Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Gabriel is not the Lord. Gabriel is an angelic messenger of the Lord. Gabriel doesn't "oversee", i.e. manage anything. Gabriel appeared to Mary, not by his own decision, but the Lord instructed him to.How could Gabriel not be involved and oversee the whole promise . He shows up on schedule to reinforce this promise and this hope to an end of sin and the ushering in of his everlasting righteousness..... Through the Messiah, our Lord Jesus Christ and his cross.
This is where we as Christians have to think carefully about this, because there is one discourse speaking of different things occurring at different times:If I understand your view, the wrath that happened in AD70 can’t be the AOD in Matthew 24 because the AOD only involves tribulation. I have no problem with this, it agrees with my thoughts on the AOD.
The AOD in Matthew 24 has a singular abomination, again I agree and have no issues or arguments against it.
What I was looking at is the fact that fleeing occurred by those who followed the instructions in Luke 21. As I’m sure your aware the are fleeing instructions in Matthew 24.
I’m trying to figure out if you think the fleeing in Luke 21 has any connection whatsoever with the fleeing in Matthew 24.
No, I believe it was the overspreading of abominations (plural) in the form of continued animal sacrifices for sins in the building in Jerusalem which was no longer the Temple of God (Daniel 9:27) that ensured their house was left to them desolate at the hand of the Romans (Daniel 9:26; Luke 21:20-24).
I don't believe the coming abomination (singular) of desolation spoken of in Matthew 24:15 happened in A.D 70.
@grafted branch Inserted a day later: That's what happens when you post when already tired - you (I) wind up copying the wrong person in the edits to my post to you (you may roll your eyes now)
@sovereigngrace (copy @Christian Gedge because of the addition to my post after you agreed)
Luke uses the words distress and wrath to talk about the wrath of God coming upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem in Luke 21:20-24, but in Luke 21:12-19 & 27-28; Matthew 24:9-31, and in Mark 13:9, 11-13, the tribulation of the disciples of Jesus in the days leading up to the coming of the Son of man is being spoken about.
@sovereigngrace In my opinion it's important not to conflate the abomination (singular) of desolation with the abominations (plural), which were the continuous sacrifices and offerings for sin which were made after Jesus had died and risen again,
i.e not to conflate Daniel 9:26-27 with Matthew 24:15. They are not talking about the same thing. Matthew 24:15 is the antitype of the abomination (singular) of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
@sovereigngrace @Christian Gedge
I was checking the interlinear as though I'm a Hebrew expert (which I'm not) to see if I could find any discrepancy in the plural use of the word abomination in Daniel 9:27, but it's the case in the interlinear too.
In Daniel 12:11, abomination is in the singular, and there are two things being spoken about, but three things are being spoken about in Daniel 9:27, where abominations (plural) are taking place:
Daniel 12:11
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, AND the abomination (singular) that makes desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
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 (plural) he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Daniel 9:27 Interlinear: And he hath strengthened a covenant with many -- one week, and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.'
Daniel 9:27 could also be translated as "on the wing of abominations.." or in more modern English "the wings of abominations"
Thank you for your explanation, I appreciate it.This is where we as Christians have to think carefully about this, because there is one discourse speaking of different things occurring at different times:
The question Matthew records the disciples asking is different to the question Luke records the disciples asking:
Matthew 24:3
And as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the aiṓn (the Age)?
* The gospels were written long before the destruction of the Temple.
* The authors only knew what Jesus had said. They did not know when this was going to occur, and when that was going to occur. How could they have known?
* But they nevertheless faithfully recorded all that Jesus had said, Matthew being an eyewitness, and Luke recording what he had learned from the eyewitnesses.
But again, there was one discourse, speaking about two different events at two different times, and one author (Matthew) trying to ensure that he records correctly what the Lord said about both events at both times, but Matthew not knowing when the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple would come, and when the end of the Age would come (There is a lot of evidence that the apostles all assumed that the two would occur at the same time).
The same goes for Luke, but in Luke's gospel it's more obvious: Luke 21:20-24 speaks about the wrath of God coming upon the city when the armies gather against Jerusalem, but the tribulation of the disciples of Jesus in the days leading up to the coming of the Son of man is being spoken about tin Luke 21:12-19 & 27-28.
Even so, no indication is given in either gospel that it's speaking about two different events at two different times. Why is this?
It's because when the authors recorded what Jesus had said, they could not possibly have known that the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple and the time of the end of the Age were going to be separated by thousands of years.
The context of Matthew 24:29-34 and beyond verse 34 is the tribulation the disciples of Jesus would face at the time of the coming of the Son of man. But Matthew also faithfully records what Jesus had said about the abomination of desolation (singular) standing in the holy place, and added (let the reader understand).
I believe it's because Matthew wanted the readers to understand what is meant by "the holy place" (it was not the temple that was destroyed in A.D 70). With regard to the AOD (singular) of Matthew 24:15 as Christians we MUST understand that not only does God no longer dwell in temples made with (human) hands, but He had no longer dwelt in a temple made with (human) hands since the death and resurrection of Christ. For 40 years the holy place had been the church/the part of New Jerusalem of many nations of believers that exists in the world.
.. but there are many Jews and Arabs living in Judea today who believe in Jesus. Most of Judea of the Roman days lies in the West Bank today, but Jerusalem and a small part of the Judea of Jesus' day lies within the state now called Israel. There are Christian Palestinians too, the Palestinians are not all Muslims.
But personally I don't think that the part of the Olivet Discourse speaking about the fleeing Judea is meant for the end of the Age - but the Abomination of Desolation certainly is.
However, Jesus tells them this from John 16:12“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.* The authors only knew what Jesus had said. They did not know when this was going to occur, and when that was going to occur. How could they have known?
I see no proof in scripture that it would be. 1 John 4: 6We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error.It's because when the authors recorded what Jesus had said, they could not possibly have known that the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple and the time of the end of the Age were going to be separated by thousands of years.
I agree with you as to separate things, but during the same Roman siege.The context of Matthew 24:29-34 and beyond verse 34 is the tribulation the disciples of Jesus would face at the time of the coming of the Son of man. But Matthew also faithfully records what Jesus had said about the abomination of desolation (singular) standing in the holy place, and added (let the reader understand).
I believe it's because Matthew wanted the readers to understand what is meant by "the holy place" (it was not the temple that was destroyed in A.D 70). With regard to the AOD (singular) of Matthew 24:15 as Christians we MUST understand that not only does God no longer dwell in temples made with (human) hands, but He had no longer dwelt in a temple made with (human) hands since the death and resurrection of Christ. For 40 years the holy place had been the church/the part of New Jerusalem of many nations of believers that exists in the world.
It seems you're ignoring the difference between plurals and singular things as found in the word abominations (plural) in Daniel 9:27, and the word abomination (singular) as found in Daniel 12:11 and Matthew 24:15.It seems to me then, you have no NT Scripture to support your interpretation of Daniel 9:27b. That part involves abominations. In the NT, in regards to abominations, that subject is mentioned in all of the following passages. Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14, Luke 16:15, Rev 17:4, Rev 17:5, and Rev 21:27. None of them are involving context having to do with animal sacrificing continuing unless you want to change your view of Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14, and now propose those do? I don't see you doing that, though. That leaves Luke 16:15, Rev 17:4, Rev 17:5, and Rev 21:27, except none of those are involving animal sacrificing continuing and that being an abomination.
Ok so I agree to differ. I don't see it the way you do because whereas Luke talks about A.D 66-70 in Luke 21:20-24 and the wrath that would come upon the people at that time, he speaks about the tribulation of the disciples of Jesus in all the other verses, and Matthew and Mark only speak about the tribulation of the disciples of Jesus, remaining totally silent about the wrath to come upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem that Luke mentions in Luke 21:20-24.Thank you for your explanation, I appreciate it.
I think where we are diverging is on the statement in Matthew 24:15 whoso readeth, let him understand.
I understand this to be referring to those who read the book of Daniel. I think it’s meaning that the seal on the book is being lifted and now the readers can understand it.
So when Matthew 24:22 says “except those days should be shortened” I think it’s referring to days that are written in Daniel.
Gabriel is not the Lord. Gabriel is an angelic messenger of the Lord. Gabriel doesn't "oversee", i.e. manage anything. Gabriel appeared to Mary, not by his own decision, but the Lord instructed him to.
Luke 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
You're telling me to read things more carefully just because I told you that and no other reason. I did read it carefully. Maybe you forgot what you said?huh? I did not write "the appearance" of John the Baptist is what started the 70th week. You are getting so mixed up and confused. You need to read things more carefully.
What did you mean by that second statement? No one was claiming that John the Baptist himself instigated the 70th week, so why did you say that? What was claimed is that the time that John the Baptist saw Jesus and said "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29) is when the 70th week started. There is no basis for saying that it's impossible for that to be the case.Douggg said:John the baptist preceded the messiah and him being cutoff in Daniel 9:26a. So it is impossible that John the baptist instigated the 70th week of Daniel 9.
I've read a lot of Josephus' accounts of history, and it's never surprised me that Josephus, who wasn't a Christian, and the pious non-believing Jews of his day saw the building that stood in Jerusalem that for 40 years had no more been the holy temple of God, as the holy temple of God, and therefore viewed the abominable things that were taking place in it (as it came closer to the year A.D 70 when that building was finally completely destroyed), as the reason God gave it over to be destroyed.However, Jesus tells them this from John 16:12“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
I see no proof in scripture that it would be. 1 John 4: 6We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
I agree with you as to separate things, but during the same Roman siege.
Of the War — Book IV Chapter 3 Section 10 Josephus: Of the War, Book IV Speaking of Phinnias Ben Samuel and the Zealots: "Ananus stood in the midst of them; and casting his eyes frequently at the temple, and having a flood of tears in his eyes, he said, “Certainly it had been good for me to die before I had seen the house of God full of so many abominations; or these sacred places, that ought not to be trodden upon at random, filled with the feet of these blood-shedding villains."
From the Jewish Orthodox website: Destruction and Desecration: The Story of Titus and Onkelos
“The replacement for Vespasian, the newly crowned Emperor, was the wicked Titus, from whose mouth the verse ‘Where is their G-d, the Rock in Whom they trusted?’ seemed to come. For Titus blasphemed and cursed Heaven!”
“What did he do? He seized a prostitute, and entered the Holy of Holies, spread out a Sefer Torah, and committed a sin on it. He then took a sword and thrust it into the curtain dividing between the Holy and the Holy of Holies. A miracle occurred and blood spurted forth, causing him to think that he had killed “himself” (where “himself” is a euphemism for Heaven)…”
In Hebrews 9, "Holy Place" is still being referred to in the present tense and as that which was holding back the Church from entering into the "true" Holy of Holies.
please read carefully. Someone, i.e. sovereingrace, in this thread claimed that John the Baptist's actions of introducing the Messiah "instigated" the 70th week of Daniel.What did you mean by that second statement? No one was claiming that John the Baptist himself instigated the 70th week, so why did you say that?
Is a contiguous count of Daniel’s weeks found in New Testament writings?
4. ST. JOHN RECORDED the PRECISE DATE of the FIRST DAY of the SEVENTIETH WEEK.
The actual start-point of the 70th week was the 1st Nisan AD 27. Does the New Testament identify it? Yes, it does! We are able to track the fourteen days between the beginning of the month to the start of Passover as recorded in the gospel of John. Here are the events leading up to, and signifying the switch-point between the weeks.
“The Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask John, “Who are you?” He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ” ... John answered them, “I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie ...”
This encounter took place on the last day of the 69th week, 29th Adar AD 27, as we shall see shortly. Please continue:
“The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.”
As seen before, the reference to “taking away sin” is directly from Daniel’s prophecy, so it becomes very appropriate if it was declared over Jesus on the first day of the 70th week. Let us follow several more days to see if such was the case?
The next day Andrew, Peter and one other (probably the writer) were chosen to be disciples. I believe it was Saturday, 2nd of Nisan because the wedding of Cana, a few days later, was a Monday evening. By Sunday, 3rd of Nisan, Philip and Nathaniel had also been chosen, then came Monday, 4th of Nisan. Please bear in mind that Hebrew days began at sunset, so, strictly speaking, the 4th of Nisan was Sunday/Monday, and the 5th was Monday/Tuesday. In other words, Monday evening started the 5th day of the Hebrew month and it also started the third day of the regular week. Now, notice carefully. John tells us:
“On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples.”
So, the wedding of Cana is recorded as “the third day”, that is to say, Monday night. Assuming the year was AD 27, all that remains to do is to examine the lunar phases of that month and when we do, we find that the 5th of Nisan did indeed start on a Monday evening. Moreover, it was the only Monday that could have fitted a wedding before Passover, because later festivities would have conflicted with the Passover Seder.
Thus, by identifying the date of the wedding of Cana, we are able to track backwards to the 1st of Nisan and confirm the declaration of John the Baptist, “Behold, the Lamb”, as the defining event which marked the first day of the 70th week!
I realize that. I was pointing out that it is the Lord who "oversees" everything, not Gabriel.
Jeff, you used some inappropriate terminology when saying Gabriel "oversees". Just accept it as a poor choice of wording that you used, and move on.That is obvious. God uses the same Angel to announce the good news about redemption.
From it's inception to its completion.
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, 2 who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, everything that he saw.
Jeff, you used some inappropriate terminology when saying Gabriel "oversees". Just accept it as a poor choice of wording that you used, and move on.
Lol. Nothing inappropriate , as Gabriel is in the presence of God....and is involved in Gods plan to redeem the world in Dan 9 through Messiah. Gabriel then shows up AGAIN revealing the identity of this Messiah and the eternal victory he has already achieved.
IT IS FINISHED.
.
And probably the same archangel that leads us in song at our Glorification.As you said. The archangel who gave Daniel the 70 weeks was the same archangel overseeing the birth of Christ. Amazing!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?