Post Trib Rapture?

Man's wisdom.
I was not trying to correlate the 2 passage as the same event. The only correlation I was trying to make is that Jesus uses physical to teach spiritual. As I have said before.

Man's wisdom.
My quotes there have been misplaced.

Apologies. This is a repost to correct my quoting error.

To answer your question, there are not only "saints" in the millennium kingdom age but saints (glorified, 1st resurrection) and sinners (mortals). For a few reasons (in no particular order):

1) Revelation 2:27 says that those that overcome will rule the nations with Messiah with a rod of iron to dash them into pieces. No reason to dash obedient saints into pieces.

2) Zechariah 14:16 speaks about the "survivors" of the nations being required to come up to Jerusalem year after year for the feast of tabernacles (Messiah's birthday) who will be cursed with no rain if they do not. Saints wouldn't be disobedient.

3) Daniel 7:12 says that the beasts/nations will be prolonged for a time after the hideous beast is destroyed.

4) Revelation 20 explains that satan is cast into prison to no longer deceive the nations until the 1000 years are over, which suggests that the nations can still be deceived (i.e. they are not glorified). The passage then continues; after 1000 years are over satan is loosed to deceive the nations again which leads to gog magog war. These people can't be glorified saints.

I will have to see about addressing this later - it is a bit complex.

I am interested in you finding "Paul's conversion" in Daniel 9......or any other time constrained prophecy.

You are misunderstanding what I am saying. It is not a grammar issue. (as it is written)

Yes - in the grammar - as it is written - it is suggesting a future event. However, it is being said (to the Jews) in a 'wink' + "you know what I mean" manner.

A modern-day example:

I say to you - "...when you see planes hit the twin towers..." - suggesting a future event. But, you are well-aware that that event is already in the historical past. So, you understand that I am connecting something with the past event to the future event I am foretelling.

What I am trying to communicate about the future event is not that planes will hit the twin towers - it is the something that I am connecting with the past event which you know has already occurred.

The Matthew and Mark accounts of the Olivet Discourse 'encrypt' the information that the Luke account simply states in straight-forward simplicity.

Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 13:14-20, and Luke 21:20-24 are all referring to the same events in the same time frame.

In effect, what is written in the Matthew and Mark accounts is saying "when you see [what happened to Jerusalem at the AOD] about to happen again..."

What happened to Jerusalem at the AOD in 176 B.C.?

1) Jerusalem was surrounded by armies.
2) Jerusalem was desolated by an army.

What happened to Jerusalem circa 70 A.D.?

1) Jerusalem was surrounded by armies.
2) Jerusalem was desolated by an army.

The real actual bona fide AOD is intrinsically tied to Daniel 11. We are told in no uncertain terms exactly when the AOD occurred. We can match the account in Daniel 11 to history. The real actual bona fide AOD was already past history on the date of the Olivet Discourse.

And, the Jews knew this very well - and, knew exactly what it meant. (What was written in the Matthew and Mark accounts of the Olivet Discourse.)

The parenthetical statements are the 'wink' + "you know what I mean"...

I believe it is Armageddon. And, if not that, then it must be 70 A.D. - I know of no other [prophetic] 'events' that it can be associated with.

If the 'specific date' you refer to here is 70 A.D. - then, yes - we agree.

The Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy concerns Israel in history only up to the events of the first century and nothing whatsoever beyond that century. It is 100% fulfilled. The very last part of its fulfillment was 70 A.D. - which was only a mere mention in the prophecy. All of the "actionable items" in the prophecy were fulfilled by Jesus Himself long before that. And, there is absolutely nothing about/in it that is future to us.

Wanna bet?

If I was a betting man, I would take that bet in a heartbeat - because I know that I know that I know that I know - that I absolutely know - beyond a shadow of any doubt whatsoever - that Daniel 9:24-27 is NOT about a future 7-year tribulation period, antichrist, treaty, etc.

Just like you know the earth is flat?

Let me just put it this way - I would put the proper understanding of Daniel 9:24-27 orders-of-magnitude above the Flat Earth belief.

To compare:

I am "quite certain" about the earth being flat.

I "absolutely know beyond a shadow of any doubt whatsoever" that I have a proper understanding of what Daniel 9:24-27 is actually saying.

Does this illustrate the point effectively?

Something else I "absolutely know beyond a shadow of any doubt whatsoever" that I have a proper understanding of:

Also - from this past post in another thread (with regard to Matthew 24):

Verses 16-20 comprise the instructions that the Jew-Christians were to follow according to the recognition of what is being illustrated in verse 15.

'When ye therefore shall see...'

[then]

'follow these instructions'

(And don't waste any time doing it.)

There was a three-year seige before the Romans took the city and destroyed the temple.

The Jew-Christians followed the instructions before/as the seige began.

What did they 'see' - before/as the seige began - three years before the temple was ever touched or destroyed - that they instantly recognized as being what was illustrated in verse 15?

hint:

( whoso readeth, let him understand: )

Three years before any 'physical' AOD could possibly have taken place - the Christians headed for the mountains.

They saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

They understood perfectly.

Think about it...

Well - there is more there than just "a mere mention" - but, you know what I mean...

- up to verse 39.

I believe there is a [large] jump in time between verse 39 and verse 40.

Here is your problem:
Implicit in your theory is amillennialism and denial of the redemption/reconstitution of the Nation Israel.
But really it is worse than that. You are denying the King and His Kingdom, of which Israel, Jerusalem and His Temple are intrinsic.

End time (and really ALL) prophecy is ultimately about the King and His Kingdom. First of all coming upon the earth, then a new heavens and new earth and new eternal Kingdom.

Please, PLEASE define your concept of "Armageddon". When and where and what.

Biblically, it is meant to refer to the future Rev 16:16 battle at Har Megiddo, which the OT also prophecies many times.

NOPE - none of that. Not sure how you came up with all of that.

No amillennialism in my view of things. I most definitely believe that there will be a 1000-year reign of Christ on the earth.

All things left to accomplish where the nation of Israel is concerned will occur at the time of the Second Coming of Christ - and afterward. And, one part of all of that is Armageddon.

Nothing will happen with Israel until Christ returns. But, after He returns, Israel will have a part to play in the millennium.

Not denying any such thing. There is the Kingdom that is now. There is the Kingdom that Christ will set up when he comes.

Yep...

Please see: http://mywebsite.us/BibleStudy/Order_Of_Events.html