So he will seat himself in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.

[Maria Billingsley]

But what then is the meaning of 2 Thes 2:1-4 in your view???

Judaizers, Jews , Herod all who went against Jesus Christ of Nazareth prediction of the destruction of the temple.

 

[AdB]

For example, according to Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers:

"... the whole phrase, “taking his seat in the temple of God,” is a poetical or prophetical description of usurping divine prerogatives generally: not the prerogatives of the true God alone, but whatever prerogatives have been offered to anything “called God.”

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Commentaries: who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.

So if 2 Thess 2:4 is metaphorical, then what is it talking about?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Because you seem to acknowledge that Dan 9:27b refers to the crucifixion's and resurrection of Christ, while Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14 and Luke 21:20 refer to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Jesus indicates in Matt 24:15 that this was spoken of by Daniel, so this can't be referring to Dan 9:27b, so to which part of Daniel does it refer to then?

Ok. To me it fits perfectly. All fulfilled in Him.

 

[AdB]

Just a note - "as written in Daniel" does not have to mean that its the fulfillment of Daniel. It can only mean that it will be similar.

So Daniel could be historically about Antiochus Epiphanes, but Jesus could refer to the text as "the same/very similar thing will happen again in this generation".

I do think that when Jesus says "as written by Daniel" then He means that Daniel was talking about the very events that Jesus is talking about...

 

[trophy33]

But Luke 21, Jesus does not include the abomination of desolation spoke of by Daniel the prophet standing in a holy place.

Its traditionally accepted that the gospel of Matthew was written to Christians from Jews. Therefore the reference to their prophet was included, but was not so important for Mark or Luke who wrote for Christians from other nations.

But that does not mean the chapters are about different events.

 

[AdB]

Ok. To me it fits perfectly. All fulfilled in Him.

so to which part of Daniel does it refer to then?

 

[trophy33]

I do think that when Jesus says "as written by Daniel" then He means that Daniel was talking about the very events that Jesus is talking about...

Can be. It was just a thought. Trying to be open-minded to various possibilities.

 

[Douggg]

The structure is completely similar, Luke just doesn't explicitly mention that from Luke 21:7 they had moved onto the Mount of Olives.

Luke 21:37 actually ends with noting of Jesus leaving the temple complex to overnight on the Mount of Olives.

Matthew 24, as well as Mark 13, picks up with Jesus and the disciples leaving the temple complex on their way to the Mount of Olives.

If a person gets Luke 21 and Matthew 24/Mark 13 in that sequence of events of where Jesus and the disciples were, and their movement from the temple complex to the Mount of Olives - then the differences/similarities of between the three chapters can be better understood.

 

[AdB]

Judaizers, Jews , Herod all who went against Jesus Christ of Nazareth prediction of the destruction of the temple.

Yet all these had already appeared when Paul wrote 2 Thess 2:4, while Pauls is obviously talking about something that was yet to come...

 

[trophy33]

So if 2 Thess 2:4 is metaphorical, then what is it talking about?

Perhaps about Nero proclaiming himself to be God.

 

[Douggg]

Its traditionally accepted that the gospel of Matthew was written to Christians from Jews. Therefore the reference to their prophet was included, but was not so important for Mark or Luke who wrote for Christians from other nations.

But that does not mean the chapters are about different events.

Matthew 24:15-31, although we as Christians read about to understand bible prophecy, is Jesus's message to Jews (Judaism) who will end up going through the great tribulation. And what they in Judeah should do to survive it - flee to the mountains.

Differently, Matthew 24:32-15 is Jesus's message to Christians, about being aware of the times by the parable of the fig tree, and to be watching and not being abusive to others and not being a drunkard, carousing with the wrong crowd, to avoid having to go through the great tribulation via the rapture.

 

[trophy33]

Matthew 24:15-31, although we as Christians read about to understand bible prophecy, is Jesus's message to Jews (Judaism) who will end up going through the great tribulation. And what they in Judeah should do to survive it - flee to the mountains.

Differently, Matthew 24:32-15 is Jesus's message to Christians, about being aware of the times by the parable of the fig tree, and to be watching and not being abusive to others and not being a drunkard to avoid having to go through the great tribulation via the rapture.

There is no such division in the text between two audiences, though. Its only your personal division.

 

[AdB]

Luke 21:37 actually ends with noting of Jesus leaving the temple complex to overnight on the Mount of Olives.

Matthew 24, as well as Mark 13, picks up with Jesus and the disciples leaving the temple complex on their way to the Mount of Olives.

If a person gets Luke 21 and Matthew 24/Mark 13 in that sequence of events of where Jesus and the disciples were, and their movement from the temple complex to the Mount of Olives - then the differences/similarities of between the three chapters can be better understood.

Nope...

Luke 21:37-38 is a recap indicating that Jesus was preaching in the Temple during the day and went to the Mount of Olives at night.
So from this we learn that Matt 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2 and Luke 21:5-6 were spoken at the Temple, while Matt 24:3-51 & Matt 25, Mark 13:3-37 and Luke 21:7-36 were spoken at the Mount of Olives. This is logical because Jesus always explained His parables when He was alone with His disciples...

 

[Douggg]

There is no such division in the text between two audiences, though. Its only your personal division.

No one in Judaism considers the New Testament to be valid. They don't read the parable of the fig tree will any sense of meaning to them.

 

[d taylor]

If Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14 and Luke 21:20 are speaking of the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, and that this is the fulfilment of Dan 9:27b “And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”, then what is 2 Thes 2:1-4 speaking of, in particular “So he will seat himself in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.”?

The king of the north (Daniel 11) is the same man as Pauls man of sin in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4


“Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.

____________​

Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

​

 

[trophy33]

No one in Judaism considers the New Testament to be valid. They don't read the parable of the fig tree will any sense of meaning to them.

I do not understand your point here. Jesus was talking to His disciples, not to unbelieving Jews.

Also, the parable of the fig tree is simply saying that when they will the sings, the end will come. Thats all. There is no deep mystery about it.

 

[Douggg]

So from this we learn that Matt 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2 and Luke 21:5-6 were spoken at the Temple,

No, you are wrong about that.

Matthew 24:1-2 is Jesus and the disciples leaving the temple complex. Mark 13:1-2 the same.
1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

What you are reading that leads you to think (wrongly) that Luke 21:5-6/Matthew 24:1-2/Mark 13:1-2 are the same - is the commenting on the grandeur of the temple is in all three. Right?

Luke 21:5-6 is commenting on the grandeur of the temple by onlookers, as Jesus was speaking in the temple complex. But what is not in the text, but can be concluded, was that not all of the disciples were right there in that part of the temple at the time.

Why? Because in both Matthew 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2 some of the disciples made the same comment about the temple's grandeur - as though they did not hear what Jesus had already said about the destruction of the temple.

So the conclusion is that some of disciples, other than Luke, were in other parts of the temple complex when Jesus spoke in Luke 21:5-6. As Luke was the one who wrote it.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Yet all these had already appeared when Paul wrote 2 Thess 2:4, while Pauls is obviously talking about something that was yet to come...

Not sure why your caught up in timing. This was all comming to fruition in their generation. As Jesus Christ of Nazareth said. " This generation shall not pass until all is fulfilled ". Matthew 24:34.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

If Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14 and Luke 21:20 are speaking of the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, and that this is the fulfilment of Dan 9:27b “And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”, then what is 2 Thes 2:1-4 speaking of, in particular “So he will seat himself in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.”?

FYI, Doug and I are on opposite ends of eschatology. Hopefully we dont cause you to stumble. Blessings and prayers.

 

[Douggg]

I do not understand your point here. Jesus was talking to His disciples, not to unbelieving Jews.

Also, the parable of the fig tree is simply saying that when they will the sings, the end will come. Thats all. There is no deep mystery about it.

The point I am trying to make is this. Right now Jews (Judaism) don't believe in Jesus and the New Testament - so they are not reading it for the same reasons we are - if at all.

So they don't know, as a group by and large, about what is written in Matthew 24:15-31, and Jesus's instructions to flee to the mountains when the abomination of desolation is standing in a holy place.

It is not until the 7 years begin, by the Antichrist, that the two witnesses will be in Jerusalem preaching to the Jews about it, and not to trust the person because he is a phony who will betray them.

We on the other hand know what is in Matthew 24:32-51, because we believe Jesus as our Lord and Savior. And read the New Testament about to be watching for we know not what hour our Lord comes.