shape, and he happens to be one of those people in my view (have not spoken for him for a few years now. Maybe he has changed?)

As for roman money, I am Not sure how that relates. As I see it, The mark of the beast will prevent people from buying or selling. I do not see where it will be only from roman money. It says they have no way to buy or sell anything period. Again, as I see it, Nothing the ceasar of rome did in AD 70 fulfills the prophesies concerning to final form of the gentile beast system.

Anyway, Thank you for honest and peaceful discussion :)
 

luigi

Junior Member
Dec 6, 2015
1,222
216
63
Yeah it may about the Old Covenant. I was reading in the verse before 18 where it was talking about laying a foundation stone in Zion. What do you think about the overflowing scourge in Isaiah 28:15. We know that happened in AD 70 do you think it happens twice, once back then and then again at the end?

Isa 28:15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
For the Israeli's not to be worrying about the overflowing scourge because they have an agreement with it, means the overflowing scourge would have been overflowing through some of the other nations in the Southern kingdom/Middle East.
This was not the case in 70 AD.
The Middle East was already subject to Rome and were living in peace; thereby "no overflowing scourge" in those nations at the time.
In contrast: Judeans in 70 AD were in rebellion against Rome and thereby had no agreement with it.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
So what you are saying is that the Lord is describing the abomination of desolation as some sort of material object that will be placed in a rebuilt temple which does not acknowledge Christ as Lord that from which the faithless in Christ who live in Israel should then run? Do you not see how your perspective is multi-flawed?
I see Jesus saying that the jews will see an abomination which causes desolation in the holy place period. Whenever it is, It will be lterally fulfilled. To say otherwise, makes your perspectively immediatly flawed.

In contrast: We have numerous scriptures identifying an entity that will destroy the Middle East, including the land of Israel.
Do you think this entity may qualify as an abomination because of its making numerous Middle Eastern nations desolate?
Making a city or nations desolate. And placing an abomination which makes desolate in a holy place are two different things.

So as I said, your trying to ake a spiritual interpretation. I can not do this with prphesy, I must interpret whaty jesus said literally. He said when you see the abomination in the holy place run. It is an event, what you are trying to interpret it with is not an event, it is an ongoing mission which continues.. Again, Huge difference. One is an event which people should see and know they must do something, the other is not an event, and would not be something which we can say as soon as this happens run..

We also have numerous scriptures that the temple of the Lord is within those faithful to Him, and not in some stone building.
You can not place an abomination which causes desolation in a person. Let alone see it standing there. So this alone should divirt your thinking to understand this cannot be the proper interpretation.

As such, do you think that if the beasts system which the whole faithless world will adore, also to some degree will affect the faithful, may represent the beasts system standing in the place where it ought not, in the Lords temple within the hearts of the faithful?
Object, abomination - unclean thing, idol (see hebrew)

which causes abomination (Makes something desolate, or unclean)

Standing in holy place - a sacred place, a literal place. Found in religious temples, namely in this context. The jewish temple. Whatever temple that may be)

Just take what the term means to the people it was written to. And take jesus literally. Try not to add things which are out of context and can not properly render the prophesy fulfilled.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
The abomination of desolation is simply blasphemy against the Holy anointing Spirit, Christ. (Contributing the works of one to another) It is the same a plagiarism stealing the authorship of one and giving it over to another

In that way the abomination of desolation in effect violates the first commandment not to have any unseen false gods before our Creator and redeemer.

When the time of reformation came.... the abomination of desolation began. The veil is rent .
How can one see this standing in a holy place. And be a sign for people to see to cause them to run, because immediatly following this event, will be great tribulation?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
So you are claiming that the Lord was referring to the then generation in the first century having witnessed all the events described in Mark 13; Luke 21; and Matthew 24; all of which before the end came?
If so, I see you are one who believes the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem as the end that came.
Do you realize that the Jews who remained in Jerusalem in 70 AD, were those who rejected Christ and had exiled all believers from the land of Judea years earlier (Acts 8:1)?
The faithless who were around in Jerusalem in 70AD were those upon whom the wrath of God came down hard upon (1 Thessalonians 2:15). Do you think the Lord in Mark 13; Luke 21; and Matthew 24, was providing warning to the faithless in 70 AD Jerusalem?

Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.

1 Thessalonians 2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.
The people in the first century did not see all the events in matt 24 or the others. They did even see the events jesus called the birth pangs, or beginning of sorrows. The great tribulation, or the return of jesus because all life would be destroyed if he did not return, In fact that last point was impossible in 70 AD. So why do peole say it was possible?
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
The bible plainly says in Leviticus that they were to offer two lambs DAILY, I have to stick with that. Also I have to leave for a while and will be back later.
I now get it and that view supports the idea that Christ doesn't abolish the daily sacrifice but sets it.

The daily sacrifice was not for atonement of sins but it was food sacrifice that was offered to please God.

Num 28:1The Lord said to Moses, 2“Give this command to the Israelites and say to them: ‘Make sure that you present to me at the appointed time my food offerings, as an aroma pleasing to me.’ 3Say to them: ‘This is the food offering you are to present to the Lord: two lambs a year old without defect, as a regular burnt offering each day. 4Offer one lamb in the morning and the other at twilight, 5together with a grain offering of a tenth of an ephah a of the finest flour mixed with a quarter of a hin b of oil from pressed olives. 6This is the regular burnt offering instituted at Mount Sinai as a pleasing aroma, a food offering presented to the Lord. 7The accompanying drink offering is to be a quarter of a hin of fermented drink with each lamb. Pour out the drink offering to the Lord at the sanctuary. 8Offer the second lamb at twilight, along with the same kind of grain offering and drink offering that you offer in the morning. This is a food offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord.

But all these being only a prophesy, Jesus doesn't abolish it but fulfills it. And the real fulfillment is us is that we are through the death and resurrection of Christ, a pleasing aroma to God.

Eph 5:1Be imitators of God, therefore, as beloved children, 2and walk in love, just as Christ loved us and gave Himself up for us as a fragrant sacrificial offering to God.

2 Cor 2:15For we are to God the sweet aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing.

Psalms 141: 2May my prayer be set before You like incense, my uplifted hands like the evening offering.

So, Jesus is not the one that abolishes the daily sacrifice according to Daniel's prophesy, it is the antichrist because daily sacrifice is something pleasing to God.
But the strongest argument for this is that taking away daily sacrifice has been shown to be done by the antichrist at least twice in Dan 8 & Dan 11, and every time it has been connected to the abomination that causes desolate as one event.
So it is safe to conclude that in Dan 9, the one that takes away the daily sacrifice and sets the abomination is not Jesus but the antichrist.
 

luigi

Junior Member
Dec 6, 2015
1,222
216
63
I see Jesus saying that the jews will see an abomination which causes desolation in the holy place period. Whenever it is, It will be lterally fulfilled. To say otherwise, makes your perspectively immediatly flawed.
You do not see a flaw in the Lord speaking to they who do not believe in Him to take heed about something?



Making a city or nations desolate. And placing an abomination which makes desolate in a holy place are two different things.
So as I said, your trying to ake a spiritual interpretation. I can not do this with prphesy, I must interpret whaty jesus said literally. He said when you see the abomination in the holy place run. It is an event, what you are trying to interpret it with is not an event, it is an ongoing mission which continues.. Again, Huge difference. One is an event which people should see and know they must do something, the other is not an event, and would not be something which we can say as soon as this happens run..



You can not place an abomination which causes desolation in a person. Let alone see it standing there. So this alone should divirt your thinking to understand this cannot be the proper interpretation.



Object, abomination - unclean thing, idol (see hebrew)

which causes abomination (Makes something desolate, or unclean)

Standing in holy place - a sacred place, a literal place. Found in religious temples, namely in this context. The jewish temple. Whatever temple that may be)

Just take what the term means to the people it was written to. And take jesus literally. Try not to add things which are out of context and can not properly render the prophesy fulfilled.
I reiterate: it is completely implausible that some material object will be placed in some newly erected stone building that will have billions of people adoring it.
 

luigi

Junior Member
Dec 6, 2015
1,222
216
63
The people in the first century did not see all the events in matt 24 or the others. They did even see the events jesus called the birth pangs, or beginning of sorrows. The great tribulation, or the return of jesus because all life would be destroyed if he did not return, In fact that last point was impossible in 70 AD. So why do peole say it was possible?
If the people in the first century did not witness all the events in Matt 24, that generation was then not the generation in reference who would see all the events therein occur.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
You do not see a flaw in the Lord speaking to they who do not believe in Him to take heed about something?


He talks to people who do not believe in him all the time, He spoke to jews who were disbelieving all over the OT, and promised he would restore them when they repent. part of their repentance is called the time of Jacobs trouble. Which is also known as the time of jacobs trouble. Which is part of the end of the gentile dominion.

So no. I do not see it as a flaw.

What i see as a flaw is you unable to interpret him literally, and thus having to spiritualise a prophesy to make it fit what you believe. This is not only a flaw. But dangerous.


I reiterate: it is completely implausible that some material object will be placed in some newly erected stone building that will have billions of people adoring it.
Thats your view. And I can not agree.

Jesus said an object would be placed. I must take jesus at his word. And not twist what he says, and make him say something he never said

You do whatever you wish.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
If the people in the first century did not witness all the events in Matt 24, that generation was then not the generation in reference who would see all the events therein occur.
Who says we are not in that generation now? Generations can mean many things.

Again I ask, Matt 24 says these events would be so great, all flesh would die if he did not return. Can you tell me what occured in 70 AD that caused all life on earth to be threatened. And when did Christ return? He said in matt 24 he would return at that time, when did it happen?
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
Masoretic text:
26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he [Christ or the prince] shall make a firm covenant with many for one week; and for half of the week he [Christ or the prince] shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease...


Theodotion:
26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one/Christ shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint the city to desolations.
27 And one week [not said who will do it] shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away [not said by whom]...


Old Greek:
26 And after seven and seventy and sixty-two weeks, an anointing will be removed and will not be. And a king of nations will demolish the city and the sanctuary along with the anointed one, and his consummation will come with wrath even until the time of consummation. He will be attacked through war.
27 And the covenant will prevail for many, and it will return again and be rebuilt broad and long. [nothing about establishing some new covenant]


Vulgate:
26 And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain: and the people that shall deny him shall not be his. And a people, with their leader, that shall come, shall destroy the city, and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation.
27 And he [Christ or the leader of army] shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week:

----

Its hard to discuss the prophecy when we actually do not know which version is right.
Is this really how bad it is? Sheesh! This proves a thing or two...