A.D. 70;- Where's the Abomination?

a reply to: SeaWorthy
Even if that counts as idolatry, we're still looking for the other half of the formula, that the act interrupts and prevents the true worship.

a reply to: ntech
I don't know much but when i look at what is happening I remember the anger the creator has when people worship other gods.

It seems to me true Israel is now only those who recognized what the prophets prepared them for and saw their savior when he arrived. in other words they are the many Christian Jews who would have no part in this.
The gold and silver objects that are created now to replace the temple items and the altar itself is now idolatrous.

This sounds idolatrous to me.
Creation Concert: Prophecy Revealed as Nations Recognize Sanhedrin

God established the borders of the world based on the 70 children of Israel who went down to Egypt and the 70 nations that came out from Noah. The concept of 70 Nations is from the Bible and symbolizes the basis for the organization while not being intended to imply a limit or requirement for participation.”

The concept of 70 nations also appears in reference to the 70 oxen offered in the Temple throughout Sukkot (the feast of the tabernacles) which the Talmud (Sukkah 55b) teaches are for the merit of the 70 nations.
orthochristian.com...

There are connections in the times somewhere in it all, there is a big picture.

The United Nations
Founded: October 24, 1945

The CDC
Formed July 1, 1946; 73 years ago

World Health Organization.
Founded: April 7, 1948

Israel,
was established in 1948

If the generation who will see the end of these things who saw the tree get leaf, flower and fruit are the generation who saw world war 2 there are not many left and the years are growing short.
These are just my thoughts.

Proverbs 18:12
Before destruction a man's heart is haughty, but humility comes before honor.

a reply to: DISRAELI
I was simply using your words that you said anything that stopped the daily sacrifice was an abomination. Using your logic then the redemptive work of Jesus did away with the need for the sacrifice then by your logic He must be an abomination since he ended the need for the daily sacrifice.

a reply to: PhilbertDezineck
Your conclusion does not follow, because Jesus did NOT stop the sacrifice, in the sense meant by Daniel.

I've already told you this in two of the paragraphs of my previous reply, which I now repeat;

For Daniel, "stopping the sacrifice" means preventing people from doing it, thus interrupting their worship.
Historically, Jesus did NOT stop the sacrifice, in that sense. The Romans did that when they pulled down the Temple.
Theologically, Jesus did not actually prevent the Temple sacrifice from taking place. He simply made it redundant.

The New Testament doesn't actually make a big issue out of animal sacrifice being evil. Neither Jesus nor Paul bother to talk about it. Hebrews tells the Jewish Christian they should "move on" from the sacrificial system, but only because it is redundant, because it never really worked, and because it distracts them from putting their full trust in Jesus

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Specimen88
The problem there is finding the rapid sequence of abomination-flight-tribulation which Matthew describes. I think that works against any proposed solution which lasts a long time.

I am not a scholar and realize you have much superior knowledge and i enjoy reading your posts and threads.

But if the abomination has not yet happened maybe we can't see the rest yet. If it will begin the tribulation will it not be sudden like a thief in the night? In an hour we don't expect?

When are they to make the first sacrifice on the Temple mound and what will happen in between has this happened yet?
I find it interesting that Covid is involved in the reason it can come about.

Thanks to the coronavirus and President Donald Trump, Jewish authorities are hopeful that they will be able to sacrifice a Passover lamb on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem this year.

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.

Have you heard of the growing Hebrew Roots movement, very surprising to me to see Christians growing beards and looking to the torah.

Philippians 2:3
Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.

a reply to: SeaWorthy
I don't rule out the possibility that the abomination hasn't happened yet, far from it, but I was replying to a poster who was looking at something which had been around for a long time. That was the reason for my objection that we had not seen the other things which were supposed to happen quickly.

When expecting one in the future, don't forget the double definition; an idolatrous event which also stops the true worship from happening.

a reply to: DISRAELI The Jews did not accept the redemptive work of the cross so it was God who used the Romans to destroy the temple thus stopping the daily sacrifice.

a reply to: PhilbertDezineck
The only effect of that argument is that you are now calling the act of Jesus the abomination.
I must repeat, in Daniel and Maccabees, the abomination and the stopping of the sacrifice are the same event. YOU are the one calling Jesus the one who stops the sacrifice, so YOU are the one calllng Jesus the abomination.

It is actually much simpler, and less contrived, to ignore the purely verbal similarity between the two kinds of "stopping the sacrifice", and accept that the issue of Cross vs Temple sacrifice is not the solution to the abomination prophecy.

You are just going round in endless circles tying yourself in knots You are fond of that particular interpretation because it is ingenious, but it is also incorrect.

a reply to: DISRAELI

an idolatrous event which also stops the true worship from happening

True worship of the body of Christ, I can't see how anything can stop that from happening as it needs no physical ceremony.

Peter 5
“God opposes the proud
but shows favor to the humble.

6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time.

a reply to: SeaWorthy
If there's going to be an abomination of desolation, something has to happen to meet the definition of "desolation", i.e interrupting the true worship in some way.
One speculation which has occurred to me in the past is that the Lord's Supper might be forbidden, or even turned into a way of glorifying the antichrist, which would be one way of meeting both parts of the definition.
The main point is- if there is going to be an abomination of desolation, both parts of the definition have to be met.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: ntech
Yes, the Abomination is the act of the hostile ruler which marks his breach with God, a kind of declaration of war.

The Pope being set up as the Vicar of Christ answers this. According to the title the Pope is God on earth. How much more of a breach with God and declaration are you looking for? Saying that the timeline is wrong means you are placing an arbitrary timeline to events that you agree you don’t fully understand.

This is definitely false worship and we can see the amount of Paganism that was accepted by the Catholic Church. Which is in direct contradiction to the scriptures. The entire foundation of the Catholic Church is a contradiction to the message of Jesus Christ. Outright blasphemy.

And back to my first point. How can you read those two passages and not come to the conclusion that they are quoting the same event spoken by Jesus? The similarities are way to much to be coincidental.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
Saying that the timeline is wrong means you are placing an arbitrary timeline to events that you agree you don’t fully understand.

I have not set any arbitrary timeline. I have said that the abomination must be followed by an urgent flight, because the tribulation would follow immediately, but that comes direct from the words of Jesus. In your quotations from Matthew and Luke, you yourself have helpfully highlighted the very words of Jesus which prove my point, by emphasising the need for urgency. Why, exactly, did you highlight those words, since they are proving my case rather than your own?

I have focussed on the version in Matthew, but I have never tried to deny that Luke is talking about the same event. However, I don't see how that affects my point that Jesus talks about urgency. As you yourself have shown, both versions mention it.

a reply to: DISRAELI
No it was you who said any thing that stopped the daily sacrifice was an abomination. God stopped the daily sacrifice by destroying the temple.

a reply to: PhilbertDezineck
Daniel and Maccabees identify stopping the stopping of the sacrifice with the abomination. I am simply following through the logical consequences of what the Bible says.

We are rapidly reaching the point when I can answer any thing you say by copy/pasting my previous answers, and I will normally find that easier.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Specimen88
The problem there is finding the rapid sequence of abomination-flight-tribulation which Matthew describes. I think that works against any proposed solution which lasts a long time.

Depends on what one would consider an abomination I guess, but for a sacrifice of a pig to the Roman equivalent of Zeus in a temple of the jealous Yahweh/Elohim offensive and a cultural taboo for the Hebrews. Off topic a bit, but Elijah story shares a semblance, an has mountains since there was a conflict of interest in what the Hebrew god name should be, all the while the loser became synonymous with Satan later.

I'm curious as to what extent or how far hebrew laws go when it comes to pictures, let alone words, like Yhwh being used or said out loud by gentile...let alone if they ever knew anything about Hebrew myths. Sunni Islam rather strict about such things where as the #es aren't as far I know.

Even imagery of Jesus, or Hey-Zeus can be a very controversial subject.

a reply to: [post=25159806]DISRAELI[/po"st]
I am simply following through the logical consequences of what the Bible says. " Using the same logic then what does that make Jesus?

a reply to: SeaWorthy

Wasn't Jesus sacrifice enough, or twas it for naught? Everyone needed their daily bread n butter, or not butter, since apparently it was his body.

Which ancient religion doesnt have ritual sacrifice for sunny shine an rain Egyptians an Hindus sacrificed different animals an avoided , Hebrews goats, Muslims Cows, while the greeks had coins or fruit, an Roman's offered pigroast

Or criminals at passover.

a reply to: DISRAELI

The urgency was for the saints to be prepared for what would happen in 70AD.

They were told to go into hiding as soon as the event started to take place. This message of urgency was for his followers whi would still be alive at the time.

The abomination of desolation is an event that starts with the destruction of Jerusalem. Had the saints not been prepared and heeded the message the message may have been lost. We know many of the saints were killed, Revelation confirms the blood of the saints was on the hands of one who would proclaim himself God, the Vicar of Christ. The false religion that would mix paganism with the message of Christ.

Part of the event was urgent and immediate. The rest of the event, continues through the times of the gentiles.

Even if you disagree with what I say about the lasting desolation.

The destruction of the Temple was done at a time when Christians were heavily persecuted. So even if this message is only about the destruction of the temple and the inability to worship and make sacrifices it still covers all the necessary parts of the abomination of desolation.

But I believe that the abomination of desolation is more about the destruction of true Christianity and the birth of the Catholic Church and the Vicar of Christ. The OT speaks consistently about avoiding the practice of Pagans but the Catholic Church adopted all the pagan holidays and ideas to convert them.

originally posted by: Specimen88
Depends on what one would consider an abomination I guess, but for a sacrifice of a pig to the Roman equivalent of Zeus in a temple of the jealous Yahweh/Elohim offensive and a cultural taboo for the Hebrews.

I touched on this episode in the opening post. Yes, it fulfils the definition of abomination, but it puts events into the wrong sequence. The abomination is supposed to be the signal for a flight which escapes the tribulation, if the abomination comes after both flight and tribulation, then the sequence does not match and the prophecy has not been fulfilled.

a reply to: PhilbertDezineck
It makes Jesus someone who does not "stop the sacrifice" in the sense intended by Daniel.
You have said this before, I have said this before. We are going round in circles.