The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

In colonial Africa, a british governor had the arrogance to demand a tribal stool to sit upon. The end result was the deaths of many thousands of both tribesmen and british soldiers.
The very identity of the tribe was the issue with only their deity worthy to sit upon the stool.
For a gentile mind, the past offers many instances where a conquering general or king would enter an enemy's sanctuary to symbolize his victory over the people and their god.

So, having a gentile makes sense when it comes to identifying the identity or background of a future who will do the same in the end time.
There is only one problem, the temple has never seen an instance where its desecrated and left desolate by the hand of a gentile.

Now, if we were to look at the other alternative, we would see the following;
Daniel describes both the abomination and the rebellion that causes desolation.
Mannasseh erects an Ashera pole in the temple grounds tall enough to be seen from the outside, and misleads the people making them carry the guilt.
Three different prophecies state that God would destroy the temple and city because of what he had done.

You can only imagine the mindset of a future Hebrew leader that will be driven to do that one last sacriledge...

Have you never read of the desecrations of the temple by Antiochus IV or of Titus when he finally had the temple destroyed? While I take a futurist reading seriously I still also take the historical understanding seriously. I understand these former fulfillments to have only pointed ahead to the final ultimate fulfillment. I personally find the fulfillment in Manasseh scenario quite problematic...not least of which because Daniel is written AFTER Manasseh's reign and AFTER the destruction of the Temple and what Daniel wrote refers to what is yet to come (which would find soon fulfillment in the deeds of Antiochus IV). Not to mention that 1 Maccabees 6:7 refers to the "abomination" which Antiochus had erected. And Jesus statement about the "abomination that causes desolation" seems to have immediately referred to the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and most definitely NOT to Manasseh. I still await the final fulfillment, but see both of these prophecies as also fulfilled in their day.

_________________
Everyone is equal at the foot of the cross...just some are more equal than others.
Forum Code of Conduct
Bible.org Doctrinal Statement
rickwadholmjr.wordpress.com
iheartbarth.wordpress.com
bluechippastor.org
Twitter: @RickWadholmJr

Anti -- i agree with everything you posted except the bit colored here -- Luke speaks of this event while Matt/Mark do not

note: i've made this pt numerous times in here without much agreement but hey -- doesn't make me wrong

Perhaps I've missed what you've said before about Luke use of this...I'd love to hear it though.

_________________
Everyone is equal at the foot of the cross...just some are more equal than others.
Forum Code of Conduct
Bible.org Doctrinal Statement
rickwadholmjr.wordpress.com
iheartbarth.wordpress.com
bluechippastor.org
Twitter: @RickWadholmJr

Anti -- i'll cut & paste some response i've given in the past if that's ok...

Matt. 24:3 -- Jesus Speaking privately to His disciples @ the Mt of Olives
Mark 13:3 -- Jesus Speaking privately to 4 of His disciples @ the Mt of Olives

notice from the 2 Passages we conclude Jesus Speaking to only 4 people @ the Mt of Olives -- let's see if the Luke account tells us anything different -- Luke doesn't overtly mention in chap. 21 where they are so let's backtrack to see if we can clearly discern the location...

Luke 20:1 -- Jesus Speaking to the people @ the Temple with some of the Jewish leadership coming to test Him...
this continues thru-out the chapter as there is various Qs asked
Luke 20:45 -- Jesus still Speaking to the people...
Luke 21:1 -- a clue they are in the Temple
Luke 21:5-6 -- still appear to be @ the Temple...still surrounded by the people...Jesus is asked some Qs that lead to a similar setting to the 1 in Matt 24 & Mark 13

now what i see are 2 separate events -- the assumption is the Luke account describes events that happened earlier & 4 of the disciples came later that evening & asked Jesus for some more insight -- perhaps they did not understand His previous Answers -- perhaps they did not hear Him due to the crowds (the place was packed due to Passover)

we also have some added insights here: Luke 21:37-38 -- so we now have diff times in play as well

also, how far apart our the Mt of Olives & the Temple??? -- here's an illustration that helps (http://www.swaen.com/antique-map-image-of.php?id=1799) -- clearly, this is not in Jordan but it is a noticeable distance off -- so reading the Text, i conclude 2 separate events, @ 2 separate locations, to 2 distinct groups

1 thing that always bothered me when conversing with preterists was the fact thay clung to Luke 21 which appeared to describe the events of 70AD in part -- however, Matt 24 & Mark 13 did not in my estimation

Luke 21 & Matt 24 begin similarly but there is a divergence...

Luke 21:10-11 10 Then he said to them, “Nation will rise up in arms against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 There will be great earthquakes, and famines and plagues in various places, and there will be terrifying sights and great signs from heaven. Context (NET)

Matt 24:7-8 7 For nation will rise up in arms against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these things are the beginning of birth pains. Context (NET)

but look how each author continues:

Matt 24:9 9 “Then they will hand you over to be persecuted and will kill you. You will be hated by all the nations because of my name. Context (NET)

"Then..."

Luke 21:12 12 But before all this, they will seize you and persecute you, handing you over to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and governors because of my name. Context (NET)

"But before all this..."

it's as if Luke goes back in time from the period he & Matthew are talking about to add the bit about Jerusalem getting jacked up (again)

so it would be my contention that Luke describes Jerusalem being sacked in 70AD while Matt/Mark do not -- also, Luke 21:12-24 is not found in Matt 24/Mark 13 & the "abomination" stuff is not found in Luke 21