Smoodock's Blog

Due to what we might call bad theology believed and taught by many biblical scholars today the eschatological worldview of most Christians is wrong, and is clearly not supported in the Bible. For example, scholars as a rule have led many Christians to believe time, as we know it, will end. Nevertheless, the idea that time has an end is disproved in Daniels interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in chapter two of the Book of Daniel, where it is said: “the God of heaven will raise up an everlasting kingdom that will not be destroyed and a kingdom that will not be left to another people. It will break in pieces and bring about the demise of all these kingdoms. But it will stand forever” (Daniel 2:44). If the Kingdom of God, which Jesus set up in the first century AD, will never end, but will stand forever, how does time end? If there is no end of time, how could the eschatological worldview of most Christians today be correct? Where’s the evidence that time will end?

What most Christians believe today about Jesus’ Second Coming is that, sometime in the future, the final week of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks Prophecy will be fulfilled. In other words, a week of seven years must yet be fulfilled. However, if Daniel’s prophecy has been fulfilled, nothing of what is believed today about Jesus’ future coming could be true, because the 70^th week of Daniel’s prophecy was fulfilled in the 1^st century AD. So, a future rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem is moot; it won’t happen. If the Temple won’t be rebuilt, then the myth about a the coming of a future strong man, who will sacrifice an abomination on the altar in the Temple, or set up an idol there, is also a moot issue; it won’t happen! If none of these things will occur, when will the Rapture occur (if there is a rapture)?[1] If the Rapture doesn’t occur, when will Christ return, but if he already returned in the 1^st century AD, why would he return a third time? Do the scriptures predict he will come three times? Such are the problems that bad theology interjects into modern Christian eschatology.

Therefore, we need to ask: “what did Jesus mean when he warned his followers about the abomination of desolation in his Mt. Olivet Prophecy?” Was it something Jesus intended for all generations to look for, or was it only for the first century believers? Obviously, he meant his followers to watch for something, and, when it occurred, they were to flee Judea. Whatever that ‘something’ was, it represented grave danger to his people in that day, but would it mean anything for us today? In order to answer this question, it would help to know what the abomination of desolation is.

The phrase abomination of desolation in Matthew 24:15 is the same as the abomination of desolation in Daniel 12:11. This phrase concerns the destruction brought upon a person or nation due to idolatry. In view of this we need to an event in Jewish history during the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. He sacrificed swine’s flesh on the altar of God in the Temple at Jerusalem. Nevertheless, this was not the abomination of desolation, according to the interpretation of Jewish literature written after those days. If this is true, what was the abomination and what did it destroy?

Ever since the Babylonians captivity, the Jews had been ruled by a foreign power, an not only so, but they had been steadily falling prey to the gentile customs and ignoring the customs which the Lord gave them to practice. The gentiles had always wanted to change the Jews customs to something similar to their own and this purpose came close to becoming a reality during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes when a Jew by the name of Jason literally bought the right to the high priesthood for the purpose of leading the Jews into the customs of the Greeks by bringing the Greek games to Jerusalem (2Maccabees 4:7-17). Corruption of the Jews’ relationship with God accelerated when Jason’s relative, Menelaus, paid Antiochus more silver to make him high priest in the place of Jason (2Maccabees 4:23-26). [2]

In whatever manner the Hellenization of the Jews occurred or who is responsible for the process, it was this very thing that brought on the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanies, and it was an act that he later regretted (1Maccabees 6:8-13). Nevertheless, it wasn’t his blasphemous act that was the abomination, but the Hellenization of the Jews, which took them away from obeying the Lord, that was the abomination. Notice what the Jewish writers say:

And so haughty was Antiochus in mind, that he considered not that the Lord was angry for a while for the sins of them that dwelt in the city, and therefore his eye was not upon the place. For had they not been formerly wrapped in many sins, this man, as soon as he had come, had forthwith been scourged, and put back from his presumption, as Heliodorus was, whom Seleucus the king sent to view the treasury. Nevertheless, God did not choose the people for the place’s sake, but the place far the people’s sake. And therefore, the place itself, that was partaker with them of the adversity that happened to the nation, did afterward communicate in the benefits sent from the Lord: and as it was forsaken in the wrath of the Almighty, so again, the great Lord being reconciled, it was set up with all glory. [2 Maccabees 5:17-20 (emphasis mine)]

It was a matter of divine judgment. God brought Antiochus against the Jews, because they wholeheartedly deserted him, just as they had done in the matter of Nebuchadnezzar’s destroying the Temple. Therefore, this matter of abomination of desolation seems to be a national sin led and encouraged by the high priests of the days of Antiochus Epiphanes. What then did Jesus mean when he warned the apostles of the abomination that makes desolate, concerning which Daniel also wrote? I conclude this study HERE.

[1] The New Covenant text does not support the doctrine of the Rapture.

[2] See also JOSEPHUS, Antiquities of the Jews, 12.5.1.