The Little Horn of Dan 8

[Lysimachus]

457 BC cannot pass biblical scrutiny. The Bible specifies a decree for the restoration and building of Jerusalem. But the 457 BC decree of the Achaemenid king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, is not for restoration (Hebrew 'shuwb') and rebuilding (Hebrew 'banah') of Jerusalem. Rather the decree was specifically for the "beautification" (Hebrew 'paar') of the temple in Jerusalem (see Ezra 7:27).

Samie my friend. Have you still to graduate from these outdated, long-refuted arguments?

It is amusing to me how the critics of Adventism love to ridicule the BRI's "DARCOM" series, yet in that very series, these arguments you have put forth have been refuted so thorough already as far back as the 50s. Yet people like you keep bringing them up, with wishful imaginations as though they are original, turning a blind eye, and plugging your ears from the fact that these arguments have already been taken care of.

If you happen to have an appetite for some humble pie, I recommend the following article I wrote here:

The 70 Weeks of Daniel 9 - Vindicating the Historical-Messianic Computation

(Read all the posts in the entire thread, not just my first few posts)

If this is too much for you, you can always start by enrolling here:

Bible School

[Samie]

Originally Posted By: Samie

457 BC cannot pass biblical scrutiny. The Bible specifies a decree for the restoration and building of Jerusalem. But the 457 BC decree of the Achaemenid king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, is not for restoration (Hebrew 'shuwb') and rebuilding (Hebrew 'banah') of Jerusalem. Rather the decree was specifically for the "beautification" (Hebrew 'paar') of the temple in Jerusalem (see Ezra 7:27).

Samie my friend. Have you still to graduate from these outdated, long-refuted arguments?

It is amusing to me how the critics of Adventism love to ridicule the BRI's "DARCOM" series, yet in that very series, these arguments you have put forth have been refuted so thorough already as far back as the 50s. Yet people like you keep bringing them up, with wishful imaginations as though they are original, turning a blind eye, and plugging your ears from the fact that these arguments have already been taken care of.

If you happen to have an appetite for some humble pie, I recommend the following article I wrote here:

The 70 Weeks of Daniel 9 - Vindicating the Historical-Messianic Computation

(Read all the posts in the entire thread, not just my first few posts)

If this is too much for you, you can always start by enrolling here:

Bible School

I suggest that you just post your Bible-based counter-arguments, if you really have any, instead of sending me to a wild-goose-chase for your rebuttal.

And thanks for inviting me to enroll in a school of your choice, brother. But I had already enrolled in the school of Christ. You are always welcome there.

[Nic Samojluk]

Samie wrote:

“I would say I did not assume; I just believed in what the Saviour said. He said it, I believed it. He said when the abomination of desolation is set up in the holy place the great tribulation will start; and immediately after the great tribulation, unusual celestial phenomena occurs which will be capped by the 2nd Coming. I did not assume anything; I just believed our Lord.

It is because of assumption that partial fulfillment comes into the issue. There is just no place for partial fulfillment anywhere in the words of Jesus our Lord in Matt 24:15-31.”

My question to you is: Do you think that Jesus was talking about the destruction of the city of Jerusalem, the destruction at the Second Coming, or both?

[Samie]

Samie wrote:

“I would say I did not assume; I just believed in what the Saviour said. He said it, I believed it. He said when the abomination of desolation is set up in the holy place the great tribulation will start; and immediately after the great tribulation, unusual celestial phenomena occurs which will be capped by the 2nd Coming. I did not assume anything; I just believed our Lord.

It is because of assumption that partial fulfillment comes into the issue. There is just no place for partial fulfillment anywhere in the words of Jesus our Lord in Matt 24:15-31.”

My question to you is: Do you think that Jesus was talking about the destruction of the city of Jerusalem, the destruction at the Second Coming, or both?

[Gerr]

I'm just a learner, so I would like to know more about your views. However, let me raise just a few questions for now.

1. Where does the Bible say that the temple will again be rebuilt?

2. How did you come about identifying the woman that rides the beast as Jerusalem?

3. Or the head that received a deadly wound that was healed as being Judaism?

[Lysimachus]

I'm just a learner, so I would like to know more about your views. However, let me raise just a few questions for now.

1. Where does the Bible say that the temple will again be rebuilt?

2. How did you come about identifying the woman that rides the beast as Jerusalem?

3. Or the head that received a deadly wound that was healed as being Judaism?

I can answer these questions for you. And it is time we put an end to these spurious interpretations of scripture once and for all.

Why do they come to these erroneous conclusions? I will primary focus on refuting their conclusions to question 2, and that will automatically take care of 1 and 3.

First off, because of a carnal interpretation of the book of Revelation, that literalizes these prophecies, and simply does not understand proper hermeneutical principles.

Their arguments go along the lines of something like this:

Arguments used to prove that literal Jerusalem in Palestine is Babylon:

They say that in Revelation, there are two Jerusalems, "two great cities".

1. Jerusalem which now is here on earth.

2. Jerusalem which is above.

They then ask the question: "WHERE was our Lord crucified?"

They answer: "In that 'great city'", which they say is "Jerusalem" based on Revelation 11:8: "And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified."

Then they ask: "Where was our Lord crucified?"

They answer: "In Jerusalem which now is".

They ask: Which of the two Jerusalems is spiritually called "Sodom and Egypt"

They answer: "Jerusalem which now is", "where also our Lord was crucified".

They ask: What does Sodom and Egypt spiritually imply?

They answer: Sodom-sin/corruption, Egypt-slavery/bondage, and they will quote Romans 8:21 - "Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the BONDAGE OF CORRUPTION into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

They say that the Jerusalem which now is, is cursed and under the bondage of curruption with her children.

Then they quote Gal. 4:25 and 26: "For this Agar is mount Sinain in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage of her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all (who are of faith).

Now it's time to refute this foolishness once and for all:

PART 1:

There is a literal New Jerusalem, just as once there was a literal Babylon. Unilke literal Babylon, New Jerusalem exists at this very hour in heaven. According to Revelation 21:1-4, it will one day exist literally on the earth. But like Babylon, New Jerusalem also symbolizes something. It is called the Lamb's "bride," who has "made herself ready" and is "clothed" with the "righteous deeds of the saints"." (Rev 19:7,8. Like Babylon, it is a smbol of a vast community, but not of the wicked! New Jerusalem is the community of the righteous, the true church, the "host" of Daniel 8:13,14, which is "trampled" on by the citizens of the great city, Babylon. (Rev 14:8; 16:19; 17:18; 18:10; etc.)

But the great city is described in Revelation 11:8 as the place "where their Lord was crucified." This this is what has led some readers to assume that it is old literal Jerusalem. But the same place is "allegorically called Sodom and Egypt." Sodom stood for vice and luxury. See Gen 19:4-8 and Ezekiel 16:49,50, 56-58. It fittingly represented the exorbant luxury and vice of European nobility and royalty and the orgy of immorality associated with the French Revolution. (Paris was wide open, and at least one eighth of all marriageable women may be estimated to have practiced prostitution.) The Pharaoh of Egypt in Moses' time enslaved the Israelites and scoffed, "I do not know the Lord, and moreover I will not let Israel go." Exodus 5:2. Egypt symbolized the bold skepticis of the philosphies and the blatant de-Christianization of the Revolution.

Hebrews 6:4, 5 settles the matter! It shows that Jesus has been crucified wherever His people have apostatized seriously from Bible truth.

• ]"It is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt." (Heb. 6:4,5)

The holy city (God's people) was trampled during the entire 1260 days. The two witnesses during the same prophesied in sadness and sackcloth. But at the end of the period the French REvolution uniquely fulfilled this reference to crucifying Jesus.

Just like the Heavenly Temple mirrors and reflects God's earthly Temple, the Church, so likewise, the literal New Jerusalem in heaven is a symbol of God's Church on earth. When you make war on a city, are you making war on the city itself, or its citizens? Obviously its citizens. Likewise, while we are not physically in the New Jerusalem, according to Hebrews 12:22 and 23, we are indeed citizens of the New Jerusalem. Therefore, when God's people are trampled, they are trampling that "HOLY CITY". The citizens that is.

Those Gentiles represented atheist and communistic France, and the Two Witnesses represented the Old and New Testament. The Bible was banned for exactly 3 1/2 years (3 1/2 days) from November 24, 1793 when the Churches of Paris were closed and the public reading of Bibles forbidden to April 1797 when the Churches of Paris were reopened, and the public reading of the Bible was once again encouraged among Protestants.

The entire subject of Revelation 11 has NOTHING to do with Old Jerusalem. This is grotesque literalism at its best! The measuring of the temple has to do with the measuring of God's people, and this is specifically referring to the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment that began in 1844 at the conclusion of the 2300 year prophecy which commenced in 457 B.C.

The "measuring" of the temple is analogous to the terminology Paul utilized to measuring God's people in Ephesians 4:13 and 16.

What is the "great city"? Revelation 11:7, 8 says, "And when they [the two witnesses] have finished their testimony," that is, when they have finished prophesying clothed in sackcloth during the 1260 years, "the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them, and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified."

We must identify the "great city." Some readers equate it with the "holy city" of verse 2 and conclude that it is the literal city of Jerusalem, where Jesus was literally crucified. Revelation 21:2, however, identifies the "holy city" with New Jerusalem, not with the old city of Jerusalem. Says John, "I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

Many things in Revelation come to pairs of opposites. For instance, there are two insignia, the "seal of God" and the "mark of the beast." There are two resurrections, the first for the "blessed and holy," the second for everyone else. There are two mothers, one pure clothed in white, the other a harlot draped in red. Among still other pairs, there are two cities, the holy city and the great city. As we have just seen, the holy city is New Jerusalem. The other city, the great city, is Babylon. "Alas alas! thou great city thou mighty city, Babylon!" (Revelation 18:10. See also 18:2, 16, etc.)

We all know that a literal city of Babylon flourished back in Daniel's day. By John's time it was a ghost town, and it has never been an inhabited city since. Thus the "Babylon" of Revelation cannot be a literal city. It is a symbol of the vast community of people who, like Babylon of old, were to blaspheme God and persecute the true saints.

Consistency demands, therefore, that if Babylon is spiritual, representing a community of people, then also the Holy City mentioned in Revelation 11:2 also represents a God's spiritual people, who reflect and mirror their home, the literal city in heaven of which they are members of.

It makes no sense to have Spiritual Babylon in Revelation juxtaposed to Literal Jerusalem. NO! It would have to be Literal Babylon juxtaposed to Literal Jerusalem or Israel. But, it is not so! It must be Spiritual Babylon juxtaposed to Spiritual Jerusalem or Israel! Consistency DEMANDS this sound hermeneutical principle.

Now it is true that the New Jerusalem is called the "great city" in Revelation 21:10. But it is qualified with the phrase "the holy Jerusalem" right after. That is the same as "holy city". It is the same also as the "Beloved City".

Those Christians who are looking to the Middle East for fulfillment of God's promises to Israel will, sadly, be EXTREMELY disappointed. For that is the Devil's COUNTERFEIT prophecy, preventing God's people from discerning spiritual things, and viewing the prophetic declarations through carnal lenses of grotesque literalism!

Going back to the "great city", we must emphasize--Babylon is primarily noted as the "great city". Unequivocally! But it is a counterfeit to God's city, the REAL and TRUE "GREAT CITY". But not the Old Jerusalem!

THE OLD JERUSALEM HAS BEEN CAST OUT!!!

• 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

  4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

  4:27 For it is written, Rejoice, [thou] barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

  4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

  4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now.

  4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. (Galatians 4:24-30)

Thus we see that since the Old Jerusalem has already been "cast out", the Jerusalem in Revelation can no longer be in consideration when John wrote the book.

The proof is in the pudding . The Adventist-Historicist methodology is based on sound exegetical and Biblical data which our critics must come to grips with.

Jesuit Futurism and Preterism are the two great lies that emanate from the mouth of the Great Hermetic Dragon. And these spurious theologies which numerous evengelicals and ex-Adventists are espousing are nothing but Jesuit manufactured theologies to OFFSET the sound historicist principles established by our Godly reformers of old who God used to place the brand of Antichrist on the great false religious System of the Papacy.

(Continue to Part 2)

[Lysimachus]

PART 2:

Question: But what about Jerusalem becoming "Babylon"? you ask? Isn't the Old Jerusalem "Babylon"? Since that "great city" is where our Lord was "crucified", shouldn't "Babylon" be the Old Jerusalem?

NO!

None of the above means anything anymore at this point after I have laid down the proper Biblical rules of prophetic interpretation. Old Jerusalem was NOT Babylon itself, but Old Jerusalem became a harlot to Babylon. Babylon was Rome, both Pagan and Papal. Jerusalem became a part of Babylon by joining hands with Babylon, and committing fornication with her.

• "How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers." (Isaiah 1:21)

  "They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD." (Jeremiah 3:1)

Babylon is the MOTHER of harlots. Jerusalem became a DAUGHTER. You cannot exegetically equate Old Jerusalem as being the Mother Harlot. She became a daughter.

Old Jerusalem became a type of the great apostasy that would envelope the whole world in the last days, and that is why John the Revelator takes much Old Testament Local Typology, and redefines it on a global-world-wide-spiritual-basis.

The court of the sanctuary represents the world. That is where the Lamb was crucified--in the court. The Sanctuary temple structure itself represented the heavenly sanctuary.

Who are the "nations" in the "court outside"? Revelation 11:2 speaks of "nations" who occupy the "court outside the temple." First off we ought to know that the word translated "nations" is the same word translated over ninety times in the New Testament as "Gentiles." The venerable King James Version and such modern ones as the New English Bible and the New International Version do, in fact, use the word Gentiles in translating this passage.

The translation "Gentiles" helps immediately when we learn that in the New Testament times the great temple in Jerusalem included inner courts where only Jews could worship, and a large outer court, for devout Gentiles who desired to worship God. (The low wall separating the Gentile court from the Jewish courts is referred to symbolically in Ephesians 2:14.)

Now, in Revelation 11 the Gentiles who come to worship in the outer court "trample" for 1260 years on the "holy city", which we have come to see, above represents the community of righteous people. At once we are reminded of the little horn of Daniel 7, which was to persecute the saints during the same period, and of the little horn of Daniel 8, which "trampled" on the "host." These little horns principally represent the bad side of Christianity during the Middle Ages and later. In as much as the "gentiles" (or "nations") in Revelation 11 are in the outer court, we know they are worshipers of God. This encourages our interpretation that they represent a kind of Christian.

The Gentiles, or nations, then, are the same as the citizens of the great city, who crucify Christ by apostatizing from genuine worship. Thus we find symbolized the opposition of the great city against the holy city. We also find a distinction between the true worshipers who are in the inner court, and the others who worship in the outer court. John is told to "measure" the inner worshipers, along with the temple itself and its altar. But he is told to "leave out" the other worshipers. The underlying Greek word actually suggest a stronger translation, "throw out," or "discard." A judgment is involved, separating true Christians from people who merely profess to be Christians. There is much more that can be said of this judgment in Revelation 14:6,8.

We must conclude, therefore, that the "nations" or "Gentiles" of Revelation 11:2 are Christians who do not live up to their profession and who harass other Christians who do.

Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. These prophecies will never be understood as long as they literalize them and read them in chronological order..

The issues in Revelation pertain to a global, world-wide Great Controversy between Christ and Satan, and John the Revelator takes Old Testament Jerusalem and local Palestinian settings in their local vicinity to serve as a "type" of the world-wide spiritual conflict between good and evil. He lifts them out of their local typological settings and redefines them in their Antitypical, world-wide settings in the book of Revelation.

As I have demonstrated, our Preterist and Futurist critics have taken Types and gone back to Types.

With their Jesuit Psuedepigraphal mythology splattered all over God's Holy Writ, they violate the sound Biblical hermeneutical principles of prophetic interpretation. With their shaky foundation, types always end up going back to types, local always ends up going to local, and literal always ends up going back to literal.

But God's rules are thus:

Types point forward to Antitypes, Local points forward to Global, and Literal points forward to Spiritual.

I will pray that the Lord will help them to wake up from the theological quagmire which they have inadvertently fallen.

God bless,

Lysimachus

[cheddar]

How Rude. Your posts are like a book…I don’t have time to read all that.

[cheddar]

I'm just a learner, so I would like to know more about your views. However, let me raise just a few questions for now.

1. Where does the Bible say that the temple will again be rebuilt?

2. How did you come about identifying the woman that rides the beast as Jerusalem?

3. Or the head that received a deadly wound that was healed as being Judaism?

1a) Matt. 24 – the AOD happens in the temple just prior to the great tribulation/time of trouble. This event ushers in the time of trouble with the 7 last plagues and 2nd coming. No amount of verse twisting can make this temple into the one that was destroyed in 70AD.

In 2nd Thess. 2 the man of sin sits in the temple of God showing that he is God – another reference to the AOD. The pope never sat in a Jewish temple and only claimed to be the representative of God. Satan will actually sit in the temple and claim to be God.

c) Dan. 11 – the final king of the north will plant the tabernacles of his palace in Jerusalem. This is the same power who removes the daily and sets up the AOD which is separated by 1290 days.

2) Babylon is identified as the great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth (Rev. 17). In Rev. 11 the great city is the place where Jesus was crucified. If you read thru the symbology of the old testament – Jerusalem (Israel) was often compared to a beautiful woman when she was faithful to God and a whore or harlot when she fell into idolatry (Isa. 54, Jer. 3, Eze. 16, Hos. 2). There are two great cities mentioned in Revelation, one is the harlot Babylon and the other is the new Jerusalem which descends out of heaven.

3) There are seven heads of the beast which are identified as mountains (places of worship) or kings. Five are fallen, one is and the other is not yet come. The five that I see fallen are: Judaism, Islam, Eastern mysticism, Atheism and Paganism. Christianity is the one that is and some kind of new world order will be the one that is to come. Any of the five could be said to have received a deadly wound but only Judaism and especially Jerusalem will regain much of its former glory.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

I'm just a learner, so I would like to know more about your views. However, let me raise just a few questions for now.

1. Where does the Bible say that the temple will again be rebuilt?

2. How did you come about identifying the woman that rides the beast as Jerusalem?

3. Or the head that received a deadly wound that was healed as being Judaism?

1a) Matt. 24 – the AOD happens in the temple just prior to the great tribulation/time of trouble. This event ushers in the time of trouble with the 7 last plagues and 2nd coming. No amount of verse twisting can make this temple into the one that was destroyed in 70AD.

This is your evidence that another temple will be rebuilt? And what the Romans did to the temple in Jerusalem by completely razing it does not qualify as an abominable desolation?

When the prophet Daniel said, "“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place," Dan 9:24 NASB, Israel as a nation had 490 years of probation. Look at the Parable of the Vineyard in Mt 21:33-41. Israel did not produce the fruit and the vineyard was given to other tenants.

Here is what the Lord had to say to Israel:

‎‎Lk 13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! ‎‎35 Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’ ”

Quote:

In 2nd Thess. 2 the man of sin sits in the temple of God showing that he is God – another reference to the AOD. The pope never sat in a Jewish temple and only claimed to be the representative of God. Satan will actually sit in the temple and claim to be God.

Me thinks the error in the above statement is equating the "temple of God" solely with the Jewish temple! According to Eph 2:21, the body of Christ, the Church, is also God's holy temple. I would be happy to get you all the boastful claims of the papacy in this regard.

I will deal with the rest in a later post.

[phkrause]

Gerry great post.

[cheddar]

This is your evidence that another temple will be rebuilt? And what the Romans did to the temple in Jerusalem by completely razing it does not qualify as an abominable desolation?

No!

Show where the little horn removed the daily 1290 days or years prior.

Are you familiar with the 1290 day prophecy in Dan. 12? - or are you just a one verse pony?

[cheddar]

Me thinks the error in the above statement is equating the "temple of God" solely with the Jewish temple! According to Eph 2:21, the body of Christ, the Church, is also God's holy temple. I would be happy to get you all the boastful claims of the papacy in this regard.

The man of sin is destroyed at the 2nd coming and performs signs and lying wonders.

Will the pope perform more miracles than Satan? I guess the pope is so powerful that he tells Satan what to do. lol

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

This is your evidence that another temple will be rebuilt? And what the Romans did to the temple in Jerusalem by completely razing it does not qualify as an abominable desolation?

No!

Show where the little horn removed the daily 1290 days or years prior.

Are you familiar with the 1290 day prophecy in Dan. 12? - or are you just a one verse pony?

The "daily" and "abomination of desolation" associated with Daniel 12 have nothing to do with the "abomination of desolation" of Daniel 9:24-27.

Two completely and totally different time periods, and different abominations of desolations. The "abomination of desolation spoken by the prophet" that Jesus was referring to was the one in Daniel 9, not Daniel 12.

[Gerr]

Post corrected ...

Forget prophecy; believe Christ.

I believe Christ, that's why I take prophecy seriously.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Me thinks the error in the above statement is equating the "temple of God" solely with the Jewish temple! According to Eph 2:21, the body of Christ, the Church, is also God's holy temple. I would be happy to get you all the boastful claims of the papacy in this regard.

The man of sin is destroyed at the 2nd coming and performs signs and lying wonders.

Will the pope perform more miracles than Satan? I guess the pope is so powerful that he tells Satan what to do. lol

Agreed that the "man of sin" is destroyed at the Second Coming.

Agreed that the ultimate antichrist is Satan. But Satan does not personally appear to men. He uses a front. In Rev 13 the dragon (Satan) "gave his power and his throne and great authority" to the beast (earthly power). When the beast is worshiped, this is tantamount to worshiping the dragon, Rev 13:4. John said the spirit of the antichrist was already in the world during his day. But there is a specific power that he was refering to in the one of the 7 heads that received a deadly wound but recovered.

The power behind all rebellious earthly gov'ts is Satan. But Satan is not destroyed until AFTER the millenium, Rev 20. So the "man of sin" and Satan cannot possibly be identical, although the former is the front of the latter.

[Gustave]

I believe Christ, that's why I take prophecy seriously

Then why do you retain the Arian teaching that Christ could have sinned & eternally ceased to exist?

...When Prophecy X 200 said that couldn't happen?

1 Cor 15,3

For I delivered unto you first of ALL that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins ACCORDING to the scriptures; AND that he was buried, AND that he rose again the third day ACCORDING to the scriptures

Do you not believe when the Prophets said X, Y, & Z would happen to the Christ...

...That those things were not "Prophecy"?

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

This is your evidence that another temple will be rebuilt? And what the Romans did to the temple in Jerusalem by completely razing it does not qualify as an abominable desolation?

No!

Then show what does!

Quote:

Show where the little horn removed the daily 1290 days or years prior.

Are you familiar with the 1290 day prophecy in Dan. 12? - or are you just a one verse pony?

Yes, I have read it, but I had to lay it aside for a looong time because I could not make heads or tails. It is only now that I am taking another look at Daniel but I am only at chapter 8. So tell me how you understand chapter 12 and the 1290 & 1335 days/years.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

I believe Christ, that's why I take prophecy seriously

Then why do you retain the Arian teaching that Christ could have sinned & eternally ceased to exist?

...When Prophecy X 200 said that couldn't happen?

If there is no possibility whatsoever that Christ could have failed, that He could have succumbed to Satan's temptations, then He could not have been the second Adam. He could not have been man's substitute. His incarnation would have been nothing but a charade.

Quote:

1 Cor 15,3

For I delivered unto you first of ALL that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins ACCORDING to the scriptures; AND that he was buried, AND that he rose again the third day ACCORDING to the scriptures

Do you not believe when the Prophets said X, Y, & Z would happen to the Christ...

...That those things were not "Prophecy"?

The prophets foresaw that He would succeed!!!

[Lysimachus]

GE:

These are questions evoked in your mind by indoctrination...

I consider it a great insult when you use terminology like this SD. You act as though simply because many of us have been raised Seventh-Day Adventist, that this means were were "indoctrinated". Well I won't take this insult you have put forth against us sitting down.

I may just as well charge you with the same, that you have been indoctrinated by evangelical thinking, and fused with with some elements of Adventism who's legacy was handed down to you, and this is why you accept portions of Adventism but not all of it. You want to only go "so far", but you won't embrace the whole thing. Had it not been for Adventism, who knows where you'd be in your beliefs. The knowledge of the Sabbath has spread across the globe BECAUSE of SDA's.

Men like Gerry and myself do not believe the way we do because we have been "indoctrinated". Oh no sirreee! Our conclusions are based on our YEARS of careful Biblical research. Speaking for myself, I did not know what I believed until within the last 10 years or so. I studied with an open-mind, and after thoroughly studying what the scriptures had to say, my conclusions happened to line up with the historic foundations of Adventism.

These messages are truly "most precious", and hold an INESTIMABLE value which the world, including you, do not see, nor want to see.

[cheddar]

Yes, I have read it, but I had to lay it aside for a looong time because I could not make heads or tails. It is only now that I am taking another look at Daniel but I am only at chapter 8. So tell me how you understand chapter 12 and the 1290 & 1335 days/years.

The problem with making 70AD out to be the abomination of desolation is that the little horn would have to be in existence at that time.

You don't see the conflict? The little horn is the one who sets up the abomination. Most historicists identify the little horn as the papacy and there was no papacy in 70AD.

Therefore 70AD is not the abomination of desolation. Jesus said that this event happens in the temple just prior to the time of trouble so a third temple is the only possible scenario.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Yes, I have read it, but I had to lay it aside for a looong time because I could not make heads or tails. It is only now that I am taking another look at Daniel but I am only at chapter 8. So tell me how you understand chapter 12 and the 1290 & 1335 days/years.

The problem with making 70AD out to be the abomination of desolation is that the little horn would have to be in existence at that time.

But the "little horn" of Dan 8 was already in existence long before 70 AD! Recall that in Dan 8, there was the vision of the ram with 2 horns, one higher than the other. Gabriel explained that this beast represented Media & Persia. And the goat was interpreted as the kingdom of Greece. The great horn between its eyes that was broken was interpreted as the first king of that empire. All the commentaries I have consulted are unanimous in interpreting this to be Alexander the Great. When this great horn was broken, 4 "conspicuous horns toward the 4 winds of heaven" took its place. History shows that the empire of Alexander was divided among his 4 generals.

Daniel then relates that "out of one of them came a little horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the glorious land, etc." Dan 8:9 ESV. Unfortunately, it is rather ambiguous what "them" refer to. Does the little horn come out of the 4 winds? or does it come out of one of the 4 horns? I have over a dozen non-SDA commentaries that unanimously hold that this little horn was Antiochus Epiphanes. SDAs reject this. (Thus my opening post.) The reasons for rejecting this have been brought out in other posts.

Quote:

You don't see the conflict? The little horn is the one who sets up the abomination. Most historicists identify the little horn as the papacy and there was no papacy in 70AD.

I believe most historicists identify the little horn with Rome. I personally think it is Rome in its pagan & papal phase. Dan 2 & 7 showed the succession of 4 world empires - Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, & Rome. It would be extremely illogical for me to think that the next power succeeding the Hellenist Empire (the little horn), would be anything other than Rome. Rome in its pagan phase surrounded Jerusalem with their pagan standards and then razed the literal temple in 70 AD. You are right that the papacy was not in existence in 70 AD. BUT, when the Roman empire disintegrated as depicted in the 2 legs and 10 toes division of Dan 2, and the 10 horns + the stout little horn of Dan 7, the phoenix that arose from its ashes was the papacy. History clearly confirms this. What sanctuary did the papacy cast down? By instituting the papal priesthood & the mass, the papacy effectively usurped Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.

Quote:

Therefore 70AD is not the abomination of desolation. Jesus said that this event happens in the temple just prior to the time of trouble so a third temple is the only possible scenario.

It seems very clear to me that pagan Rome was the "abomination of desolation" in Mt 24. Jesus warned the Christians that when they saw it, they were to flee. The Christians did just that when they saw the Roman standards surrounding Jerusalem.

BTW, that's a lot of supposition to arrive at a third temple without one verse to back it up.

[phkrause]

Gerry, great post, this has been my observation's also. Between the prophecies of the Bible, EGWs GC and history, it seems to add up pretty much.

[Guest DennisKean]

Quote:

The problem with making 70AD out to be the abomination of desolation is that the little horn would have to be in existence at that time.

This is correct. It is simply impossible that the temple in Jerusalem was the one which was spoken of in the prophecy of Mat 24:

• 15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

The reason is that the HOLY PLACE was no longer holy when the Shikainah left at the moment the Savior Died. At that time the sacrificing stopped and it was an abomination to offer sacrifices in that place any more. God did all He could to convey to them not to continue their sacrificing in that place. So that place was no longer a holy place, because God left it!.

But positioning the Abomination of Desolation to our days is just as impossible. The reality is that the Savior was speaking in parables as he always has. And the Holy Place was moved somewhere else, as Daniel was told in chapter 9. Let's read it:

• 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, where did it go??? Israel was given 70 weeks to figure this out! And they failed to figure it out! But the Savior came and told the people how to worship God from then onward. And here is a comment on that from the Savior:

Quote:

20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

So, where, where are people supposed to worship the Father.

The Savior taught them to pray to the Father directly, no longer interacting with a symbolic intercessor like the priest. Why? Because He was now their priest. So they could approach Father on their own in the name of the Savior!!! That was the idea behind the entire symbolism of the priests and their sacrificing. So, the Temple in Jerusalem was replaced and by recognizing that they can approach God directly the people were able to ANOINT THE MOST HOLY. Anointing is done at the beginning of the process. So this had to be a new thing by default.

Now, about the Abomination of Desolation being placed in the Holy place and removing the Daily, my friends. The Daily represented the activity of the Savior on daily basis. Men pray and the Savior intercedes for them daily.

But the Roman Church figured out the nexus of the Christian faith and positioned itself right where the Daily was supposed to be. They decided to do this as an economic engagement to extort monies from the guilt ridden Christians and the Abominable Desolate was put in the place where the Daily was supposed to be.

And that transpired in the year 538 when the church officially began its religious dictums over the state and its populace. So this did not transpire in 70 AD, but in 538AD.

And that little horn, in chapter 8 is not the same little horn spoken of elsewhere. That little horn was ROME. How do we know that? We know that because it says that this little horn waxed exceeding GREAT, unlike the other one! And it also tells you the very extents of its expansion, which only ROME could have done. Let's read it:

• 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.

If you try to defend either of your views you will never stop oscillating. You will find some arguments for one idea, but it will not fit well enough. And then you can find some arguments for the other, but again no beans!

In this manner you will find far more befitting details and you will solve many other incomprehensible points which to date have been a mystery. One of those is the following, which I will leave to you to figure out.

• 43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

  44 But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.

Or you can ask me if it is too abstruse. I will gladly try to give you my perspective.

This is a very interesting discussion! Thanx for starting this up.

Regards,

[jacksdad]

Hello,

I'm new to this, and have just quickly read the ten messages concerning the "little Horn," "abomination of desolation," and the comments about futurism and historicism. All those who made comments are obviously set pretty solid in their beliefs. I would like to share something, and would ask only the hardest thing in the world - that as you pray and meditate on what you are about to read, that you set self aside.

God be with you,

Pastorick

Daniel 8:11-14 reads:

8:11 Yea, he magnified [himself] even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily [sacrifice] was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.

8:12 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 practiced, and prospered.

8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain [saint] which spake, How long [shall be] the vision [concerning] the daily [sacrifice], and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Consider this - When translated properly, verse 11 reads: Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and FROM him the daily was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. That's from Christ!

What this is saying is that Satan took the "continual," Christ's Holy Place ministry in the heavenly sanctuary "FROM HIM," who is the Prince of the Host, casting it to the ground, replacing it with the papal mass.

In verse 13, the words "How long" should read "Until when"? The question is - until when will Satan's counterfeit - papal mass, obscure the truth of Christ's Heavenly - continual - Holy Place ministry, deceiving the world?

The answer - 1844, after 2300 years, when the "temple of God is opened in Heaven, Rev. 11:19, exposing the world to the light from inside the ark of the covenant, the two tables of stone where the Lord wrote with His own finger, the eternal and everlasting law of God.

Psalms 111:7,8 "The works of his hands [are] verity and judgment; all his commandments [are] sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, [and are] done in truth and uprightness."

Rev. 22:14 "Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."