How Daniel saw more than one Abomination

[Cyberseeker]

Abominations of the blasphemous kind tend to repeat because they are the fruit of an antichrist spirit which is always with us. (1John 4:3) Whenever the spirit manifests itself in the form of a man we get 'Antichrist' and that is why St John says, "… you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come." (1 John 2:18) With this in mind, we observe Daniels visions having several (not just one) antichrists, hence abominations (plural) and the gradual revealing of a future 'man of sin.'

The first example in Daniel’s book is Nebuchadnezzar. He set up an abomination, a statue, representative of Babylon and of himself ("You are that head of gold" Dan 2:38) , and all people everywhere were forced to worship it. (Dan 3:1-7)

The next example is an overview of world history as it pertains to 'beast' dominions that would arise. They were a lion (Babylon), a bear (Medo-Persia), a leopard (Greece) and a terrifying beast. (Rome) Their characteristics were that of antichrist - conquest and power. Then, from out of the fourth beast came ten 'horns' and from out of these another horn who, "had eyes like the eyes of a human being and a mouth that spoke boastfully." (Dan 7:8) He would, speak against the Most High and oppress God’s holy people who would be delivered into his hands for a "time, times and half a time." (Dan 7:25) This is Antichrist who is yet to come.

It might be helpful at this point to notice how the 'times' mentioned are the same period referenced in the book of Revelation. The end-time 3½ years are not taken from Daniel chapter nine as so often assumed since that would require the 'seventieth week' to be broken off and sent to the future. Such an interpretation is unnecessary because a different 3½ year period is already revealed in Daniel chapter seven.

[DurbanDude]

Interesting! Are you saying that Jesus could have been refferring to Daniel 7, not Daniel 12, when He mentions the abomination spoken of by the prophet Daniel?

[Cyberseeker]

The best known AoD in the book of Daniel is that of Antiochus Epiphanes who desecrated the Jewish temple in 167 BC. This is the subject of chapter eight which is described in such detail that liberal scholars have tried to 'doctor' the authorship so to make it appear written after the advent had already happened.

The least understood case of abomination is the one which happened in the middle of the seventieth week. (AD 30) Some have muddled it with the AoD to come but it was really the continuation of sacrifice after Christ had said, "Finished!" In this case it 'overspread' (Dan 9:27 KJV) from the initial blasphemy for another forty years until the desolation of the temple became complete.

Chapter eleven provides the fifth example, an interesting one because it demonstrates dual fulfilment, ie. how some prophecy has a near fulfilment with a far one later on. The first section predicts more background of Antiochus culminating in, "Then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation." (Dan 11:31) From verse 36 however, the text telescopes forward to a different person, similar in 'spirit', but whose actions no longer match the Greek tyrant. It is obviously alluding to a future Antichrist.

We finally come to Daniel 12:11 speaking about the '1335 and 1290 days.' The figures given have no connection to the Antiochus figures quoted in chapter eight, so there is obviously more than one abomination of desolation in Daniels writings. The figures do tie in with the calendar at the time of the cross, so the temple’s alternative sacrifice makes two abominations. However, the context of chapter twelve references future aspects awaiting fulfilment which indicates a 1290-day span may come around again. The figures given have no connection to the Antiochus figures quoted in chapter eight, so there is obviously more than one abomination of desolation in Daniels writings. The figures do tie in with the calendar at the time of the cross, so the temple’s alternative sacrifice makes two abominations. However, the context of chapter twelve references future aspects awaiting fulfilment which indicates a 1290-day span may come around again. That makes three separate, identifiable AoD's in the book of Daniel, four if we count Nebuchadnezzar’s statue.

What say ye? Do we agree there are more than one AoD?

[Cyberseeker]

Interesting! Are you saying that Jesus could have been refferring to Daniel 7, not Daniel 12, when He mentions the abomination spoken of by the prophet Daniel?

Daniel 7 seems to be a survey of world history in advance. Verse 24-27 is the climax of the previous Antichrist systems and it specifically mentions a 3½ period. This period is mentioned again in Dan 12:7 and, of course, the Revelation references.

You have put up strong arguments from time to time for a ‘half-week’ to be split from the chapter nine’s seventieth week on the basis that Revelation demands it. 3½ years has to come from somewhere so Daniel 9 must be it? Right? My point is that it is not necessary because weeks (and half weeks) keep coming and Dan 7:25’s half week is different to the one in Daniel 9.

[Beckrl]

What say ye? Do we agree there are more than one AoD?

I would agree that their have been more that one 'abomination' of the temple, but there where only one 'abomination of desolation'. As what Daniel described in 9:26

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.

This latter portion refers to the destruction of the city Jerusalem which came in 70AD, I would also relate what is mentioned in verse 27 as well to this 'end' which to me refers to the ending of the temple worship system. That of desolation where as in the time of Antiochus the temple was left desolate for only a 2300 dailys, but was later cleaned and they returned to worship and give their evening and morning offerings again. [A type and shadow of what was to come] But at this 'end' that will come as a flood upon the temple will lay desolate and it remains deoslate unto this day and will forever.

27And he hath strengthened a covenant with many -- one week, and [in] the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.'

So yes I see that Antiochus 'abomination' was an type for those that read could understand that then Jesus spoke of another 'abomintion of desolation' and refer to Daniel 9:26b and also that which Daniel 12:1-13 told a seal was placed on the vision unto the 'end' and Jesus himself revealed/openned the seal the book so that many understood as the wise shall understand.

I then would relate the 'time of trouble' spoken by Daniel 12:1 as that time in which the city becomes surround by armies, the Jews Roman war and relate the days in which the daily is taken away unto their redeemption as having 1290/1335. The shadow and typological fulfillment by Antiochus which fulfilled chapter 8 and Titus would come and fulfill that of Daniel 9:26b, 27 & chapter 12.

[DurbanDude]

The best known AoD in the book of Daniel is that of Antiochus Epiphanes who desecrated the Jewish temple in 167 BC. This is the subject of chapter eight which is described in such detail that liberal scholars have tried to 'doctor' the authorship so to make it appear written after the advent had already happened.

The least understood case of abomination is the one which happened in the middle of the seventieth week. (AD 30) Some have muddled it with the AoD to come but it was really the continuation of sacrifice after Christ had said, "Finished!" In this case it 'overspread' (Dan 9:27 KJV) from the initial blasphemy for another forty years until the desolation of the temple became complete.

Chapter eleven provides the fifth example, an interesting one because it demonstrates dual fulfilment, ie. how some prophecy has a near fulfilment with a far one later on. The first section predicts more background of Antiochus culminating in, "Then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation." (Dan 11:31) From verse 36 however, the text telescopes forward to a different person, similar in 'spirit', but whose actions no longer match the Greek tyrant. It is obviously alluding to a future Antichrist.

We finally come to Daniel 12:11 speaking about the '1335 and 1290 days.' The figures given have no connection to the Antiochus figures quoted in chapter eight, so there is obviously more than one abomination of desolation in Daniels writings. The figures do tie in with the calendar at the time of the cross, so the temple’s alternative sacrifice makes two abominations. However, the context of chapter twelve references future aspects awaiting fulfilment which indicates a 1290-day span may come around again. The figures given have no connection to the Antiochus figures quoted in chapter eight, so there is obviously more than one abomination of desolation in Daniels writings. The figures do tie in with the calendar at the time of the cross, so the temple’s alternative sacrifice makes two abominations. However, the context of chapter twelve references future aspects awaiting fulfilment which indicates a 1290-day span may come around again. That makes three separate, identifiable AoD's in the book of Daniel, four if we count Nebuchadnezzar’s statue.

What say ye? Do we agree there are more than one AoD?

Definitely! I do agree.

I believe in 2 abominations, that of Antiochus and that future one to come, when a man declares himself god on Mount Zion.

Agreed, the abomination of Antiochus is referred to in Daniel 8 and Daniel 11:31-32. History fulfilled those prophecies too exactly to look elsewhere for a fulfilment.

This is where the standard 7 year futurist view goes badly wrong, because they fail to see those exact historical fulfilments, and therefore lose followers because the historical fulfiments are pretty obvious. So we have futurists becoming preterists just because no-one has shown them an alternate futurist view that acknowledges some historical fulfiment.

I won't go into the technicalities of Daniel 9:27 here, you know my view that I regard that abomination of Daniel 9:27 as the future one occurring 3.5 years before the second coming. Agreed both Daniel 7 and Daniel 12 are referring to the 3.5 years preceding the second coming, and the end-times abomination is the starting point of this last 3.5 year period.

So I believe Daniel refers repeatedly to two different abominations.

[DurbanDude]

Daniel 7 seems to be a survey of world history in advance. Verse 24-27 is the climax of the previous Antichrist systems and it specifically mentions a 3½ period. This period is mentioned again in Dan 12:7 and, of course, the Revelation references.

You have put up strong arguments from time to time for a ‘half-week’ to be split from the chapter nine’s seventieth week on the basis that Revelation demands it. 3½ years has to come from somewhere so Daniel 9 must be it? Right? My point is that it is not necessary because weeks (and half weeks) keep coming and Dan 7:25’s half week is different to the one in Daniel 9.

Although I do believe that Dan 9:27b is future, there are enough verses in the bible about this end-times tribulation period that we do not need to correctly cross reference the 3.5 year period with every other 3.5 year period to get a basic warning of what is to come.Thus my view on this future period certainly is not based on Daniel 9:27.

A good basic reference point is 2 Thessalonians, where we are told that the second coming will not come until the man of lawlessness is revealed at the holy place. This was written when the temple mount was known as the holy place. 2 Thessalonians is clear that this man of lawlessness declares himself god of earth, a very abominable act, especially taking into account where he does it, in the place historically known as the holy place. 2 Thess 2 is clear that this man will cause a lot of deception, and he will come to his end when Jesus comes again.

Another good reference point is Jesus who clearly says that when we see the abomination, there will be a short time of trouble until Jesus comes again.

We can build on what the gospels and the epistles say, adding more detail and more exact time periods when we read Daniel and Revelation, but to the average reader of the bible, its pretty clear even without any in depth study that we must watch out for this man on the temple area who will declare himself God and then we will have a short intense period followed by the second coming.

[ross3421]

13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Any chance this is the abomination of desolations? It would be more logical that this what was spoken of than Antiochus which is NEVER mentioned definatively in scripture.

27And 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.

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

It should be clear that it is NOT until the abominations of Satan sitting in the temple claiming to be the most high then does Dan 9 and Matt 24 culminate to the end and the second coming.

[Cyberseeker]

Bump.

An assumption is often made concerning Daniel, that his mention of an 'abomination' always refers to the same event. Does it?

My thinking is its a recurring theme in his visions but they are separate cases. I count 3 or 4 examples of AoD in Daniels writings, one of which is yet to be fulfilled.

Discussion?

[markedward]

Does it?

I say yes, but only after having studied the book from beginning to end; not because I 'assume' it. All references to the 'abomination of desolation' (or, in chapter 8, the 'transgression that causes desolation') refer to the desecration of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes. All of the visions build off from the previous ones.

Chapter 2's dream is identical in detail to chapter 7's dream. Four kingdoms, followed by the kingdom of God. Chapter 8 is 'a vision ... after that which appeared to me at first'. Daniel is explicitly connecting the two visions of Daniel 7 and 8 together (not the least of which by using the same 'little horn' symbol). Chapter 9 begins with Daniel studying 'the word of Yahweh to Jeremiah the prophet'. The angel Gabriel shows up and tells Daniel to 'consider the word and understand the vision'. Gabriel's new information is an explanation of the relationship between the 'word' of Jeremiah and the 'vision' which Daniel has already received. Chapters 10-12 begins by explaining how another new message was brought to Daniel, so that he finally 'understood the word and had understanding of the vision', connecting us back to chapter 9.

So to recap: chapter 10-12 explicitly reuses the 'word and vision' language of chapter 9, connecting them together. Chapter 9 uses 'vision' to refer to the vision Daniel had before, which could be either chapter 8 or 7, or both, since chapter 8 specifically connected itself to chapter 7. And lastly, the dream of chapter 7 follows the same format as the dream of chapter 2. They're all the same prophecy, they all refer to the same thing: pagan kingdoms ruling over Israel, but in the 'latter days' of those pagan kingdoms a wicked king would desecrate the temple and persecute the people, until God would act on behalf of his people and give them the kingdom for their faithfulness. Whatever the interpretation of one chapter is, it has to be the same for all of them, because the book internally connects all of them together.

[RabbiKnife]

I say yes, but only after having studied the book from beginning to end; not because I 'assume' it.

All references to the 'abomination of desolation' (or, in chapter 8, the 'transgression that causes desolation') refer to the desecration of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes.

Agreed..............

[Beckrl]

Bump.

An assumption is often made concerning Daniel, that his mention of an 'abomination' always refers to the same event. Does it?

My thinking is its a recurring theme in his visions but they are separate cases. I count 3 or 4 examples of AoD in Daniels writings, one of which is yet to be fulfilled.

Discussion?

Hi Chris,

I changed some of my prespective on Daniel. As I pervious posted #5 I now believe that Daniel was prophesying solely about the Abomination by Antiochus IV. I no longer beleive that Daniel was prophesying about Rome nor it's destruction. Only that Jesus used Daniel as a 'type' to prophesy of an antitype that the people of Judah was to watch and be ready for.