The "Abomination that Maketh Desolate"

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by ronharvey

Bump - Bump!

Ron

Yogi bear again, huh? lol

[kritter3]

Let me ask you and all futurists something. Have you ever seriously considered you may be wrong and preterism may be right? In reading all our thoughts, have you ever considered we may be onto something,, instead of thinking of how we are wrong when you read? Are you open to the thought futurism may be wrong?

I have never seriously considered preterism at all. I have considered that preterists may be on something. I would just imagine that with preterism comes a great risk. If events begin to occur that evidently fulfill futuristic prophecy in the Scripture, preterists would have to scramble to cast those events in a coincidental light. That would simply be dishonest.

One such claim is that the events of 70AD, which, according to the scripture, is a time of tribulation such as never was or ever shall be. I find it preposterous to compare 70AD with many modern times of tribulation, namely the death of 6 million Jews in the holocaust. Please don't try.

Otherwise, I'm completely open.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by gloryseeker

...
Eating, drinking, marrying sounds more like a party atmosphere than a desolate atmosphere. Obviously the Word is right that which you posted and also these words of Jesus.

How then do both occur?

Eating, drinking, and marrying are not condemned. It is not wrong to eat, nor to drink, nor to get married. Jesus was just saying that life will be going on as usual.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by kritter3

I have never seriously considered preterism at all. I have considered that preterists may be on something. I would just imagine that with preterism comes a great risk. If events begin to occur that evidently fulfill futuristic prophecy in the Scripture, preterists would have to scramble to cast those events in a coincidental light. That would simply be dishonest.

But that is only a hypothetical possibility. Until things actually do come to pass the way futurism says, and not just speculations that perhaps something MAY BE fulfillment of prophecy, this is not basis upon which to treat preterism as risky.

One such claim is that the events of 70AD, which, according to the scripture, is a time of tribulation such as never was or ever shall be. I find it preposterous to compare 70AD with many modern times of tribulation, namely the death of 6 million Jews in the holocaust. Please don't try.

Have you ever considered what is more significant to God when Jesus used the term GREAT? I mean, God's bride, Jerusalem, forsook Him and claimed a pagan Caesar who claimed godhood to be her king instead, and then murdered her true Groom, Jesus. I would think a man would be more concerned over his bride's experiences and infidelity and murderous acts than someone else, no matter how outwardly worse the acts of others might have been

[kritter3]

Have you ever considered what is more significant to God when Jesus used the term GREAT? I mean, God's bride, Jerusalem, forsook Him and claimed a pagan Caesar who claimed godhood to be her king instead, and then murdered her true Groom, Jesus. I would think a man would be more concerned over his bride's experiences and infidelity and murderous acts than someone else, no matter how outwardly worse the acts of others might have been.

From what you have written, I understand your definition of great tribulation to be the infidelity of God's people in the days of Caesar. The Old Testament shows a continual cycle of whoredom regarding the people of God. God's judgement was poured out many times on the Jews for their infidelity. It does not appear that God was surprised by the rejection. Your reference to the great tribulation also does not take into account the gentile church which is as much the bride of Christ as the Jews.

Also, how do you determine that the infidelity was for a time, times, and the dividing of time (3.5 years)?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by kritter3

From what you have written, I understand your definition of great tribulation to be the infidelity of God's people in the days of Caesar. The Old Testament shows a continual cycle of whoredom regarding the people of God. God's judgement was poured out many times on the Jews for their infidelity. It does not appear that God was surprised by the rejection. Your reference to the great tribulation also does not take into account the gentile church which is as much the bride of Christ as the Jews.

Also, how do you determine that the infidelity was for a time, times, and the dividing of time (3.5 years)?

I claim Jerusalem was Christ's bride, and that when we read He came unto His own and His own received Him not, it is considering Jerusalem and Israel as His bride. But although God divorced Israel time and time again under Old Covenant, He always took her back. But he said something in Matt 23 that indicated she crossed the line in the first century when she would crucify those sent to her and scourge God's people in her synagogues. This meant a cutting off forever. And the church is the Bride INSTEAD of Israel, rather than gentiles getting into the same body as Israel was who rejected Christ. God divorced Jerusalem and Israel and His death caused His freedom to marry a new bride, the church. And He "ain't" going back to the old bride. She "filled the cup", as He put it, that day two thousand years ago.

I do not believe the infidelity was for three and one half years, but that the vengeance upon her that would occur at the end of that generation would be for three and one half years. It was a three and one half year siege against Jerusalem that ended in AD70 at the end of that generation, for the sake of stretching it out as long as He could to see her repent. And the references in Revelation that they repented not, are indications the wrath came to move her to repent, but she refused.

[rava61]

Wow - never heard it in that manner before, are you sure you understand what is going on there?

RV

[rava61]

Exactement, monsieur - bon!
RV

[rava61]

The "abomination that maketh desolate' that Paul is talking about is the Man of Sin or Anti-Christ setting himself up in the Temple in Jerusalem and demanding to be worshiped.
RV

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by rava61

The "abomination that maketh desolate' that Paul is talking about is the Man of Sin or Anti-Christ setting himself up in the Temple in Jerusalem and demanding to be worshiped.
RV

I disagree, but I do understand that is the futurist perspective. Paul said nothing about the man of sin causing sacrifices to cease in 2 thess 2. The only connection is reference to a temple and a man in it. I wondered if 2 Thess 2 could refer to 1 cor 6:13, 19, since both passages refer to temple and destruction by the Lord. Bit either way, nothing in 2 Thess 2 mentions cessation of sacrifices.

My thoughts, anyway.