SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:idunno:
ECT The Rebellion that Desolates
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
- Status
:idunno:
Interplanner
Well-known member
You would think he would at least retract the brick. Since what Paul is saying is totally clear.
Right Divider
Body part
Dan 8:13 (AKJV/PCE)
(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?
IP the Fabulous ASSUMES (due to his pushing HIS "interp" upon the Bible) that this "transgression" refers to Israel rebelling against Rome. What a loon!
The following verse helps clarify what the Daniel really means and it does NOT match with IP's vain machinations.
Dan 8:14 (AKJV/PCE)
(8:14) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The sanctuary is the Temple and it will be cleansed and NOT destroyed.
The word used for CLEANSED is:
H6663 צָדַק tsadaq (tsaw-dak') v.
1. to be right (in a moral or forensic sense).
2. (causatively) to make right (in a moral or forensic sense).
[a primitive root]
KJV: cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just(-ice, -ify, -ify self), (be turn to) righteous(-ness).
It is quite clear that the "rebellion" is against GOD and not Rome.
Why does Rome care about the desecration of the Temple?
Jesus also clarified this quite nicely:
Matt 24:15 (AKJV/PCE)
(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 abomination of desolation is STANDING in the holy place....
Too clear and simple for "real writer and grammar scholar" to understand.
Dan 8:13 (AKJV/PCE)(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?
IP the Fabulous ASSUMES (due to his pushing HIS "interp" upon the Bible) that this "transgression" refers to Israel rebelling against Rome. What a loon!
The following verse helps clarify what the Daniel really means and it does NOT match with IP's vain machinations.
Dan 8:14 (AKJV/PCE)(8:14) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The sanctuary is the Temple and it will be cleansed and NOT destroyed.
The word used for CLEANSED is:H6663 צָדַק tsadaq (tsaw-dak') v.1. to be right (in a moral or forensic sense).2. (causatively) to make right (in a moral or forensic sense).[a primitive root]KJV: cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just(-ice, -ify, -ify self), (be turn to) righteous(-ness).
It is quite clear that the "rebellion" is against GOD and not Rome.
Why does Rome care about the desecration of the Temple?
Jesus also clarified this quite nicely:
Matt 24:15 (AKJV/PCE)(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 abomination of desolation is STANDING in the holy place....
Too clear and simple for "real writer and grammar scholar" to understand.
Yep.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Dan 8:13 (AKJV/PCE)(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?
IP the Fabulous ASSUMES (due to his pushing HIS "interp" upon the Bible) that this "transgression" refers to Israel rebelling against Rome. What a loon!
The following verse helps clarify what the Daniel really means and it does NOT match with IP's vain machinations.
Dan 8:14 (AKJV/PCE)(8:14) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The sanctuary is the Temple and it will be cleansed and NOT destroyed.
The word used for CLEANSED is:H6663 צָדַק tsadaq (tsaw-dak') v.1. to be right (in a moral or forensic sense).2. (causatively) to make right (in a moral or forensic sense).[a primitive root]KJV: cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just(-ice, -ify, -ify self), (be turn to) righteous(-ness).
It is quite clear that the "rebellion" is against GOD and not Rome.
Why does Rome care about the desecration of the Temple?
Jesus also clarified this quite nicely:
Matt 24:15 (AKJV/PCE)(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 abomination of desolation is STANDING in the holy place....
Too clear and simple for "real writer and grammar scholar" to understand.
Yes sir.
IP does not want the abomination of desolation to be what the Bible says that it is.
Hath God said?
It's wicked.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You do not know the abomination of desolation from a hole in the ground.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Dan 8:13 (AKJV/PCE)(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?
IP the Fabulous ASSUMES (due to his pushing HIS "interp" upon the Bible) that this "transgression" refers to Israel rebelling against Rome. What a loon!
The following verse helps clarify what the Daniel really means and it does NOT match with IP's vain machinations.
Dan 8:14 (AKJV/PCE)(8:14) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
The sanctuary is the Temple and it will be cleansed and NOT destroyed.
The word used for CLEANSED is:H6663 צָדַק tsadaq (tsaw-dak') v.1. to be right (in a moral or forensic sense).2. (causatively) to make right (in a moral or forensic sense).[a primitive root]KJV: cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just(-ice, -ify, -ify self), (be turn to) righteous(-ness).
It is quite clear that the "rebellion" is against GOD and not Rome.
Why does Rome care about the desecration of the Temple?
Jesus also clarified this quite nicely:
Matt 24:15 (AKJV/PCE)(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 abomination of desolation is STANDING in the holy place....
Too clear and simple for "real writer and grammar scholar" to understand.
Sorry, but you missed most of it.
The rebellion is against Rome because there was no need to fight for the independence of Israel. The mission of Christ was going to be able to go all over the world with Roman technology. Israel rebelled against God and Christ, but by doing so pit themselves against Rome to fight for Israel. Notice how many times, even I Pet 2B, that Christians are not to bother with rebellion against Rome. Rom 13. Acts 21.
You won't understand this until you allow yourself more knowledge of the 1st century , which is a sin.
Christ succeeded in cleansing the sanctuary in his Gospel; his redemptive accomplishments are listed there in Dan 9.
The abomination expression starts as a rebellion that desolates. Call it a transgression if you like. The point from the entire chapter is that the rebellion would peak and ruin the country. There is no arguing that.
The person (the AofD) was the leader of that rebellion. Just read the history. It is plain to see what happened. They all did it claiming God's intervention and signs and wonders and even claiming to be Messiah.
Your arguments are a piece of cake to dismantle, but go ahead.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The cleansing of the temple is addressed in: "to atone for wickedness...to anoint the most holy..." which is language that shows up again in Heb 9:12.
But you'd have to be a student of the 2500 uses of the OT to see that...
But you'd have to be a student of the 2500 uses of the OT to see that...
Right Divider
Body part
No, I did not.
More subjectivist, humanist, self-think.
:dizzy:
:rotfl:
You really are completely insane.
I'll just go with what the Bible says.
That's exactly your problem. You call things anything that you like.
Your arguments dismantle themselves.
Interplanner
Well-known member
So you must think Christ was on the side of zealot rebels all through his career and advocated that to the disciples.
Interplanner
Well-known member
RD,
since I don't accept your dictates--whether theology or vocab or even contemporary words--you might want to find another way to communicate. ie, if you dictate it, I don't pay any attention. As soon as you have reasons for your beliefs, I will pay attention.
Since the rebellion in the middle of Dan 8 is the main event there, and desolates the country, I have no idea why you would object to 'the rebellion that desolates' earlier.
The reconsecrated temple referred to Christ's new covenant, heb 9-10.
since I don't accept your dictates--whether theology or vocab or even contemporary words--you might want to find another way to communicate. ie, if you dictate it, I don't pay any attention. As soon as you have reasons for your beliefs, I will pay attention.
Since the rebellion in the middle of Dan 8 is the main event there, and desolates the country, I have no idea why you would object to 'the rebellion that desolates' earlier.
The reconsecrated temple referred to Christ's new covenant, heb 9-10.
Right Divider
Body part
You think WRONG again.... what a surprise!
Right Divider
Body part
You never pay attention in the first place.
That's just nonsense that you got from a commentary.
Made up.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I'm not here to play 20 questions. Do you know how to communicate what you believe, or is it just a juvenile game?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
All made up.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
IP still does not know the abomination of desolation from a hole in the ground.
I cannot believe the fantasy island ideas he has about it. I'm shocked.
I cannot believe the fantasy island ideas he has about it. I'm shocked.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:idunno:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
IP's interpretation of the abomination of desolation is 100% fantasy.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I did read you here because I thought there might be some connection to the title of the other--rebellion.
Here's the problem: we have just one NT reference about the expression, by Christ, and it is smack in the middle of the circumstance of the Jewish revolt. So I for one can't budge from that. He also said it was happening in that generation. Those literal apostles would see those literal construction stones of those literal buildings dropped. It is not complicated.
Here's the problem: we have just one NT reference about the expression, by Christ, and it is smack in the middle of the circumstance of the Jewish revolt. So I for one can't budge from that. He also said it was happening in that generation. Those literal apostles would see those literal construction stones of those literal buildings dropped. It is not complicated.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Your interpretation of the abomination of desolation is pure fantasy.
- Status