Recently I have been in a dialogue
online with a group of people who are espousing, in my mind, some
very strange and interesting interpretations of the abomination of
desolation of Daniel's 70th week. I tried to understand
their viewpoint and reasoning, but quite honestly it was so lacking
in coherence and logic that I found it difficult to follow.
Basically they held to a spiritualized interpretation of the event,
which in and of itself can lead to some very strange conclusions.
What I managed to gather that they believe is, first they do not
expect a real literal temple to be built. They believe that all
references to the temple in the New Testament must refer to the
Christian's body. Now this is not a totally uncommon theory, so I
was not completely surprised at this since they took a spiritualized
rather than literal approach to Scripture. Second, they feel that
the first half of the 70th week was Christ's ministry and
that his crucifixion was the abomination of desolation or rather the
first in a list of abominations that somehow they fit into this
mid-point (which according to this theory continues for the last 2000
years) of the 70th week. This is followed by another
literal three and a half year period beginning with a spiritualized
abomination of desolation initiated by the antichrist. Quite honestly
I found it very difficult to follow the ideas, as not only were they
a little obscure, but the manner in which the information was
delivered was very disjunct, peppered with oblique spiritual comments
that interrupted the flow of information, and a lack of reference
points for many comments to enable the reader to know the point
being discussed. I decided that even though I have written a very
detailed Bible study on Daniel in my endtimes blog, I needed to write
something on this subject alone, just out of a need to purge my pure
frustration, in that when I tried to discuss taking a literal
approach to these Scriptures with them, they could not see any logic
to what I was saying. Quite frankly this puzzled me, as I merely
took the verses at face value and in order, as I believe God wants us
to take them. So for my own benefit and hopefully the reader's, I
would like to look at the Scriptures surrounding the temple and the
abomination of desolation to see if they are literal things or just
ideas which have no material substance, as this group insisted.
I think a good place to start is with
the New Testament references to anything having to do with the temple
or abomination of desolation, as Daniel was sealed until the end of
the age, while the New Testament Scriptures were not, so we need to
see how we should understand the temple and abomination in the New
Testament first, then reference back to Daniel as Christ told us to
do.
Matthew 24:15-21 “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:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the
mountains. Let him which is on the housetop not come down to
take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the
field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are
with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye
that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the
beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.”
Mark 13:14-19 “But when ye shall
see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet,
standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then
let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains. And let him
that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter
therein, to take any thing out of his house: And let him that is in
the field not turn back again for to take up his garment. But woe to
them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter. For in those days
shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the
creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.”
Luke 21:20-23 “And when ye shall
see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation
thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the
mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and
let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be
the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be
fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that
give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the
land, and wrath upon this people. ”
2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 “Let no man
deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there
come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son
of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is
called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the
temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.”
Revelation 11:1-2 “ And there was
given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise,
and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship
therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and
measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city
shall they tread under foot forty and two months.”
What do all of these verses say? First
in Matthew we are told there will be an (singular) abomination of
desolation. It is the
abomination of desolation, not a list of abominations as some might
believe. Second we are told that this abomination is referenced in
Daniel, so when we go to Daniel we should expect to find some
reference to a particular abomination. Now this is important to
remember, for there are references in Daniel to abominations as in
plural events, but this is one specific event which stands out from
the rest. The Greek word for “abomination” is “bdelugma”
meaning a detestable thing of idolatry. The Greek word for
“desolation” is “eremosis” which is derived from a word which
means “to lay waste.” Next we are told that we
will see this abomination. Christ is talking to His disciples who
were believers. Therefore we must understand that 1) since He was
talking to His followers, by extension He is talking to us, and 2)
since only Christians study the New Testament, the information in
this passage does apply to Christians, as the gospels were written
for believers. Then it must also follow that as in this passage He
is speaking to those who live in Judea (now the West Bank), He must
also be speaking about unbelieving Jews as well. Therefore the
conclusion must be that this passage is not meant strictly for Jews
or Christians, but for the entire world, Jews and Gentiles alike.
Antichrist's blasphemous act will affect the entire world. However
only Christians who study this will have foreknowledge of the event.
Which then brings us to the conclusion that if Jews should know to
flee, if this information was also for them, there must be something
other than the New Testament which clues them in. Christ gave us the
answer to that problem when He referenced Daniel, which Jews would
know and therefore recognize this event as something from their
history.
Next
we are told that we will see this
event. That seems fairly straightforward and understandable as is,
but there are those who actually reinterpret this word to mean
something other than “to see,” so we need to study what is meant
by the word “see.” The Greek word for “see” is “eido”
which means “to see literally, or to know about or be aware of.”
The entire world will either see or be made aware that this event has
transpired. This abomination will stand
in a holy place. The Greek word for “stand” is “histemi”
which means “to stand” as in being established. It can be meant
either literally, as something is set up, or it can be meant
figuratively as in something will be established (such as a rule that
must be obeyed). Then we are told that this detestable thing of
idolatry will be established in a holy place.
The word for “holy” is “hagios” meaning sacred and the word
for “place” is “topos” meaning spot or location, but in the
sense of a very limited space or place, not in a general area. In
other words, a very particular spot in a place such as a room or
street corner, that sort of idea. So to recap, we are told that when
we (everyone in the world) literally see and become aware of a
detestable object of idolatry which will lay waste and desecrate the
sacred spot (think a location as in the size of a room or so and the
only sacred spot of God is found on the temple mount), those in
Judea should flee to the mountains as quickly as possible from
wherever they are without even returning home to grab their things,
for then there will be great tribulation such as the world has never
seen before. He tells those of us who study the gospels (whoso
readeth) that we should look to the book of Daniel to reference this
event (let him understand) and realize in advance what will happen.
Now Christ makes a
very deliberate point of saying that the reader needs to understand
this, and that he will understand it through the reference in Daniel,
so that we will know exactly what to look for. As we will recognize
the repeat of the abomination of idolatry that has already happened
once before in the book of Daniel, we will recognize it as the
precursor to the Great Tribulation. Specifically when it is seen,
the people in Judea are to flee for their lives to the mountains
without a moment's hesitation, as even Hitler's holocaust will seem
tame by comparison to what is about to happen. So it appears that it
will be something that everyone will see at the same time. This will
be a very visible event, not some spiritual happening in the hearts
of men which can neither be seen literally by the world nor
pinpointed as being a single event. This must of necessity be
something physical that occurs and occurs at one time in one place.
So let us again recap what Christ said. He said that when we
(everyone) either literally see or are made aware of a detestable
form or object of idolatry, which will lay waste and desecrate the
sacred spot (this is a limited location at God's only sacred spot –
on the temple mount), set up or established in that spot, those who
are in the land of Judea (today that is the West Bank) should run for
their lives to the mountains without stopping to grab anything from
home. We (the readers of the gospels) [Christ must have foreseen
that Christians would not read the O.T. as a rule, so sent us there
so that we would understand this event more thoroughly] should have
already looked to the book of Daniel to reference this event, which
has been foreshadowed there. And the Jews, by already knowing the
book of Daniel, will also recognize this event as having occurred
before. This is a straightforward literal reading of what Christ
said.
This event is
described again in Mark in the same way, with the addition of the
fact that this abomination is standing where it ought not to be. In
other words, it is totally forbidden for it to be there. It is also
referenced more obliquely in Luke. In Luke we are merely told that
when Jerusalem is surrounded by armies, then we should know that
desolation is about to occur. Now one of the arguments used against
believing that the abomination is by necessity a physical event, as
there has to be a signal to people that they have to flee, is that
because Luke tells us that armies will surround Jerusalem, that is
what tells the people to flee to the mountains, so the abomination
need not be a physical event for people to see. The problem with
this reasoning is, two of the three writers of the gospels do not
mention the armies – at all. In other words, it is the abomination
that is the event that signals people to run. In Luke we are told
that the armies signal to us that the abomination is about to occur,
so those who have studied these passages will realize what is about
to occur and can warn people to leave earlier, making their escape a
more sure thing, but it is the abomination that is the key. It is
that event which all those in Judea (meaning Jews, not Christians),
those who have not studied these passages of Scripture, will suddenly
recognize as something that has occurred before.
From all these
verses one can gather that there will be something that is easily
recognizable (from referencing the same situation in Daniel) as an
idol or an event that creates a situation for idolatry to be carried
on. It will be set up (if an idol) or established (if a situation) on
a specific spot in a place that is considered sacred. (the temple
mount). This can only be a literal event of some kind. I don't know
how the reader perceives it, but it is extremely difficult to see how
this passage can be spiritualized to mean a spiritual invisible
happening within a Christian's body or heart. And if we were to
establish an idol in our hearts (bodies) would that not mean we have
forsaken Christ? If the Christian's body is the temple of God, and a
Christian rejects antichrist as God, he would then not sit in the
temple of God. To sit in the temple of God, temple meaning a
Christian's body or heart, declaring himself God, it would mean that
they have put him there replacing Christ.
The problem with
this spiritualized interpretation then becomes, how would everyone in
Judea be aware of this invisible event happening in the hearts of
Christians that tells them they should flee to the mountains? One
cannot simply reference Luke and say the armies would do this.
Matthew and Mark say that Christ said the abomination would be the
key to their fleeing. They do not even mention the armies. And why
should Jews flee to the mountains because Christians have adopted an
idol in their hearts? What difference would it make to a Jew in whom
a Christian believes? And as the ones in Judea are Jews, not
Christians, and have no idea what the New Testament says about this
event, how will they recognize a situation that telegraphs to them
that something is terribly wrong, even if there are armies
surrounding the city? The clue is in what Christ told us to
reference in Daniel. Jews are aware of the events in the book of
Daniel that are historic and therefore we must now realize that what
happens is something that was described in the book of Daniel that
Jews will recognize as being a repeat of an abomination that has
already occurred.
Now at this point,
I should mention that some people think this abomination refers to
the Romans destroying the temple in 70 AD, (they get this from Daniel
as we will shortly see) as that event made people flee Jerusalem when
armies surrounded the city, and it was yet a future event when Christ
spoke on the Mount of Olives. But that is impossible, as Christ
tells us that when this event occurs there will be great tribulation
such as the world has never seen before. That has not occurred. This
is exactly why armies surrounding the city cannot be said to be the
sign before the Great Tribulation that will signal people that the
abomination has happened. Armies have surrounded the city before and
will again. It is not the sign to which Christ was referring when
He said that when they see it they should flee. Not that they should
not flee any time they see armies surrounding the city. It would be
a good idea, even if it does not signal the start of the Great
Tribulation, but still it is not the sign to which Christ referred.
It will be the abomination, not the armies that is the crucial sign
that the Great Tribulation is beginning. Further, when the temple
was destroyed, there was not a detestable idolatrous thing set up.
Instead the temple of God was torn down. So this event in the
gospels could not be speaking of the Roman armies destroying the
temple and city as the abomination.
Before going to the
book of Daniel to see what the event was that Christ was referencing,
we need to look at the rest of the verses in the New Testament. In
Thessalonians Paul tells us that the man of sin, the son of
perdition, more commonly known as the antichrist (or in Revelation,
the beast), will exalt himself above all that is called God and sit
in the temple of God declaring himself to be God. So what is the
temple of God? It is this passage more than any other that people,
who believe the abomination has to do with the body or heart, use to
expound upon their theory on this issue. And it is this very verse
when one looks at that way of interpreting it makes a completely
illogical statement. We already know that something will “stand”
in a place that is holy to God on earth, and here we see something
that fits that description perfectly. And this place is one
specific small location, not an accumulation of many small (the
heart) locations, which is what the temple in this passage would have
to be if it were referring to the hearts of Christians. There is
only one specific location geographically that is holy to God and
that is the temple mount. But even that is larger than is implied in
Matthew when the word “place” is used. The implication is that
it is a single spot. The holy place can be the two roomed temple
proper, and it can go as far as to include the area around the temple
where the altar and sacrifices occurred, but the implication with the
verses is that even that is a little bigger than the area that this
abomination occurs. This man of perdition sitting (establishing
himself - “standing”) in the temple (the most holy place where
the ark should sit and where he should not be sitting) demanding
worship would certainly fit the bill of a detestable act of idolatry
establishing itself in a place where it has no business being, as
described in the gospels. And again, the idea that he sits in a
temple of Christian's hearts is simply unfathomable, as if he did
that, would not all Christians then no longer be Christians having
forsaken God to replace Him with Satan in their heart? This
interpretation is quite illogical to the grammar of the sentence.
One of the
questions that must be asked of those who hold to the spiritualized
view of the temple being the Christian's body is this. If (and I
believe He is) God is trying to indicate a real physical temple on
the temple mount, how else is He to refer to this in the Scriptures
so that we understand that this is what He means? Would He not call
it the temple of God? The word temple is the word used to describe
the temple building. There simply is no other word to describe that
building. Just because the word temple is also used in some places
in the New Testament to refer to our body does not mean that it must
always refer to it. In fact when looking at the Scriptures in
context where it does refer to the body, the surrounding text makes
it very clear that it is the body of the Christian that is being
spoken about. That is not the case in these verses where the temple
having to do with the abomination and 70th week is
referenced. In these cases it becomes clear from looking at all of
these verses together that it must be referring to a building. The
fact that Christ refers us back to Daniel and an incident that
happened at the second temple should clue us in that He is speaking
of a physical temple. That was partly why He did reference Daniel,
to make the point that He is not speaking of the Christian in these
passages, (and at this time, people were not referred to as being the
temple of God, because the Holy Spirit had not been given yet), but
of a building that will be built on the temple mount (and which is
the only way that the disciples would have understood the word
temple).
Now
having addressed the passage in Thessalonians, it is of interest to
read the passage in Revelation 13 about the beast. Verses 11-15 “And
I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two
horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all
the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and
them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly
wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire
come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, And
deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles
which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them
that dwell on the earth, that
they should make an image to the beast, which had the
wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give
life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the
beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would
not worship the image of the beast should be killed.”
Clearly this is an abomination of idolatry. Is this also part of
the abomination that lays waste the holy place?
We have seen the
mention of a holy place and a temple in the verses covered so far.
In all cases it seems that it is speaking of a literal place,
specifically located on the temple mount. Now in Revelation 11:1-2
we see that John is given some instructions. He is given a reed like
a rod. This reed is a measuring tool. It comes from a plant and is
like a wooden stick or wand. In ancient times this was used to
measure objects, and measuring something is exactly what John is told
to do. Specifically he is told to measure the temple of God, and the
altar. Clearly this is referring to a literal temple, as only a
literal object can be measured with a measuring stick. And we are
told that there is an altar. The Christian's body may be referred to
as a temple in some of the Scriptures, but we are never called an
altar. The altar always refers to a literal altar. So this is
referring to a literal temple and a literal altar. He is also told to
not include in his measuring the court which is outside of the
temple, for it will not be a part of the temple complex. Clearly now
we have a definitive description of a literal temple complex, as
there is nothing about us that could be called a courtyard
symbolically. This is a confirmation of the literal manner of
interpreting the verses in the gospels and Thessalonians. This is a
temple with an altar and a courtyard, which is being trampled by the
Gentiles. We surmised from the Greek terms that the holy place that
is abominated is a small location, probably only the temple proper
itself. And here we are told that the court that is outside the
temple is indeed not a part of the working temple. It is being
trodden down by the Gentiles, something which is not allowed in the
regulation temple complex. The Gentile court was the outermost part
of the temple. They could not get anywhere near the actual temple
itself. So this tells us that the tribulation temple that goes up
will only be the temple itself with an altar, not an entire complex
on the temple mount.
So all of these
verses seem to confirm that indeed there will be a literal temple,
one that will not be a full blown temple in the sense of having all
the courtyards, but merely the temple proper itself and an altar at
best. And in this temple the man of sin will take a seat
establishing himself as a god, thinking himself above God, demanding
worship for himself. Further the false prophet will create an image
of him that is given the power to speak which people will be forced
to choose between worshiping or dying.
It would appear
from putting this all together that this man of sin's actions
constitute the detestable thing or act of idolatry in the holy place
that lays waste to the place. It is the abomination of desolation.
Now we need to go to Daniel to see if we can confirm this
interpretation by finding an event that occurred at the temple, where
an act of idolatry and something detestable occurred which laid waste
to the temple. And this event is something that the Jews, without
ever having read the New Testament would immediately reference in
their minds to know that something horrible was happening, so that
they should get out of town as fast as possible, as this would be a
repeat of something that has occurred before.
We find a reference
to an event like this in Daniel 11:21,29-31 “And in his estate
shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour
of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the
kingdom by flatteries......At the time appointed he shall return, and
come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the
latter. 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. 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.”
This event where a
vile man polluted the sanctuary (temple) and took away the daily
sacrifice, and placed an abomination that desolated the place is a
well-known event. It is especially well-known to the Jews. This
passage is describing the historical actions of Antiochus Epiphanes,
who came to Jerusalem, slaughtered a pig on the altar, and set up a
statue of Zeus in the temple. He also killed many Jews. The story
is found in the books of the Maccabees. It was the Maccabee brothers
who finally cleansed the temple and lit the menorah which burned for
eight days on the oil of only one day's worth. This event is
celebrated every year at Hanukkah. It is this event to which Christ
was referring in Matthew 24 when he spoke of the abomination of
desolation that occurred in Daniel that the reader should understand.
It is also a prophetic passage that foreshadows the antichrist.
Antiochus Epiphanes was the dress rehearsal, so to speak, for what
antichrist will do. Now look at the similarity of the event we have
seen described in the New Testament to this abomination. A man of
sin comes to the temple, and commits an unspeakable act of blasphemy
and idolatry in God's holy place. This is followed by terrible
bloodshed of people. To which event do I refer? Hard to say, isn't
it? Antiochus stops the daily sacrifice. Does the antichrist? One
assumes that if the temple is in service again, and there is an altar
(John is told to measure it), there will be sacrifices. Is there any
indication that this stopping of the sacrifices as Antiochus did
happens again? Christ said that the event in Daniel is a picture for
us to reference in regard to the event that will happen before He
returns. If that is so, we should find something that references a
stopping of the sacrifices at the temple that will again be built
besides this passage, which in foreshadowing antichrist indicates
there will be sacrifices which will be stopped. And we do.
Daniel 12:11 “And
from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the
abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand
two hundred and ninety days.”
This passage in
Daniel 12 is the conclusion of the vision that God gave Daniel about
the end of the age. Particularly this chapter speaks of the events
of the last half of the 70th week (which we have yet to
address). Verses in Revelation and elsewhere in Daniel tell us that
the last half of the 70th week has three endings. The
1260th day is the end of the antichrist's reign. The
1290th day is the end of God's wrath, and the 1335th
day (also mentioned in this chapter) is when the temple is most
likely restored and consecrated and the millennium begun. Here in
the above verse we are told that from the time the abomination is set
up and the daily sacrifice is stopped there will be 1290 days. So
here we see that when the abomination occurs, there have been
sacrifices going on. This clearly indicates a physical temple, and
it now makes the event of antichrist match up completely to the act
of Antiochus. So indeed, this is the reference to which Christ was
referring in Matthew and Mark. Now we have another passage in Daniel
that tells us more of this event.
Daniel
9:24-27 “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. Know therefore and understand, that
from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build
Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and
threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the
wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks
shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the
prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and
the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war
desolations are determined. 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.”
In these verses we are told that
seventy weeks were determined upon Israel to finish up God's dealings
with their sins, to bring them back to Him, and to finish up all
these prophecies and this age. We are then told that the first
sixty-nine of those weeks (which are seven year weeks) will bring us
up to Christ's death. He is killed after the sixty-ninth week
finishes up its seven year period. Then we are told the temple will
be destroyed. (70 AD) It is this passage which those who would make
the abomination in the gospels the destruction of the temple in 70 AD
point to, to try to justify their theory. But this destruction is
not put at the middle of the 70th week, and as we see in
the verse above, the abomination occurs in the midst or middle of
that last week. The destruction of the second temple is mentioned as
happening between the 69th and the 70th week.
At some point in the future (Christians have been waiting 2000 years
for this last week) a covenant will be confirmed for one week or one
seven year period. In the middle of that seven year period or 3 ½
years into it, there will be an abomination of desolation set up and
the daily sacrifices will be stopped. This goes along completely
with what we learned in the New Testament passages, with more details
added in. Now if the temple was destroyed between the 69th
and 70th week, and the sacrifices are caused to cease in
the middle of the 70th week, it necessitates that an altar
(and temple) be restored so that they can be abominated. So we now
see that this abomination which occurs in the gospels and
Thessalonians will occur in the middle of a seven year period known
as Daniel's 70th week. And we are also told that
sacrifices will cease to be made. Again the point is made that
sacrifices cannot be made without an altar and temple. The very ones
that John was told to measure. The very one that Paul said the man
of perdition would sit in declaring himself God. All of these
passages work together very well like puzzle pieces to paint a
picture. And we have only had to take all of it quite literally. No
spiritualized symbolic interpretation needed.
If a more detailed explanation of the
70th week of Daniel is desired, my end times studies blog
at http://endtimesstudies.blogspot.com/
can provide more information. The archives on the right side of the
page list the Scripture verses for ease of finding the passage
wanted. The book of Daniel is found in June 2009.
So in taking God's Word at face value,
and when all of the passages which speak to this issue are taken
together, we see that they all point to one thing. There will be a
literal temple building (albeit probably quite small) with an altar
upon which sacrifices are made, which will be stopped when an
abomination reminiscent of the event by Antiochus Epiphanes that led
to the holiday of Hanukkah occurs. The reader is free to believe
what they want, but I think it is quite clear what God has said on
this issue.