The Abomination That Causes Desolation

reply to post by pthena
Thanks for joining in to the Daniel portion of the abomination that causes desolation topic.
I assume that you believe Jesus meant it just like you spelled out.
It is rather appropriate that according to Josephus, it was the Idumeans who caused the destruction of Jerusalem and was like Hezekiah who said, "as long as it does not happen in my lifetime." in that the last of the Hasmonean Kings allied himself to Antipater, the father of Herod.

reply to post by jmdewey60
You're welcome.

That last post of mine, somewhat of a rant, was after I wrote this on:
Good use of logic in the question of, Is God Real?,
I've really got no explanation for why people would want to mess with the OT.

reply to post by jmdewey60

It is rather appropriate that according to Josephus, it was the Idumeans who caused the destruction of Jerusalem and was like Hezekiah who said, "as long as it does not happen in my lifetime." in that the last of the Hasmonean Kings allied himself to Antipater, the father of Herod.

Then ultimately it falls back on Priest-King Messiah John Hyrcanus who forced at sword point the conversion of the Idumeans, in addition to destroying the temple of Shechem. Even at its absolute pinnacle of success, the Levite-led Judean state was just as much garbage as any other overreaching state.

Conquests of John Hyrcanus
Hyrcanus also raised a new mercenary army that strongly contrasted with the Judean forces that were defeated by Antiochus VII (Ant.13.257). The Jewish population was probably still recovering from the attack of Antiochus, and therefore could not provide enough able men for a Hyrcanus-led army.[8] Hyrcanus’ army was supported by the Judean State once again by funds that Hyrcanus removed from the Tomb of David.[10]

The whole wikipedia article is a must read. When things were bad, he looted David's tomb. When things were good, he looted David's tomb.
From the same article:

Destroying the Samaritan Temple on Mount Gerizim helped ameliorate Hyrcanus’ status among religious elite and common Jews who detested any Jewish(sic) temple outside of Jerusalem.

Destroying temples to earn favor huh! Maybe that's what Paul meant in Romans 2:22

I just can't resist this low hanging fruit: Last part of wikipedia article:

Tel Aviv has a Yochanan Hyrcanus Street (רחוב יוחנן הורקנוס), as do several other cities in contemporary Israel. In the early decades of the 20th century, the Zionist historical perception of the Jewish past tended to approve of and revere strong warrior kings of both Biblical and later periods, and Hyrcanus' exploits earned him a place in that pantheon.

I have not got much to say either on here, all I need to say is watch the news and see where it is all heading, if you think your religion or non religious views make sense then expand on it.

My faith warns me of what is to come, and the best ways to live with each other on earth and by over expressing certain issues starts to feel more like excessive expression than informed help in expanding knowledge for others.

We should all try and get along and typing does not always spell how we are as everyday people.

reply to post by pthena

As a pagan gentile, I really don't consider the Old Testament as anything but a source material for what some people once believed and taught. Of no value whatsoever in trying to live one's life by.

It is true that we are not under the Mosaic law, but this is still a part of the bible, it is historically important, as the Israelites were the chosen linage for Christ to arrive, the prophesies of the Old Testament are critical for identifying Jesus as the Messiah. If you just dismiss them, you do yourself a great disservice, for your own spirituality.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33
Allow me to deconstruct your post, but in reverse:

If you just dismiss them, you do yourself a great disservice, for your own spirituality.

I think my manner of writing shows evidence of one actually using the OT for a purpose of understanding

the prophesies of the Old Testament are critical for identifying Jesus as the Messiah

who now is gone, and the time of Messiah over,

it is historically important, as the Israelites were the chosen linage for Christ to arrive,

In whom, there is no longer Greek or Jew, nor male or female, nor slave or free.

but this is still a part of the bible

Which we are not under any longer along with

the Mosaic law

See, when read in reverse, we agree completely.

Christ be with you.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

. . .the prophesies of the Old Testament are critical for identifying Jesus as the Messiah.

I have to go with pthena on that because looking at the prophecy of Daniel it says that the anointing will be cut. The Jews had a parole of sorts and a specific time was allowed for that. That's why you see things like, "in the fullness of time..." because Jesus was there when the system came to an end. You have to wonder about the eternal messiah idea, and think about how we have the NT in Greek and they could have easily used Messiah, or a Greek version of the word but instead went with the word Christ.

reply to post by pthena


You have a fuzzy logic to your spiritual side, and your discounting the very book Jesus proclaimed.
True spirituality must come from a basic understanding of the scriptures, when this knowledge is attained then a person can make an informed choice. Sometimes the choice is not to believe. Actually some people become atheist after they read the bible from cover to cover.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33
I will explain the fuzziness a little later.

First I'd like to address the statement which implies that Jesus was proclaiming "the Book". Quoting from a book, while teaching in a culture thoroughly steeped in the book is not the same as proclaiming the book. His life and teaching demonstrated a quite radical departure from the book.

If he had been following the book, he would have joined in the stoning of the woman caught in adultery. He would have never touched a leper on his way to Jerusalem for a festival, then told the witnesses not to mention it (he would have been ritually unclean too long to participate).

In fact, Jesus proclaimed an ethic far beyond the ethics in the book.

True spirituality must come from a basic understanding of the scriptures,

Jesus didn't have his own sayings written down to guide him. He didn't have the writings of Paul, yet no one disputes that Jesus attained true spirituality.

when this knowledge is attained then a person can make an informed choice.

And the options you offer are:

Sometimes the choice is not to believe. Actually some people become atheist after they read the bible from cover to cover.

That would be a logical choice for some one not wanting to be bound to an obsolete bronze age notion of god. A logical choice for some one not wanting to kill people left and right for violating the dictates of a bronze age law. A logical choice for some one who can't see the logic in a perfectly good man dying to appease the wrath of a bronze age notion of god.

Now for the fuzziness of my spiritual logic. Not all people are free of this yet. I am a humanist. As long as humans take into themselves obsolete notions, I also am bound to consider obsolete notions, for that is part of the field of humanness.

reply to post by pthena


So do you, at the very least, believe in the record of Jesus life and teachings found in the four gospels in the bible?

reply to post by Blue_Jay33
I believe that his disciples made an honest attempt to recreate what they could remember of his life and teachings. Unfortunately, by the time they realized that the earth did not end in his generation, having mistaken the end of an age for the end of the world, many of the witnesses had died. And to further complicate matters, a religion had already formed around his teachings. Doctrinal matters were part of the selection process of what came to be written or not.

reply to post by jmdewey60


You speak nothing but lies and falsehoods. Christianity is not a religion and you even tried calling it a cult on another thread. Begone Satan!

reply to post by pthena


Well the great apostasy of doctrinal matters began AFTER the bible was completed, and after all the apostles of Jesus died. You discount and dismiss the Scriptures yet Jesus and the apostle Paul say the opposite.

If you won't respect or accept what the bible teaches on such matters, there is no way anything I say can help you to begin to see the glimmer of truth, you are dug in solid in your own fuzzy logic.

Please ponder and mediate on these 3 scriptures

2 Timothy 3:16

Every Scripture passage is inspired by God. All of them are useful for teaching, pointing out errors, correcting people, and training them for a life that has God's approval.

John 17:3

This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.

John 4:24

God is a Spirit (a spiritual Being) and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth (reality).

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

You speak nothing but lies and falsehoods. Christianity is not a religion and you even tried calling it a cult on another thread. Begone Satan!

I am saying you belong to a cult.
I was not saying Christianity is a cult. I have gone through this cult's ideology with your fellow cult member, NotYourTypical and you sound exactly like him.
You both also have this gimmick of saying you are not a religion.
Satan is the originator of your cult.
You should "be gone" from your cult if you want forgiveness of your sorcery.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

Well the great apostasy of doctrinal matters began AFTER the bible was completed, and after all the apostles of Jesus died. You discount and dismiss the Scriptures yet Jesus and the apostle Paul say the opposite.

I hesitantly point out then, that the majority of what Paul wrote was an attack against a different gospel creeping into the churches, specifically, the teaching that Gentiles are obliged to follow the Old Testament. And likewise, I&II John are concerned with erroneous teaching so far out that he calls it antichrist.

If the New Testament consists of battles against error, how then can you say that apostasy didn't occur until after it was all written? Apostasy and antichrist are already mentioned in I&II John, as existing already, before the completion of the Bible.

---------------------------------------------------
Let me define idolatry:

A man makes an image and says, "I don't worship the image, but the god that dwells within."
Years later people still say, "I don't worship the image, but the god that dwells within."

Some people build a temple and say, "This is god's house, we worship the god within."
Years later people still say, "This is god's house, we worship the god within."

The people who wrote what became the New Testament had no such idolatrous notions, yet:
Years later people say, "We don't worship the book, but the god that dwells within.

Most of the people who wrote the Old Testament actually were consciously creating a set of words to hold their god.

reply to post by pthena



I was going post yet another reply and looked up at the title of this thread and realized we have been off topic for some time, time to agree to disagree and get back on topic.

reply to post by pthena

Most of the people who wrote the Old Testament actually were consciously creating a set of words to hold their god.

There is a video on YouTube by the Ancient Hebrew Research Center where it explains the meaning of the name Israel. He concludes that it means, "he who is able to turn the head of God".

reply to post by jmdewey60

There is a video on YouTube by the Ancient Hebrew Research Center where it explains the meaning of the name Israel. He concludes that it means, "he who is able to turn the head of God".

I couldn't find the youtube you refer to, and didn't feel like listening to all of them to find it. However:

Israel (name)
Israel is a Biblical given name. The patriarch Jacob was given the name Israel (Hebrew: יִשְׂרָאֵל, Standard Yisraʾel Tiberian Yiśrāʾēl; "Struggled with God") after he wrestled with the angel (Genesis 32:28 and 35:10) The name already occurs in Eblaite and Ugaritic texts as a common name.[1] Commentators differ on the original literal meaning. Some say the name comes from the verb śarar ("to rule, be strong, have authority over"), thereby making the name mean "God rules" or "God judges".[2] Other possible meanings include "the prince of God" (from the King James Version) or "El fights/struggles".[3]

Eblaite language
is an extinct Semitic language, which was spoken in the 3rd millennium BC in the ancient city of Ebla, at Tell Mardikh (تل مرديخ), between Aleppo and Hama, in western modern Syria.

The language is known from about 5,000 tablets written with cuneiform script which were found between 1974 and 1976 in the ruins of the city of Ebla. The tablets were first translated by Giovanni Pettinato.

Eblaite is an Eastern Semitic language like Akkadian, indeed it may be identical to pre-Sargonic Akkadian.

Ugaritic language
known only in the form of writings found in the lost city of Ugarit (modern Ras Shamra), Syria.[1] It has been used by scholars of the Old Testament to clarify Biblical Hebrew texts and has revealed ways in which ancient Israelite culture finds parallels in the neighboring cultures.[1]

The Ugaritic language is attested in texts from the 14th through the 12th century BCE.[3] The city was destroyed in 1180–1170 BCE.

The Ugaritic alphabet is a cuneiform abjad (alphabet without vowels), used from around 15th century BCE. Although it appears similar to Mesopotamian cuneiform, it was unrelated (see Ugaritic alphabet). It is the oldest example of the family of West Semitic scripts that were used for Phoenician, Hebrew, and Aramaic

The word order for Ugaritic is verb–subject–object (VSO), possessed–possessor (NG), and noun–adjective (NA). Ugaritic is considered a conservative Semitic language, since it retains most of the Proto-Semitic phonemes, the case system and the word order of the Proto-Semitic ancestor.

So the name Israel existed way back in the 2000s BC, hence El has a much greater claim as the regional god than Yahweh.

There seems to be some ambiguity about grammar in the name. If VSO it would mean "struggling [someone] with El" If NG, then "Struggler [belongs to] El", if NA then "Struggler El[like]"

These would be possible meanings: Someone Struggling with God, God's Struggler, or Godlike Struggler.

If, on the other hand Assyrian influence perverts the meaning to "turning God's head" then that would indicate that El had been defeated and had a hook put in his face (as the Assyrians were known for) or a ring put in the nose of the Bull.

Then did the Israelites think of themselves as those who could lead El around by the nose?

reply to post by pthena

Then did the Israelites think of themselves as those who could lead El around by the nose?

The guy behind the video is an author who I had at least one of his books on my wish list on Amazon.
I think he leaves this as the most likely explanation but in more acceptable type of wording for the sake of the pious listener.
I will have to see if I can find that video again.

I was doing a Google search using the search term, "God broke the covenant" and found a site called "The Seven Seals" which explained a covenant of God and what it would take to cause God to break it. It quotes a passage, which I will quote, from the NETBible version:

Jeremiah 33:19 The Lord spoke further to Jeremiah. 33:20 “I, Lord, make the following promise: ‘I have made a covenant with the day and with the night that they will always come at their proper times. Only if you people could break that covenant 33:21 could my covenant with my servant David and my covenant with the Levites ever be broken. So David will by all means always have a descendant to occupy his throne as king and the Levites will by all means always have priests who will minister before me. 33:22 I will make the children who follow one another in the line of my servant David very numerous.

The author of the web site goes on to describe a period of darkness during Jesus' crucifixion which lasted into the hours, then claims this fulfilled the prophecy.
I thought this was interesting since I seem to be one of the few people I can find who will come out to present this concept of God breaking covenant, though it is the theme of several OT prophecies.
Notice in the quoted passage, where it says, "Only if you people . . . ", well it seems that it did happen and would be a combined effort between Jesus, the Romans, and the Temple officials.
(to find the right spot on the web site scroll down maybe two pages worth, before The Seven Seals, and under, Who Is Worthy?)