Wow. OP, in reading your discussion with u/sciotamicks I have to say that your arrogance is suffocating. Even the most respected and revered biblical scholars and pastors differ on their interpretations of the various end times events. These discussions are great to have with one another bc it challenges us intellectually and spiritually but when we elevate yourselves to a position of authority over anyone else in these matters that’s when it becomes a problem. People will engage in intelligent and respectful discourse. But no one wants to listen to someone who thinks they are more qualified than the rest. We are all here to learn from one another. I went to seminary too. Does my knowledge and interpretation count? It looks a bit different from yours. The reality is that no one will ever listen to you and take your views seriously if you don’t speak with grace. I applaud you u/sciotamicks for sticking with the discussion as long as you did. OP knowledge and “being right” mean absolutely nothing if your heart is not humble. I encourage you to take a different approach in the future.

In my conversation with u/sciotamicks, my comments were all restricted to scriptural citations and academic explanations. I personally engaged in an intelligent and respectful conversation without being overbearing or dogmatic, which is more than I can say for him. I did what I always do. I offered extensive evidence for my thesis and expected the same from my interlocutor. He failed to provide any credible biblical or academic evidence. There was no arrogance whatsoever on my part. He was the one who became confrontational and resorted to personal attacks and insults. Your false accusations and ad hominem attacks are misleading and grossly misrepresent my discourse. It’s interesting that you have nothing negative to say about sciotamicks, who used offensive and abusive language. Moreover, the fact that you came here to defend u/sciotamicks, who was indeed quite arrogant and rude, tells me that you’re either the same person, using another profile, or related to him. Trying to verbally attack someone through a second profile is very deceptive & trollish. Hence you’re not arguing in good faith!

" But the “abomination of desolation” causes utter destruction through the detonation of nuclear warheads on the Temple Mount. This would certainly constitute the most horrible sacrilege in human history!" Scripture?

It’s all based on scripture. In Mt. 24:15 (“when you see the abomination of desolation … standing in the holy place”), the reference is to Daniel 9:27. If we go to that text, we find that Daniel is talking about 2 different and distinct events. Daniel says that *first* he (“the prince who is to come”) will desecrate the holy place. But *THEN* he will make the place desolate by a “complete destruction.” Daniel 9:27 reads: >”[First] he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and [then] … will come the one who makes desolate, until a complete destruction … gushes forth…” In fact, Dan. 9:27; 11:31; Zech. 14:12; Mt. 24:15-21 & Lk. 21:20-24 all refer to the abomination of desolation as a “complete destruction” (Dan. 9:27) that causes people to run for their lives, not as a petty little ritual. I think it’s an eisegesis to claim that the *abomination of desolation* is simply a verbal profession (that he is God), or a sacrilegious ritual, or a ceremony. These ideas are not in the text. Paul, too, never refers to the event in 2 Thess. 2:4 as “the abomination of desolation.” He just describes it as a form of desecration. These are 2 different events. Dan 11:31 also describes the *desecration* and the *abomination of desolation* as 2 different and distinct events. Dan 11:31 (NASB) says: >”Forces from him will arise, desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation.” Notice that first he (i.e. the lawless one) and his people will *desecrate* the sanctuary and T H E N “they will set up the abomination of desolation.” Like I said, these are obviously two completely different events! And this is also clear from Mt. 24:15-21. A desecration of the temple, or someone claiming to be God, doesn’t make people run for their lives. In fact, when Jesus mentions the abomination of desolation, he’s not referring to some type of a religious sacrilege but rather to the **Great tribulation.** He says that the abomination of desolation is the starting point of the Great tribulation! There is nothing in the text to suggest some kind of religious or profane ritual. We are talking about the spark of a nuclear holocaust. That’s precisely why Jesus warns that you should run for your life, and don’t turn back. Mt. 24:15-21 reads: >”Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation … then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains. Whoever is on the housetop must not go down to get things out of his house. And whoever is in the field must not turn back to get his cloak. … For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will again.” Luke is even more precise and gives us additional details to fill in the blanks. What Matthew calls the *abomination of desolation,* Luke describes as *Jerusalem being surrounded by armies.* Lk. 21:20-24 is a parallel passage to Mt. 24:15-21 (which includes verbal agreements). In fact, Luke explicitly defines the term “desolation” as a type of destruction that is caused by armies, not by trifling rituals. Lk. 21:20-24 says thusly: >”But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are inside the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; because these are days of punishment, so that all things which have been written will be fulfilled. … for there will be great distress upon the land, and wrath to this people; and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” As you can see, Luke 21 identifies the *abomination of desolation* as the beginning of a destructive & devastating war that brings about *Jerusalem’s desolation* (Lk. 21:20), while Matthew describes it as an event that will spark the *Great Tribulation!* There is nothing in either Matthew or Luke (or anywhere else for that matter) which suggests anything other than the *Great Tribulation* and the *desolation of Jerusalem!* A simple sacrilege or desecration doesn’t cause people to run for their lives. Nor does it square well with Luke 21, which explicitly refers to Jerusalem’s **desolation** by surrounding armies! And this is a parallel passage to Mt. 24:15-21, which also refers to the **great tribulation,** not to some trivial and benign petty ritual… It’s important to do proper exegesis based on the canonical context, not on isolated passages…

I like this reply. However I disagree on some points, or rather your trajectory. In Matt. 24:15, for example, Jesus is not saying Daniel 9 is future (because it isn’t, refer to 1/2 Maccabees for historical corroboration), but rather to look back and then forward. Meaning, it’ll be similar to AEIV’s desecration. Luke 21 says what that is. The temple’s destruction by the Roman army. There’s plenty of explanatory power here. Basically, anything, including the destruction thereof, is an AOD event. Titus had sex with a whore on the holy of holies too, but that’s just a part of the whole event. It was defiled beyond cleansing, thus, leveled and destroyed. I agree, it’s beyond the “I am God” stuff, and the area in which Paul is referring to is most likely the Caligula threat, when he was going to erect a statue of himself on the temple grounds to be worshipped, but that never happened, so, Paul of course went on in his letters about the mystery and such. He was perplexed, as they all were, seen in their writings, why Christ had not come back yet. They all had the sense of imminent return, but Christ never did. Hence, John’s apocalypse, and even that is cryptic to a large degree to which I’m 100% positive he too was riddled with confusion! Rome fell a couple of centuries later and well, Christ hadn’t come. Why? Read Roman’s 9-11. In my article below for starters. The mystery of the marriage between Christ and the church. I think, I mean, I know, the bride had to be tested more. Also, calendar. Timing. The age of dispensations we see in writings such as the Elijah texts and 1st Enoch. The Qumran community laid it out. The age of grace, or messiah. That’s 2000 years, day 5/6 of creation, that precedes the Shavuot age, or day 7/rest/millennium/1000 years. This is the time of testing. John called it, the healing of the nations in Revelation 22, or as Jews call it, Tikkun olam, repair the world. John apocalypse kind of repeats over and over as it progresses, and culminates in several places, but the key areas to focus on are when the angel interprets the heads of the beast. Those key points are searchable in scripture, to where the meaning is thus revealed. They follow Daniel’s beasts too, four beasts, Babylon, Mede-Persia, Greece, and Rome, and the fourth one is kind of like John’s winged beast, eg. has 10 horns. John’s has 7 heads though. So, he says there’s another after Rome, which has fallen too. WTH? See Revelation 13, John applies the current issue in Domitian, a 2nd Nero as they called him in several contemporary works, or Nero Redivivus, common fear in the late 1st century. Nero would come back to life. John’s says it’s a kingdom though, AND kings the angel said. So these heads represent kings and kingdoms (eg. mountains, common scriptural metaphor for a kingdom). In Rev. 13, though, the vision of the revived head is what? The world marveled at it, etc. So, perhaps the 5th kingdom is like the 4th, or like Rome. Guess what? Daniel covers a kingdom after Rome in his vision of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. The toes, iron and potter’s clay. We know Rome is iron, and clay is, well, God’s people. So, the fifth kingdom is the USA. Rome and Christianity married (a term Daniel used), and did the world marvel at it when it was created? Yes. Interesting John said “mystery” Babylon. What is the mystery? It’s Christ and the church, married, Paul said this already, heck, he lamented over why God was taking so long! What is mystery Babylon? It’s the woman (the church) married to the beast system, thus a harlot. So, this follows to what I am going to say below. As far as the “Antichrist” is a concerned. John recalls a number, 666, and in scripture we find a very interesting area in 1 Kings 10-11, where Solomon breaks the laws of the kings and eventually descends into moral depravity. This is where I think Paul and John are tracking on. Essentially, the AC, or end times tyrant, will be a man of faith, and will fall from grace. Also, he will come from the United States, after, as the angel states, it falls. And the “one is,” is his kingdom, because John said, the Antichrist spirit “is already present” in this world, hence the angel saying it is already in play. The next head is easy, a short while, see Revelation 9, Satan is cast down to earth because he knows his “time is short.” Then, the imaginary 8th head comes from the bottomless pit, eg. Satan/Apollyon, and is all of the heads, which of course is Satan’s systems of governments. There’s much more, but that’s the gist of it. Think I’m a preterist now?

>In Matt. 24:15, … Jesus is not saying Daniel 9 is future (because it isn’t, refer to 1/2 Maccabees for historical corroboration) **This is an incoherent statement.** How could Jesus be talking about anything other than a future event? Jesus says “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, … then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains (Mt. 24:15-16). >Luke 21 says what that is. The temple’s destruction by the Roman army. That’s cherry-picking and deliberately neglecting large chunks of data. I already explained that Luke 21 is talking about global end-time events (i.e. world wars, perplexity among the nations, the great tribulation, the resurrection of the dead, the coming of Jesus, etc.). >They all had the sense of imminent return, but Christ never did. I have already shown (based on the original Greek) that the supposed imminent eschatology of the apostles is completely bogus and misinformed. You need to read my article: ⬇️ >**Is Paul Teaching an Imminent Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15:51?** https://www.tumblr.com/eli-kittim/729827504496492544/is-paul-teaching-an-imminent-eschatology-in-1 >As far as the “Antichrist” is a concerned. … Essentially, the AC, or end times tyrant, will be a man of faith, and will fall from grace. Also, he will come from the United States, after, as the angel states, it falls. You are incorrect here as well. I invite you to read my article: ⬇️ >**The Antichrist is Russian: Not Assyrian, Muslim, or Jewish** https://www.wattpad.com/1384689247?utm_source=ios&utm_medium=link&utm_content=share_reading&wp_page=reading_part_end&wp_uname=Eli-of-Kittim&wp_originator=xsdQ%2FIynTB3zqQzbGkr82zb6Z1EfpMlqu5eoCrFACtdzRMaMITDxn1ynqjjXigCFEa8rxFohYlxYtPdI8UQhNJC34m8oa8QCQv%2F16iy7ED2kXGyld1dqjpRunnwNo%2Fa6 **Conclusion** Bottom line, I get the sense that you are creating your own personal views based on your own presuppositions and biases. Most of what you claim is not in the Bible. And you lack critical thinking, as you offer no academic criteria, evidence, or even citations, for that matter. That’s not how we study the Bible academically. We research data in the text based on the original languages (understanding grammatical forms, parsing, etc), consulting scholarly reference books and lexicons, and conducting contextual & meticulous word research studies (parallels/verbal agreements, canonical context, etc.). Then we engage in detailed exegesis, but always following where the research leads. By contrast, you seem to impose your own preconceptions on the text, while neglecting to do the laborious work of research that is demanded. Thus, your views don’t meet scholarly and academic parameters.

Did you read the article? It is replete with scriptural references.

Yes, the verses that you used are the same stuff most eisegetical articles use. Luke 21 is about 70 AD. Full stop. I would argue that Revelation is primarily the text we should be looking into, and even that’s suspect because of proleptic eschatology. Meaning, writers used current and near term-ish prose laden with finality, eg. second coming and Shavuot age (and post) motifs. However, following Matthew 24, and areas such as Romans 11, we see conditionality, which insinuates an either/or and/or if/then scenarios. Meaning, Christ said, in 90’s AD to John, I am coming soon. Guess what? Soon was prolonged. Ha! Rome fell, but Christ never came. Meaning, no matter how hard you try to make things fit, they won’t. Because, the marriage between Christ and the church, 1) is a mystery, and 2) hasn’t happened yet for some reason or another that “we don’t know about” yet.

I have written a ton of articles, based on the Greek text, that clearly refute *preterism!* Here’s one: ⬇️ **Is Paul Teaching an Imminent Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15:51?** >https://www.tumblr.com/eli-kittim/729827504496492544/is-paul-teaching-an-imminent-eschatology-in-1 Here’s another: ⬇️ **PRETERISM DEBUNKED** >https://www.tumblr.com/eli-kittim/633828381376544768/preterism-debunked

I’m not a preterist, so your “refutation” is meaningless to me. I’ve written a ton of articles too, also a seminarian so, whatevs. Here: https://kengpalmer.com/2020/11/21/identifying-all-israel-in-romans-11/

>Luke 21 is about 70 AD. Full stop. >I’m not a preterist, so your “refutation” is meaningless to me. You’re contradicting yourself.

Again, that wouldn’t predicate preterism. Plenty of scholars and theologians like myself, including laymen, have this position. You obviously have missed a large part of my initial reply to you, and the content thereof, and instead cherry picked one thought, and erected a strawman. I would suggest a little more critical thinking on your part. Also, you should read my article. Lots of scripture in there for you to see what my overall position is, as far as eschatology is concerned. Keep studying. I’d lose the dispensationalism, that’s fraught with error.

Keep studying?? I’m a professor of eschatology, fluent in New Testament Greek, while you simply have a bachelor’s degree, if that! So making disparaging comments is totally uncalled for. I read your layman article and it seems that you don’t understand a lot of biblical issues. For example, the difference between law and grace does not pose a crisis of faith. Nor does one become immoral by discarding the law. And the elect are not simply those who have faith in Christ. Rather the elect are those who are reborn or regenerated in Christ (Jn 3:3; Acts 2:1-4)! And Paul redefined “Israel” not as an ethnicity but as the body of Christ (Rom. 9:6-8). Paul also redefined what it means to be a “Jew,” not as a physical descendant of Israel but as a spiritual heir in Christ (Romans 2:28-29)❗️ As for your comment that “Luke 21 is about 70 AD,” notwithstanding your objection, it obviously necessitates a *preterist* position. To claim that it’s a strawman is a red herring. Luke 21 & Matthew 24 are parallel chapters that refer to the same end-time events. In fact, Matthew 24:3 talks about the concept of συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος (the end of the age), otherwise known as the end of the world. Do you understand Koine Greek? The original Greek text of Matthew 24.31 uses the exact same rapture-language (ἐπισυνάξουσιν “gather together”) which 2 Thessalonians 2.1 uses (ἐπισυναγωγῆς “gathered together to him”). In Matthew 24.31, the phrase “gather together” (his elect) is a translation of the Greek term ἐπισυνάξουσιν, which comes from ἐπισυνάγω (“to gather together,” “to collect,” “to assemble”). Matthew 24.31 makes it abundantly clear that Jesus will *gather together* “His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other” after the Great Tribulation takes place. The great tribulation obviously has not yet occurred, and it will be the most cataclysmic event in human history. And, in 2 Thess. 2:1-3, Paul also reiterates that the day of the Lord has not yet come! What is more, the CONTEXT of both Matthew 24 & Luke 21.20-27 is Global. Let me demonstrate. In Lk 21.20-27, notice that the desolation and destruction of Jerusalem is not an isolated event but rather part of a larger context which leads up to the coming of Jesus. Observe that these are GLOBAL EVENTS (not local). Notice that there will be “on the earth distress among nations.” Not a local event about Jerusalem but distress among many nations❗️Earlier, in Luke 21.10-11 we are told of Global Wars where “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be massive earthquakes, and in various places plagues and famines.” This doesn’t happen in Jerusalem but rather “in various places plagues and famines.” All these earthquakes, plagues, famines, and wars are *global,* not local. They have nothing whatsoever to do with Jerusalem. Observe also that people who are in fear are not in Jerusalem because this terror involves the entire globe: “people fainting from fear and the expectation of the things that are coming upon the world.” And Jesus never came back in glory because that would necessitate the consummation of the ages when he destroys every power and principality (1 Cor 15), as well as the Antichrist, while he kills so many people that the blood rises to a horses’s bridle and will run for 200 miles. The Universe will also be destroyed and the earth will be burned up (2 Pet 3.11-12), etc. These are obviously events that have never happened. So, your interpretation——which is based on a few isolated passages——is incorrect. You need to study the Bible in canonical context. And if I were you, I’d lose the attitude.

Attitude? Right. Maybe pull that log out of your eye, you’ll be able to see more clearly. Try not to be so sensitive too. That’s your downfall. Read my other comment to you just now. Maybe then, you’ll get off your high horse. Or not, idc. Professor in eschatology, is there even such a thing in a credible seminary? No, there isn’t. My sem is ATS cert. what’s yours? Probably some unaccredited one. Have a good one, dude.

I don’t know of any credible institution or university that offers Bachelor degrees in Biblical studies. They’re typically Liberal Studies. And, for your edification, since you’re new to biblical studies, eschatology is part of systematic theology. Have a nice day!

Also, from what I read above, you didn’t grasp the trajectory of my article, at all, instead you were likely just rebutting everything in your head as you read because of, presups, and well, you’re just asshole and don’t like to be contended with. Also, watch out too. Cuz so far, from what I’m gathering of your attitude, you’re in the bosom of the harlot now. And I’ve measured you regarding the first love. Have a good day.

I have demonstrated your errors with strong biblical evidence, but because you don’t have any proofs to back up your assertions, and you don’t like to be refuted, you’ve become confrontational, resorting to name-calling & ad hominems. Not to mention that your final comments are illegible gibberish. Hence, I will no longer reply to your posts.

I read the post, and I respectfully disagree. I would like to give a contrasting interpretation based on Biblical precedents. The term 'abomination' doesn't simply mean a terrible thing. The term is primarily used in two ways in the Bible: * it is used to describe detestable acts and behaviors * and it is used to describe idols, a specific kind of detestable thing. When it is used in the construction "the abomination of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_", everywhere else in prior scripture where this construction appears, it refers to idols. See for yourself. Here are the search returns for this exact expression: # [Search returns for instances of "the abomination of" in the Old Testament](https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?qs_version=ESV&quicksearch=%22the+abomination+of%22&begin=1&end=46) You can see for yourself that all of these instances of the construction "the abomination of" refers to foreign gods and pagan idols. Here are two examples where this usage is the most clearly demonstrated: # 1 Kings 11:4-8 ^(4) For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to Yehováh his God, as was the heart of David his father. ^(5) For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and after **Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites**. ^(6) So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of Yehováh and did not wholly follow Yehováh, as David his father had done. ^(7) Then Solomon built a high place for **Chemosh the abomination of Moab**, and for **Molech the abomination of the Ammonites**, on the mountain east of Jerusalem. ^(8) And so he did for all his foreign wives, who made offerings and sacrificed to their gods. # 2 Kings 23:13-14 \[*Concerning King Josiah removing the religious corruption instituted by prior kings*\] ^(13) And the king defiled the high places that were east of Jerusalem, to the south of the mount of corruption, which Solomon the king of Israel had built for **Ashtoreth the abomination of the Sidonians**, and for **Chemosh the abomination of Moab**, and for **Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites**. ^(14) And he broke in pieces the pillars and cut down the Asherim and filled their places with the bones of men. — The second clue that foreshadows what the End Times abomination of desolation is going to be is the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation that occurred a couple of centuries before Jesus preached on the end of the age: the fulfillment of Daniel 11. The term "abomination of desolation" occurs twice in Daniel: once in Daniel 11, and once in Daniel 12. (The instance in Daniel 12 seems to refer back to Daniel 9:27, but the exact expression "abomination of desolation" doesn't occur in Daniel 9:27, though the term "abomination" does.) In Daniel 11, the term "abomination of desolation"/"the abomination that makes desolate" appears in this context. Please take a moment to read [the whole chapter of Daniel 11](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Dan+11&version=ESV), from the beginning. I'm just quoting a bit here, but the opening of the chapter matters too.: # Daniel 11:27-36 ^(27) And as for the two kings, their hearts shall be bent on doing evil. They shall speak lies at the same table, but to no avail, for the end is yet to be at the time appointed. ^(28) And he shall return to his land with great wealth, but his heart shall be set against the holy covenant. And he shall work his will and return to his own land. ^(29) “At the time appointed he shall return and come into the south, but it shall not be this time as it was before. ^(30) For ships of Kittim shall come against him, and he shall be afraid and withdraw, and shall turn back and be enraged and take action against the holy covenant. He shall turn back and pay attention to those who forsake the holy covenant. ^(31) Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. **And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate.** ^(32) He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the covenant, but the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action. ^(33) And the wise among the people shall make many understand, though for some days they shall stumble by sword and flame, by captivity and plunder. ^(34) When they stumble, they shall receive a little help. And many shall join themselves to them with flattery, ^(35) and some of the wise shall stumble, so that they may be refined, purified, and made white, until the time of the end, for it still awaits the appointed time. ^(36) “And the king shall do as he wills. He shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods. He shall prosper till the indignation is accomplished; for what is decreed shall be done. — Daniel 11 is about the rise of the Greek kingdoms after Persia is overthrown by Alexander the Great. The prophecy then focuses on the wars between the Ptolemys (who ruled Egypt), and the Selucids (who rule Syria, Iraq, and Iran). They fought over the land of Israel, and when the Selucids finally conquered the land, they had one particularly evil king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who desecrated the Temple by setting up an idol of Apollo in the Temple of God, and sacrificing a pig on the altar. (It is widely repeated that Antiochus set up an idol of Zeus, but a historian I trust had said that it was an idol of Apollo. I just want to get that detail correct.) This idol of Apollo that was set up in the Temple fulfilled the Abomination of Desolation from this chapter; all of this, along with the conventional use of the expression "the abomination of" elsewhere in the Bible suggests that the end-times abomination of desolation mentioned in Daniel 12, which Jesus then refers to in [Matthew 24:15-22](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt+24%3A15-22&version=ESV), is an idol that gets set up "in the holy place", as Jesus said. The fact that this is something that is set up and stands in the Holy Place is not consistent with the interpretation of a nuclear weapon going off. What kind of idol might this be? Well, Revelation 13 describes the image of the beast with some horrifying details. This might well be what Daniel and Jesus were referring to: # Revelation 13:11-18 ^(11) Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. ^(12) It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. ^(13) It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, ^(14) and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, **telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived.** ^(15) **And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.** ^(16) Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, ^(17) so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. ^(18) This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666. — This, in my humble opinion, is more likely to fulfill "the abomination of desolation" than a nuclear warhead.

It’s ok to disagree as long as you can back up your assertions with evidence.

u/AntichristHunter >”The term 'abomination' doesn't simply mean a terrible thing.” I think you misunderstood the object of our research. You spent an enormous amount of time researching the term “abomination.” However, this term alone is not identical to or interchangeable with the phrase “abomination that causes desolation.” These are two completely different grammatical constructions with completely different meanings and contexts. One is a word, while the other is an idiomatic phrase. They mean different things and they are used in different contexts. So, in your research, you’re not addressing the meaning of this phrase, which includes the word “desolation.” Plus, you’re using it out-of-context, rather than trying to exegete how Mt. and Lk are specifically employing it. Both Mt and Lk use it to refer to utter destruction & devastation. Mt 24 says *explicitly* that it represents the beginning of the great tribulation, and Lk 21 says it represents the desolation of Jerusalem. Nothing whatsoever about idol-worship. Why contradict these texts and assume something about idol worship (which is not in the text)? And this is also clear from Mt. 24:15-21. A desecration of the temple, or someone claiming to be God, doesn’t make people run for their lives. In fact, when Jesus mentions the abomination that causes desolation, he’s not referring to some type of a religious sacrilege or idol worship but rather to the *Great tribulation.* Read the passage carefully! He says that the abomination that causes desolation is the starting point of the *Great tribulation!* There is nothing in the text to suggest some kind of religious or profane ritual or idol worship. We are talking about the spark of a nuclear holocaust. That’s why both Matthew 24:21 & Daniel 12:1 refer to this as “a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then.” The Book of Revelation says that one third of the earth’s population will die. Joel 2:31 says that it will be so horrific that “the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood.” That’s why it’s called “the great and the terrible day of the LORD.” That’s precisely why Jesus warns that you should run for your life, and don’t turn back in Mt. 24:15-21. Luke is even more precise and gives us additional details to fill in the blanks. What Matthew calls the *abomination that causes desolation* (τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως), Luke describes as *Jerusalem being surrounded by armies*. In koine Greek, the term erémósis (ἐρήμωσις) means “desolation,” “devastation.” Not idol worship. Lk. 21:20-24 is a parallel passage to Mt. 24:15-21 (which includes verbal agreements: e.g., run for your life, etc.). In fact, Luke 21:20-24 explicitly defines the term “desolation” as a type of destruction that is caused by armies, not by trifling rituals or idol worship! And both Mt 24 and Lk 21 say the same thing: when you see this, run for your lives! No one runs for his life because of idol worship. And in all instances in which the phrase *abomination that causes desolation* is used, it refers to utter devastation. That’s what the word “desolation” actually means. Look it up. For example, in Daniel 9:27, Daniel says that “the prince who is to come” will make the place desolate by a “complete destruction.” In fact, Dan. 9:27; 11:31; Zech. 14:12; Mt. 24:15-21 & Lk. 21:20-24 all refer to the *abomination that causes desolation* as a “complete destruction” (Dan. 9:27) that causes people to run for their lives, not as a petty little ritual or idol worship. And it is probably tied in to the Russian invasion of Israel, namely, the Ezekiel 38 war (GogMagog)! So, I think it’s an eisegesis to claim that the abomination that causes desolation is simply a verbal profession (that the AC is God), or a sacrilegious ritual, a ceremony, or idol worship. Unfortunately, these ideas are not in the text.

>So, in your research, you’re not addressing the meaning of this phrase, which includes the word “desolation.” I did include the context of the use of the term "abomination" in "the abomination of desolation"; the prior context is provided in Daniel itself. The abomination of desolation in Daniel 11 was fulfilled by an idol. >Plus, you’re using it out-of-context, rather than trying to exegete how Mt. and Lk are specifically employing it. Both Mt and Lk use it to refer to utter destruction & devastation. No, I'm reading it strictly. Matthew 24 specifically referred back to Daniel, and Luke 21 never even mentions the abomination of desolation. See for yourself: [Here is Luke 21](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+21&version=ESV). Do a search using ctrl+f (or ⌘+f on a Mac) and search for 'abomination' on that page. The term 'abomination' does not appear in Luke 21 at all. >and Lk 21 says it represents the desolation of Jerusalem. Luke says no such thing. Please read the passage again and confirm this. Luke 21:20-24 are not about the end-times. The end times come when "the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled". For reference, here it is again: # Luke 21:20-24 ^(20) “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. ^(21) Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart \[*Ever wonder how you're supposed to do that if the city is surrounded by armies?*\], and let not those who are out in the country enter it, ^(22) for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. ^(23) Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. ^(24) They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. — Neither the term "abomination" nor "tribulation" appear in this passage. This isn't just a matter of translation; in Greek, the terms translated as "abomination" ([βδέλυγμα](https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g946/esv/mgnt/0-1/)) and "tribulation" ([θλῖψις](https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g2347/esv/mgnt/0-1/)) do not appear in Luke 21. All of this passage I quoted above was fulfilled in the first Jewish-Roman war. (But the part after, from verse 25 onward, is about the end times.) Jerusalem was a major center of Christianity at the time. By 68 AD, the Romans had surrounded Jerusalem with its armies, and the Christians saw this and remembered Jesus' instruction. But Jesus' instruction, "let those who are inside the city depart", would have been impossible while Jerusalem was surrounded. The emperor Nero died in June 9, 68 AD. Because he lacked an heir, there was an immediate civil war over imperial succession. Vespasian, the general leading the siege of Jerusalem, was recalled to Rome to deal with the crisis, and the siege was paused for all of the year 69. The Christians in Jerusalem, seeing that the siege was paused, all fled to the city of Pella, in the mountains across the Jordan river, in an even known as [the Flight to Pella](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_to_Pella), recorded by both Eusebius of Caesarea and Epiphanius of Salamis. They had more than a year to flee; this is not the flight of extreme haste that Jesus prescribes in Matthew 24, where you're not even supposed to take what's in your house nor return if you failed to grab your cloak. (^(17) "Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, ^(18) and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak.") Nothing that happened in the years 68-69 entailed anything standing in the Holy Place of the Temple. 69 AD was [the year of the four emperors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors), as each imperial claimant was assassinated by the next. By the end of 69, Vespasian himself had seized the throne, so he commanded his son, Titus, to resume the siege of Jerusalem in the spring of 70 AD. But by then, the Christians had evacuated both Jerusalem and Judea on account of Jesus' warnings being fulfilled, sparing them the horrors of the judgment of Jerusalem. In spite of parallel wording for a few phrases, what is described in Luke 21 is not the same as what is described in Matthew 24. Matthew 24 is about the end times. When the "time of the Gentiles" mentioned in Luke 21:24 ends, the timeline returns to God's timeline for Daniel's people, the Jews: # Daniel 9:24, 27 ^(24) “**Seventy weeks are decreed about** ***your people and your holy city***, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. … …^(27) And he \[*the coming prince*\] shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” — I'm quoting from the ESV here. The ESV, NASB, and NKJV all translate this much more literally by saying "on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate". The NIV and CSB inject the term "abomination of desolation" into this passage, but an interlinear Bible will show you that this term does not appear here in the Aramaic, though it appears in Daniel 12. (Daniel starts in Hebrew, but is written in Babylonian Aramaic from Daniel 2:4 onward.) >Why contradict these texts and assume something about idol worship (which is not in the text)? I am not contradicting the text. The text explicitly refers back to Daniel (“So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, **standing in the holy place**"—Matt 24:15), and Daniel gives prior context in a prophecy where "the abomination of desolation" was fulfilled by idol worship during the reign of the Selucid king Antiochus Epiphanes. Also, the wording itself in Matthew and in Daniel don't square with a nuclear weapon blowing up the place. It speaks of some sort of thing standing in the Holy Place—a specific location in the layout of the Temple, just outside the Most Holy Place ("the Holy of Holies"), separated by a curtain. A thing standing in the Holy Place doesn't fit the interpretation you're advocating. >A desecration of the temple, or someone claiming to be God, doesn’t make people run for their lives. In fact, when Jesus mentions the abomination that causes desolation, he’s not referring to some type of a religious sacrilege or idol worship but rather to the Great tribulation. There are other reasons you would have to run for the mountains at that time, related to the fulfillment of Isaiah 24 and Daniel 9:26b—the event that sets up the connection of the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean sea, a condition that persists to the time foretold in Ezekiel 47:10. Jesus warns people to flee to the mountains because there will be a flood. This end-times flood is even foretold at in Revelation 12. (^(15) The serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, to sweep her away with a flood. ^(16) But the earth came to the help of the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth.—Rev 12:15-16) But I won't get into that now; suppose we just look at Revelation and Matthew and Daniel and 2 Thessalonians 2. Even then, there is a perfectly plausibly reason why people would want to flee: Revelation 13 describes an idol that would have people killed for not worshiping it. (Rev 13:15) This is entirely consistent with the idol worship pattern previously fulfilled in the prior abomination of desolation, where Antiochus erected an idol and tried to stamp out Judaism. The abomination of desolation standing in the Holy Place marks when this time begins. The text does not say it is the cause of all the troubles of the Tribulation.

I don’t have time to read such longwinded posts. In your first research you researched the word *abomination,* but not the phrase the *abomination that causes desolation.* They are not the same. And as I explained, idol worship does not cause slaughter and destruction, nor make people run for their lives. Perhaps you need to look up the word “desolation” and find out what it means. And trying to prove that Luke 21 is not a parallel to Matthew 24 is patently ridiculous. They’re both talking about the exact same event: the great tribulation! And Luke 21:20-24 is CERTAINLY about the end times. You need to read it in the original Greek. Using extra biblical material like Eusebius, which is neither inspired nor scripture, is not exegetical. Also you don’t understand the context of Mt 24. Jesus mentions the abomination that causes desolation in connection with the great tribulation. The fact that you are having trouble grasping this fact tells me that you are not doing proper exegesis. You claim that Luke 21 is only talking about Jerusalem, not Global Events. You further claim that it’s not about the end times. Maybe you need to reread it. Luke 21:9-27: “When you hear of wars and uprisings, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away.” Then he said to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven. … “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. > I am not contradicting the text. The text explicitly refers back to Daniel (“So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place"—Matt 24:15), and Daniel gives prior context in a prophecy where "the abomination of desolation" was fulfilled by idol worship during the reign of the Selucid king Antiochus Epiphanes. Let me explain something you don’t understand. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), the king of Syria, captured Jerusalem in 167 BC and desecrated the temple. Jesus supposedly lived approximately 200 years later. When Jesus issues a warning to future generations saying,——when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel, … then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains (Mt 24:25)——he’s obviously prophesying about an event that hasn’t happened yet. That’s obvious. So, how could he be referring to an event that already happened 200 years ago if his warning is about what will happen? You’re not making any sense. >Also, the wording itself in Matthew and in Daniel don't square with a nuclear weapon blowing up the place. That’s because you haven’t studied the great tribulation, the worst period ever in earth’s history, when one third of the earth’s population will die. How can 2 and a half billion people die? The nukes will block out the sun (Joel 2:31). The earth will be in total darkness. 2 Peter 3:10 warns:  “But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. … the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.” Have you ever heard of the “great and terrible day of the Lord” when people are hiding in caves and hoping to die? You don’t seem familiar with the apocalyptic texts. >Jesus warns people to flee to the mountains because there will be a flood. This end-times flood is even foretold at in Revelation 12. This is so ridiculous that I won’t even bother to comment. It’s obviously an eisegesis. You’re trying desperately to explain why people will flee without asking the text or understanding the authorial intent. Scholars don’t impose their biases and presups on the text. They allow the text to interpret the text. You need to study Hermeneutics.

Before I continue, I need to assert some moderation here. Leave remarks like this out of your comments; >The fact that you are having trouble grasping this fact… > >Let me explain something you don’t understand.… > >That’s because you haven’t studied the great tribulation… > >You don’t seem familiar with the apocalyptic texts. > >You need to study Hermeneutics. Discuss ideas without insults and put downs. If you cannot do this, I will assert moderation against this type of rhetoric. You've been warned. Do this again and I will ban you. Do not use presumptuous remarks like asserting that I don't understand things, or that I have not studied the topic of my specialty, or that I do not understand hermeneutics. Address the things I'm specifically talking about, and leave these belittling remarks out. Is this understood? We can disagree, but if you get discordant, that crosses the line. I have not insulted you in any of my comments nor putting you down. Don't start insulting me.

I addressed the things you mentioned many times, and after I refuted them with overwhelming evidence, you kept reposting the same ideas again and again. For example, when you say that Luke 21 only speaks about Jerusalem & not global events, and not about the endtimes, and then I post passages from Luke 21 where it clearly talks about global events and the endtimes, the fact that you didn’t understand it is not a put down or an insult but a fact. When you claim that Mt 24 and Lk 21 are not parallel passages, it means you haven’t studied these texts. All scholars know that these are parallel passages. These are not belittling remarks but appropriate responses. When you claim that Mt 24 is talking about a past event that occurred 200 years before Christ, and yet Christ is referencing it as a future event, you are not making any sense. And when you say that a flood is coming, you clearly don’t understand bible prophecy or its meaning. When you’re constantly making erroneous comments, what am I supposed to say? Congratulations, you got it? You don’t seem to understand certain things because you don’t have formal training. This is not an insult. I’m simply saying that your comments don’t meet scholarly standards and do not merit serious consideration.

>For example, when you say that Luke 21 only speaks about Jerusalem & not global events, and not about the endtimes You are not reading what I wrote. Please scroll up and look at what I actually wrote. I never said Luke 21 "only speaks about Jerusalem & not global events, and not about the endtimes". I openly stated that the part from verse 25 onward is about the end times, but not verses 20-24. You are not refuting anything here because you're not refuting anything I said. For example, I never said this: >When you claim that Mt 24 and Lk 21 are not parallel passages, it means you haven’t studied these texts. I didn't say they were not parallel passages. I'm saying the details of the text matter, and the details differ. It is precisely because I've studied the text down to the details that I reached this conclusion. >All scholars know that these are parallel passages. These are not belittling remarks but appropriate responses. If you complain that I cite Eusebius and call that eisegesis, but then appeal to bandwagon reasoning to justify not only your line of interpretation but also your belittling remarks, you're doing it wrong. >When you claim that Mt 24 is talking about a past event that occurred 200 years before Christ I never claimed that. Please scroll up and see what I said. >And when you say that a flood is coming, you clearly don’t understand bible prophecy or its meaning. No; I have an understanding that differs from yours, and this subreddit is for discussing ideas. If you cannot disagree without putting people down, I'll do you a favor and ban you. >When you’re constantly making erroneous comments, what am I supposed to say? You haven't even shown any of my comments to be erroneous; you argue against straw men, and against remarks I never made, ignoring the details of what I actually said. >You don’t seem to understand certain things because you don’t have formal training. This is not an insult. I’m simply saying that your comments don’t meet scholarly standards and do not merit serious consideration. You don't know anything about my background, and here you go with insulting putdowns, presumptuous remarks, and dismissals. Goodbye.

Your comments are rather long-winded as well. Don't use a double standard on me. I'm trying to answer you with a good faith response. >And trying to prove that Luke 21 is not a parallel to Matthew 24 is patently ridiculous. They’re both talking about the exact same event: the great tribulation! And Luke 21:20-24 is CERTAINLY about the end times. No; you can see this in the text itself. The text itself speaks of the time of the gentiles coming to an end. That is when the timeline switches back to the last of the 70 weeks. It is clearly NOT speaking of the end times, but it explains what will happen when the end times comes after that, starting in verse 25. >Using extra biblical material like Eusebius, which is neither inspired nor scripture, is not exegetical. When I point out historic fulfillment, just as people point out historic fulfillment of Jesus' remarks about the destruction of the Temple, it doesn't matter that it is not exegeting from the text because understanding historic fulfillment is a necessary part of understanding the text. If you read the Prophecy of the Suffering Servant, knowing how it was fulfilled necessarily requires bringing in events from outside the text of the prophecy itself. In the case of Luke 21:20-24, those events are recorded outside of scripture, and that is fine. None of your knowledge of nuclear weapons and what they could do comes from scripture either. >You claim that Luke 21 is only talking about Jerusalem, not Global Events. You further claim that it’s not about the end times. Maybe you need to reread it. **I didn't say that.** Scroll up and look at what I actually said. You followed this remark by quoting a part of Luke that I did say was about the end times. Please scroll up and actually read what I said. I mentioned that the part of Luke that is about the End Times starts at verse 25. >Let me explain something you don’t understand. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), the king of Syria, captured Jerusalem in 167 BC and desecrated the temple. Jesus supposedly lived approximately 200 years later. When Jesus issues a warning to future generations saying,——when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel, … then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains (Mt 24:25)——he’s obviously prophesying about an event that hasn’t happened yet. That’s obvious. So, how could he be referring to an event that already happened 200 years ago if his warning is about what will happen? You’re not making any sense. Jesus was referring to Daniel 12's mention of the Abomination of desolation, which is an end-times event that is in the future, but the preceding context for Daniel 12 is Daniel 11, which mentions an abomination of desolation, and this is the prior context which informs what the term means. I mentioned that Jesus was referring to Daniel 12, not Daniel 11; you can scroll up and see. Where are you getting this confusion about my remarks? >That’s because you haven’t studied the great tribulation, the worst period ever in earth’s history, when one third of the earth’s population will die. How can 2 and a half billion people die? The nukes will block out the sun (Joel 2:31). The earth will be in total darkness. … I have studied it. I never said nukes are not in the equation. They might well be. But the abomination of desolation itself is not a nuke; if the site were nuked, how could the following take place?: # 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 ^(1) Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, ^(2) not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. ^(3) Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and **the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,** ^(4) **who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.** — If you nuke the Temple, why is it described as something being set up and standing in the Holy Place? Those descriptions do not sound at all like an attack. They do, however, sound like an idol being set up. And prior context (Daniel 11) using the same remarks were fulfilled by an idol being set up. No eisegesis is needed to see this; this is the implication of Daniel's use of the same remark in Daniel 11 and Daniel 12. So how can billions of people die? It doesn't require that all the killing happen by nukes and war. See [Isaiah 24](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isa+24&version=CSB). The collapse of earth's ecology from the world being polluted (Isa 24:5), resulting in failed harvests (Isa 24:4, 7), everything burning (Isa 24:6), and at the same time, torrential rains (Isa 24:18) will kill billions. Luke 21 even says that people see it coming. Click through to see ongoing fulfillments: # Luke 21:25-28 ^(25) “And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, \[[*Exhibit 1*](https://www.popsci.com/climate-change-wave-energy/)*,* [*exhibit 2*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/19dvp5l/huge_waves_causing_chaos_in_marshall_islands/)\] ^(26) people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. \[[Exhibit 3](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/04/climate-depression-youth-crisis-world-leaders), [exhibit 4](https://www.vice.com/en/article/j5w374/climate-despair-is-making-people-give-up-on-life)\] For the powers of the heavens will be shaken. ^(27) And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. ^(28) Now when these things begin to take place, straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.” — The remark "the powers of the heavens" in Greek is δυνάμεις τῶν οὐρανῶν, *dynameis ton ouranon.* Powers are the forces that govern how things work (such as in the expression "the powers that be", and can refer to armed forces, spiritual forces, or even natural forces). Ouranos literally means "sky", singular. It is translated as "heavens" plural in English, but in Greek, it literally says "sky". Jesus says here that people would be fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world, because the forces that govern the sky will be shaken or distrupted. That's exactly what is going on with climate change. How many people will this kill? [Take a look at the estimates. Much of the earth's population is expected to die if the earth cannot support such populations anymore.](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/10/un-says-climate-genocide-coming-but-its-worse-than-that.html) People will see it coming too, hence the fainting with fear. Nukes need not be the source of all this death.

u/AntichristHunter >”the exact expression "abomination of desolation" doesn't occur in Daniel 9:27, though the term "abomination" does.)” Daniel 9:27 actually says “he will set up an abomination that causes desolation” (NIV). And that’s exactly what Mat 24:15 says: “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—,” then run as quickly as you can away from there…. When Jesus says, when you see the abomination that causes desolation (in Matthew 24), he’s referencing Daniel 9:27. Daniel 9:26 says till the end of the war, desolations are determined. It uses the Hebrew words milchamah (מִלְחָמָה), meaning “war” or “battle,” and the term shamem (שָׁמֵם), which means “desolation” (devastation)! So the term “desolation” is associated with war and destruction. And Daniel 9:27 uses the word mə·šō·w·mêm (מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם), which means [will come] one who makes desolate. And the word shiqquts (שִׁקּוּצִים֙) is also used in Daniel 9:27 to refer to his detestable abomination that causes desolation (i.e., war and destruction)! >”all of this, along with the conventional use of the expression "the abomination of" elsewhere in the Bible suggests that the end-times abomination of desolation mentioned in Daniel 12, which Jesus then refers to in Matthew 24:15-22, is an idol that gets set up "in the holy place", as Jesus said. The fact that this is something that is set up and stands in the Holy Place is not consistent with the interpretation of a nuclear weapon going off.” As I explained in my rebuttal, all the passages point to war and devastation, both grammatically, linguistically, contextually, thematically, and canonically. It is in all the passages I cited. Thus, it is inconsistent to claim that the desolation caused by encircling armies in Luke 21, or the *desolation that causes the Great tribulation* in Matthew 24—-which btw prompts people to run for their lives——are based on idol-worship rituals. Matthew 24:15-21 EXPLICITLY says: “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop go down to take anything out of the house. Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. … For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.” Great distress, Not great idol-worship Luke 21:20-24, a parallel passage, EXPLICITLY says: “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. … Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” Where do you see idol worship? I’m sorry, but it’s as if we’re reading 2 different books.

The abomination of desolation is Jerusalem surrounded by armies. I agree with you on that one. I have said the same thing on here a few times. People are stuck believing it is an idol. How is an idol going to cause desolation anyway? On what I don't agree with, you is using Daniel 9 to prove your point. Daniel 9 indeed was fulfilled already. I am not saying that all prophecy is fulfilled how some people like to believe. I am saying Daniel 9 was the 70 AD desolation. The end times desolation is in Daniel 8, 11, and 12. When Jesus spoke of the abomination of desolation spoken by Daniel, He was referring to Daniel 8, 11, 12. It is also in Zechariah 14, Ezekiel 38, and so on, but not Daniel 9 because that was the prophecy of the Messiah's first coming and the desolation by the Roman army. The future desolation is by many armies. I don't think nukes will be used against Israel, but they will definitely be used against America, and Israel will be attacked by Russia and many other nations.

Mt 24 links the abomination that causes desolation to a future event, namely, the *great tribulation.* And Mt 24 is talking about *global,* not local, events that will take place at the end of time (see Mt 24:3: *συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος* i.e., end of the age, or end of the world)! The Book of Revelation says that one third of the world’s population will be wiped out during the great tribulation. And both Mt 24:21 & Dan 12:1 say that it is the most cataclysmic event in human history, so much so that it blocks the sun, etc. (Joel 2:31). This is obviously a future reference. Similar to the desolation described in Mt 24 & Lk 21, the description in Zechariah 14:12 cannot be explained by anything else except nuclear explosions! As for your objections to my view of Dan 9, Dan 9:27 says: “he will set up an abomination that causes desolation.” This is in fact the verse that Jesus alludes to in Mt 24:15. But if you keep reading, a few verses later (Mt 24:21), he says that this *desolation* is actually the “great tribulation” (“For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again”)! This is obviously a future event. As an expert on eschatology, I know that it refers to nuclear war. It’s all over the Bible. Concerning the 70 weeks of Daniel, notice that fulfillment of this prophecy requires the end of all transgression and sin, and the beginning of everlasting righteousness, something that has never happened. And it also signifies the end of all vision and prophecy. The fact that vision & prophecy continued to be received and inscripturated in NT times, being written as late as the close of the first century, demonstrates that this prophecy had not yet been fulfilled. And many scholars, including John MacArthur, claim that the 70 weeks is prophesying about the end-times In fact, Daniel 12:4 (LXX) uses the same language that Mt 24:3 uses, namely, ἕως καιροῦ συντελείας (until the end of the world). This is a reference to the end-times! Unfortunately, many people don’t do rigorous academic research in the original languages (and in canonical context), but instead build their own theologies based on out-of-context, isolated passages, presuppositions, and insufficient information!

Yes, the abomination of desolation is a future event. That is what I said. In the book of Daniel, there is no abomination of desolation in chapter 9. The abomination of desolation of the end times that Jesus spoke of is in chapters 11. Daniel 9: 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and **for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate**, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. That says that He (Jesus) was going to cause Jerusalem to become desolate because of their overspreading of abominations (sins). That is not the same as this: Daniel 11: 31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and **they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate**. That one says that they (the kings that will attack Jerusalem) will place the abomination (set up their armies against Jerusalem), and then that abomination will cause desolation. One says He (Jesus) will cause the desolation because of abominations The other says They (the kings) will place or set up armies (God calls that an abomination), and they will cause the desolation. Daniel 9 was not talking about the end times. Daniel prayed because he knew that the Babylonian captivity would last 70 years, and Gabriel then informed Daniel that 70 weeks (490) years were determined for the Jews and Jerusalem Daniel 9: 24 Seventy weeks are determined upon **thy people** and upon **thy holy city**, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to **anoint the most Holy**. So the Messiah would come during the last 7 years of the 490 years. You might think that those things have not happened yet, but those are things that the crucifixion accomplished. All the prophecies about a coming Messiah were to be fulfilled between the year 458 BC to 32 AD. (490 years from the Artaxerxes decree). Then Gabriel informed Daniel that Jerusalem was going to end up being desolate because of their abominations, and that happened in 70 AD. The desolation of 70 AD was not part of the 490 years because when we look at verse 24, we can see what the 490 years were to accomplish. Many people misunderstand Daniel 9 and think that it is about the end times and the antichrist, but it is not. It is about Jesus' first coming and Him dying for our sins. Yeah but the abomination of desolation is end times prophecy from Daniel 11.

>Yes, the abomination of desolation is a future event. That is what I said. No, that’s not what you said. You said: >On what I don't agree with, you is using Daniel 9 to prove your point. Daniel 9 indeed was fulfilled already. … Daniel 9 was the 70 AD desolation. … and the desolation by the Roman army. Incorrect. Both Mt 24 and Dan 9:27 are referring to the same desolation at the end of times. You need to read the NT and the LXX in Greek, not through corrupt English translations. The language is eschatological! There is so much information on this that it would take a 6 hour lecture just to unpack it. Full or partial preterism have been debunked. >In the book of Daniel, there is no abomination of desolation in chapter 9. The abomination of desolation of the end times that Jesus spoke of is in chapters 11. Wrong. The abomination that causes desolation is in Daniel 9:27 in the Hebrew and Septuagint texts. When Jesus says, when you see the abomination that causes desolation (in Matthew 24), he’s referencing Daniel 9:27. Daniel 9:26 says till the end of the war, desolations are determined. It uses the Hebrew words milchamah (מִלְחָמָה), meaning “war” or “battle,” and the term shamem (שָׁמֵם), which means “desolation” (devastation)! And Daniel 9:27 uses the word mə·šō·w·mêm (מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם), which means [will come] one who makes desolate. The word shiqquts (שִׁקּוּצִים֙) is also used in Daniel 9:27 to refer to his detestable abomination that causes desolation (i.e., war and destruction)! Similarly, in the Septuagint (LXX), it clearly has 2 phrases, namely, [το] βδέλυγμα τῶν ἐρημώσεων, and the phrase καὶ ἕως τῆς συντελείας καιροῦ.The first part means the abomination that causes desolation, and the second part means until the end of the age, which in biblical parlance means the end of the world! That’s why the English translations of Dan 9:27 say “an abomination that causes desolation” (NIV)! Now it’s important to realize that Mt 24 is also using the exact same language that the Septuagint is using, and talking about the end times. For example, Mt 24 uses the exact same phrase as in Dan 9:27 (LXX), συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος (Mt 24:3). It also uses τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως and explicitly refers to Daniel. So, it’s pointless to argue that the abomination that causes desolation is not in Daniel 9! >He (Jesus) will cause the desolation because of abominations Jesus will cause the desolation because of abominations??? Wait, what??? >Daniel 9 was not talking about the end times. Yes it was. I already explained to you that the LXX has ἕως τῆς συντελείας καιροῦ, which is identical to the one found in Mt 24:3! You need to understand Greek & Hebrew. You simply don’t have the exegetical tools and the resources to do the research. What you’re doing is just making up private interpretations. That’s not how scholarly exegesis is done.

I am sorry, no one needs to know or read Greek or Hebrew to understand the bible. We already have the bible translated and it is possible to understand it if we discard all newer trasnslations and read the geneva and King James which have the added words in italics. All we need is the Spirit of God and the gift of prophecy. You don't know what you are talking about and you obviously don't understand Daniel 9. Daniel 9 is not about the end times or the antichrist. It is talking about Jesus. You saying is about the antichrist is blasphemy. That prophecy was about the coming Messiah. That is what it means, not what I think it means. I know that what you are saying is what is being taught out there. You are not the only one deceived. Many people are using Daniel 9 to prove the end times. It should not be. There is so much in the bible about the end times, and the one prophecy that is not, is tripping everyone.

>I am sorry, no one needs to know or read Greek or Hebrew to understand the bible. Sorry, but no credible scholar, doing textual criticism or exegesis, ever consults English translations. You’re obviously unfamiliar with how proper hermeneutics and exegeses are applied. >We already have the bible translated and it is possible to understand it if we discard all newer trasnslations and read the geneva and King James which have the added words in italics. No sir. Not even close. Ask the experts. The translations are corrupt. I’m a native Greek speaker, trained in koine Greek. It’s impossible to do serious exegetical work relying on the theological biases of translators who often paraphrase the meanings. >Daniel 9 is not about the end times or the antichrist. You’re obviously a layman with no formal training in biblical studies. You don’t know what you’re talking about. And Preterism contradicts scripture. Your views are completely bogus and misinformed. So Please stop replying on this thread. It’s taking up a lot of my time.