ECT The Rebellion that Desolates

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
SaulToPaul said:
You do not know the abomination of desolation, when the man of sin erects an image in the Temple and demands worship as God, from a hole in the ground.

Put down the commentaries.
Click to expand...

Saul to Paul has erected an image of satan in the NT temple and worships it as being God.

He will not avoid his own desolation.

LA
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
To STP,
I have put down the D'ist commentaries.

The only interp of the Daniel 8-9 passage is by Christ in the thick of the 1st century zealot situation, with the guy winning control of the whole revolt, and claiming to be god and/or to have His assistance in the overthrow of Rome. You could find this by rereading the opening essay. He does this at the temple.

The sin would not be something done by some other party; it would be the rebellious ones of Dan 8-9, where the expression starts as the rebellion that desolates v13 as the best trans, due to the rebellion described below.

I don't know of any other view here at TOL on these things except that NorthW believes the Thess material is rather about the church later (the church being his temple, but invaded by nonsense).

I will stick to the closest, direct, sober meaning at that time, until shown otherwise. I don't think Christ is someone who would be asked about the nice temple buildings across the way, and suddenly jump X000 years in the future to things they could do nothing about as the 'real meaning.'
 
L

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Danoh said:
Absolute nonsense on your part...as is too often the case.

Nevertheless, Romans 5:8 towards you.
Click to expand...

You do the same as Saul to Paul.

You worship your own image.

but as you reject the new covenant for yourself then you are not cleansed by the blood of Christ.

Mar 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Heb 12:25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

LA
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Lazy afternoon said:
You do the same as Saul to Paul.

You worship your own image.

but as you reject the new covenant for yourself then you are not cleansed by the blood of Christ.

Mar 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Heb 12:25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

LA
Click to expand...

LA the Great Judge of All Mankind has issued an anathema. All rise...
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
No problem with that, but don't press the details too far (how is it a victory, when half of God's people die and all the women are raped?), and there is nothing that says that coming couldn't have been right after the DofJ, like so much of the NT originally (this generation). But now--now we know it was not.

So other than your really, really strong feeling that it is the judgement of the world, is there any reason in the text, not your feelings (like your really, really strong feelings about Mt 25's coming and sitting) that defines things here in 2 Peter 3? I mean, there is not even a quote of Zech 14 in the text, nor an allusion that I know of, so there is no direct reason to jump to another text and say its from that.
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

You are a complete loon. There is no way to talk you out of your fairy tale. The commentaries rule your mind.
 
D

Danoh

New member
Lazy afternoon said:
You do the same as Saul to Paul.

You worship your own image.

but as you reject the new covenant for yourself then you are not cleansed by the blood of Christ.

Mar 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Heb 12:25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

LA
Click to expand...

Once more, nothing but YOUR take on such things.

Nevertheless, Romans 5:8 towards you and I both :chuckle:
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
The only interp of the Daniel 8-9 passage is by Christ in the thick of the 1st century zealot situation, with the guy winning control of the whole revolt, and claiming to be god and/or to have His assistance in the overthrow of Rome. You could find this by rereading the opening essay. He does this at the temple.
Click to expand...

Totally made up.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
I will stick to the closest, direct, sober meaning at that time, until shown otherwise. I don't think Christ is someone who would be asked about the nice temple buildings across the way, and suddenly jump X000 years in the future to things they could do nothing about as the 'real meaning.'
Click to expand...

He was a prophet, wasn't he?
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
Daniel 8
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.

11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.

12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.



The abomination of desolation



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.


The abomination of desolation



Daniel 11
30 For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.

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.

32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.


The abomination of desolation.
Click to expand...

Reiteration for Bible believers of TOL...
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
I read somewhere where STP wants to know why I keep quoting 'what the fathers were promised has been fulfilled...' Acts 13:32. What an evasion.

It is central to understanding the apostles, and it belongs with the completion of the promises of David, just like Acts 2:30 does.

The fact that D'ism is in greatest denial of these three points is the biggest clue about what is mixed up about D'ism.

STP has never properly answered the singularity. It is collective. It is about everything promised. Otherwise he needs to speak on what it was about the res of Christ that was so encompassing, so exciting, so defining, so climactic? He has said nothing, because I don't think he has a clue what this means. I still meet people who believe they are well-versed on what the NT is saying about the OT, and they don't even know this sermon exists.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
I read somewhere where STP wants to know why I keep quoting 'what the fathers were promised has been fulfilled...' Acts 13:32. What an evasion.

It is central to understanding the apostles, and it belongs with the completion of the promises of David, just like Acts 2:30 does.

The fact that D'ism is in greatest denial of these three points is the biggest clue about what is mixed up about D'ism.

STP has never properly answered the singularity. It is collective. It is about everything promised. Otherwise he needs to speak on what it was about the res of Christ that was so encompassing, so exciting, so defining, so climactic? He has said nothing, because I don't think he has a clue what this means. I still meet people who believe they are well-versed on what the NT is saying about the OT, and they don't even know this sermon exists.
Click to expand...

Stop perverting the verse to promote IP'ism.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
When will IP identify the man of sin for us?

:idunno:
Click to expand...

Rome was the man of sin, in 70 ad.

Rome was also Christ in 70 ad.

Before you say that means Christ = antichrist, I remind you to stop being so literal, just relax and use your imagination...or the right commentary...to make the Bible say whatever you want. Fun!
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
You could actually read the OP you know, but it's rather blinding light, I know. Full of humanism and history, you know. In STP's world, when the beginner deputy has looked at a crime scene, and even moved things there, and only thinks there is one type of bloodstain present, the master detective is a 'humanist' for not moving things and for seeking proof that there is only one person's blood there.

Our first job in handling the Bible is to arrive at what they were thinking then when these things were said.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
musterion said:
Rome was the man of sin, in 70 ad.

Rome was also Christ in 70 ad.

Before you say that means Christ = antichrist, I remind you to stop being so literal, just relax and use your imagination...or the right commentary...to make the Bible say whatever you want. Fun!
Click to expand...





How can you possibly have been here these past 2 years and have any memory and retention at all and not realize that the material has to do with the zealot rebellion in the 1st century? It is not about blaming Rome, although Rome was involved in its destruction. The whole question is about Judaism's zealots not doing what the apostles did (the mission) and ruining the country in the process.

You see, those 'preterist' books sound about as ignorant about the situation on the ground in Judea in the 1st century as futurist D'ists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top