Right.
Two completely distinct things they will / are to "SEE" (and then "flee" when they SEE [them])
Daniel 9 Already Fulfilled
- Thread starter Yahshua
- Start date
-
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.
Right.
Two completely distinct things they will / are to "SEE" (and then "flee" when they SEE [them])
Read again One is seen by jerusalem surrounded by armies, and it is destroyed and left desolate until the time of the gentile is completedSorry, I misunderstood. Thanks for your response. I disagree though, and I believe that the two are speaking about exactly the same set of events, not two sets that are separated by about two millenia. I believe your interpretation starts with conclusions about other passages rather than starting with all Scripture in view. However, I doubt we're going to convince each other.
The other is startedn when they see an abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (by the way this is impossible in 70 AD. no one coukd see inside the temple) and is followed not by the destruction of jerusalem. but a great tribulation such as has not been seen and will end with the return of Christ because if he did nto return, no flesh woukd survive, again, not possible in 70 AD.
Respectfully disagree, as I did not not have to include those verses [at all!]
in my study of [ cc: @selahsays? ] pre-trib:
cc: @Ted01, I pray that this ↑ 'link' ↑ begins to help with your question of
the [ Dispensation of Grace ] 'gap between the 69th and 70th week" question.
Amen.
Again, this is quite possible if one considers the destruction was the greatest that ever befell Jerusalem. The city was emptied of Jews, either by death or capture into slavery.
No one could see an abomination of desolation standing in the holy place in 70 AD
the great tribulation was not just jerusalem. Its on the world state, And it would be so severe all life could be killed ifnot put an end to. Which Christ said he would do by his rerurn.
Christ has not yet returned. so again, 70 AD does not fit.
Explain to me how the following could happen if it is only in Jerusalem
21 For 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. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
1. Why does God shorten those days
2. How does he shorten those days?
Here is a hint
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His [d]elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Well, I'm not sure... but, I could imagine that John 3:16-18 might come into play.
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. 18 Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.…
The condemnation didn't really come until after the Jews rejected Him and crucified Him. So, talking about God's vengeance would have been premature, maybe... since the message at that point was of salvation.
Remember Matt. 23:37-39
37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! 38 See, your house is left to you desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”
Here's one very plausible explanation:
The context is Jerusalem, not the entire globe. As I said before, no greater calamity has ever come upon Jerusalem. The days of suffering of the Jews because of their rejection of their Messiah were ordained by God in advance. God shortened the days because He is merciful. If the Romans had not attacked when they did, the suffering would had been protracted, and disease, famine, and infighting would have destroyed all the people in the city. As it is, the Romans actually shortened the suffering, and though many Jews were killed, the Romans sold the survivors into slavery rather than slaughtering them.
Simple: the part Jesus quoted was fulfilled by His earthly ministry. The part He left out was fulfilled 40-odd years later.
How is that plausible with "no flesh would survive" would not no flesh mean no flesh (animal life)?
also. It says it will be cut short by the return of Christ, when did Christ return?
It may be plausible. But I personally do not see it as biblical.
so the day of Gods wrath was 40 years later?
Rev 6: 15 And the kings of the earth, the great men, [j]the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”
What Kings dais this in AD 70 and why was rome able to stand?
Could it? Yes. Must it? No.
Um, no, it doesn't. Not in Matthew 24, not in Mark 13, and not in Luke 21.
Fair enough. You have your view, I have mine, and we both believe our views are biblical, for if we didn't we wouldn't hold them.
Well Jesus said it. So yes, it is a must, Unless Jesus lied. then does it really matter
Matt 24:
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For 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. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the [c]elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
26 “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
The Coming of the Son of Man
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
I already posted this, how you can say it does not say it. I do not understand
Fair enough. You have your view, I have mine, and we both believe our views are biblical, for if we didn't we wouldn't hold them.
Now this is true amen.
God's wrath was directed at Israel for killing His Son. That's the whole point of Matthew 21:33-41. God used the Roman army to accomplish His purposes. There was a pause in the Roman seige in the middle of seige where many were able to escape. Then, after Rome was secured the armies returned and continued the seige, eventually destroying Jerusalem.
Jesus did come and was executing His authority. Those of His people who didn't get out were raptured before the final destruction.
Then why would Christ prophesy about the AoD in 30 AD, and indicate that its setting up will be a future event? Do you see the absurdity?