Home > Radical Islam, Wars and Rumors of War > Islam Is A Belief Of Blood And ‘No Accommodation Or Kindness Seems To Stem The Tide Of Islamic Violence’

Islam Is A Belief Of Blood And ‘No Accommodation Or Kindness Seems To Stem The Tide Of Islamic Violence’

11/15/2013 Leave a comment Go to comments

Hadith, Bukhari 2977, “I have been made victorious with terror” – The “Prophet” Of Islam, Mohammed

Hadith, Sahih Muslim 1:33a, “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish [Islamic] prayer …” (The Shahada)

Qur’an Sura 33:21, “Indeed in Allah’s Messenger (Mohammad) you have an excellent example to follow for him who hopes in (meeting with) Allah and the Last Day …”

By Amil Imani, Islam Watch – “From Peshawar Pakistan to Nairobi Kenya, from Damascus Syria to Benghazi Libya, Muslims are on a killing rampage. The civilized world is shocked and distressed. Some mutation seems to take place in the humanness of the person the minute he announces his subservience to Islam by reciting the Shahada: ‘I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.’ The individual becomes intolerant, violent and the shedding of blood becomes central to his life.

The Greek had their gods, so did the idolater Arabs before Muhammad appeared on the scene. Muhammad chose a minor idol as god and the only god and elected the name of Allah for him. According to Muhammad, Allah is not only the god; he is the all-everything god, embodying all imaginable attributes that were previously monopolies of different gods of the polytheists.

What in fact stands out as Allah’s dominating attribute, is his intolerant and violent nature. He is nothing like the all-merciful the Quran claims. But he certainly is the most wrathful. Since commissioning Muhammad as his emissary and giving him the manual of mayhem called the Quran, the world has never seen a day of peace. Apparently that’s just the way Allah likes it.

‘The religion of peace,’ is in fact the religion of blood.

Distressed by the Muslims’ trouble-making and killing sprees, civilized nations are bending over backward in the hope of placating them and helping them join the family of humanity by admitting hordes of immigrants and affording them all manner of hospitality and assistance. All seems to no avail. Many of the new arrivals, deeply infected by the Islamic ethos, find it impossible to assimilate in the host countries. Instead, they strive to impose their defunct order that is the cause of their backwardness and inhumanity on the host people.

The non-Muslim world is at the end of its wits. No accommodation or kindness seems to stem the tide of Islamic violence. Countless numbers of proposals have been advanced in dealing with Islamic mayhem. Some feel that, in general, Muslims are law-abiding citizens of their adopted countries and it is a minority that is responsible for acts of atrocities. Thinking along these lines has prompted people to say that the solution to Islamic violence rests with Islamic leaders. That is, Islamic leaders should speak up and condemn jihad and jihadists.

To begin with, renouncing jihad violates the repeated commands of the Quran and the Hadith. No Islamic leader would dare to attempt that abrogation.” Read more.

Flashback: Report: Terrorism Hits Record High In 2012, Deaths Up 89% From Prior Year, 2013 Set To Hit New Record – “As terrorism increasingly becomes a tactic of warfare, the number of attacks and fatalities soared to a record high in 2012… More than 8,500 terrorist attacks killed nearly 15,500 people last year as violence tore through Africa, Asia and the Middle East… That’s a 69% rise in attacks and an 89% jump in fatalities from 2011… and most of the violence was committed in Muslim-majority countries… The previous record for attacks was set in 2011 with more than 5,000 incidents… This year is expected to outpace even 2012’s record high. There were 5,100 attacks in the first six months of 2013…” Read more.

Flashback: New Study Shows That 80% of Mosques in America Teach Jihad Violence and Islamic Supremacism – “… Then there was the Center for Religious Freedom’s 2005 study, and the Mapping Sharia Project’s 2008 study. Each independently showed that upwards of 80% of mosques in America were preaching hatred of Jews and Christians and the necessity ultimately to impose Islamic rule. And now comes yet more confirmation that mosques in the U.S. are teaching these things, and again the percentage is remarkably similar: around 80% of mosques are found to be teaching jihad warfare and Islamic supremacism.” Read more.

Categories: Radical Islam, Wars and Rumors of War
  1. Mike
    11/15/2013 at 9:49 PM
    Reply

    ICA, I think there is merit in Jack Smith’s view, that the “covenant” of Dan 9:27 is an end times dhimmi covenant, the Pact of Umar. This is not for people to convert to Islam, but a covenant, or agreement that guarantees their safety as long as they live in a subjugated manner according to its requirements. Dan 9:27 reads as follows (NASB)

    (Dan 9:27) “And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

    The Hebrew used in both the KJV and the NASB is בּרית “bereeth”, which means “covenant, compact, confederacy”. There is no mention of peace anywhere in the passage or context. The whole “peace treaty” concept (as if it is some multinational agreement) has over the years been erroneously read into the passage when it simply is not there.

    The word בּרית “bereeth” is used in the same sense in Joshua 9:6 for a covenant between a much stronger force (the Israelis) and the weaker, submitting force (the Gibeonites).

    With this understood, Dan 9:27’s “covenant” fits very well with the dhimmitude contract that Muslims have historically imposed on those they conquer. Historically known as the Pact of Umar, is that once conquered, non-Muslims are not required to convert to Islam. But if they don’t convert, they suffer low class status,feel subjugated to Muslims and must pay a humiliation tax called the jizya tax, among other abuses. Those who do not convert AND do not pay the jizya tax are executed.

    This is the same kind of agreement of servitude that the Gibeonites entered in to when they made their בּרית “bereeth” covenant with Israel. This happens to be going on today in many Muslim countries. Islam is not as interested in obtaining converts as it is in subjugating and ruling. The dhimmitude doctrine fully demonstrates this and we see it both in history and in Muslim countries today.

    I am beginning to think that the “middle of the prophetic week” when the agreement is canceled, or reneged on from the Muslim side, and instead of the pact protecting Christians as long as they live in subjugation to Muslims, the pact is disregarded entirely and the end time massacre begins.

    The beginning of the massacre may be what Jesus was referring to when He said…

    (Mat 24:9) “Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name.

    In the same way birth pangs get progressively closer to the main event, I tentatively consider Matthew 24:9 to be the beginning of a tribulation that will get progressively more brutal, culminating in….

    (Mat 24:21) “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will.

    And we know that tribulation is directly related to the killing of people from….

    (Mat 24:22) “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.

    The “he” of Dan 9:27 (the antichrist) uses deception to renege on previously allowed under the pact of Umar, Christian religious observances and instead imposes sharia law on Christians by threat of death. This is the abomination that causes the desolation, the cessation or stopping of worship observances and testimony of Christ. By our historical model, the “one who makes desolate” is Islam, or the anti-christ vicariously through Islam.

    A quick survey of Islamic history confirms this interpretation. Wherever Islam spreads, Christians are put into subjugation, forced to abide by Islamic customs and laws, harsh restrictions imposed, freedoms of speech, expression, worship, thought, and many other freedoms taken away in order to be in submission to Islamic law. Today, we are seeing this happen again on a massive scale through military jihad and cultural jihad. Jesus warned about this in fact.

    (Mat 24:15) “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand).
    History has shown us exactly what to look for.

    Like

  2. ICA
    11/15/2013 at 11:08 PM
    Reply

    Daniel 9:27, “Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.” (NKJV).

    We’ll have to wait and see. Although such a claim can be made, whether it be in reference to a temporary “hudna” as some say or to some sort of self-imposed “dhimmitude”, it isn’t really supported contextually in my opinion (the context’s primary focus is the Messiah, see 9:25-26) nor can it be demonstrated hermeneutically. What can be demonstrated hermeneutically, however, is that “the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ” (Galatians 3:17; cf. Daniel 9:27a) is “a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (Hebrews 8:6-8), for His blood of this new covenant was “shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28). In doing so, the old sacrifices and oblations ceased and “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]” (Hebrews 10:1-10). This fulfills Daniel 9:27a perfectly.

    The word “bereeth” is also used numerous times in Scripture when referring to a covenant between God and man, about 18 times in Genesis alone (6:18, 9:9, 9:11, 9:12, 9:13, 9:15, 9:16, 9:17, 15:18, 17:2, 17:4, 17:7, 17:10, 17:11, 17:13, 17:14, 17:19, 17:21). Given the fact that Christ already confirmed the covenant and brought an end to sacrifices and offerings, I see no reason to view this prophecy other than as a foretelling of the saving work of Christ on the cross.

    The second half of the prophecy in 9:27, however, appears to be referring not to Messiah, but to someone else:

    Daniel 9:27, “Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.” (NKJV).

    Where as Daniel 9:27a would be referring to Christ, 9:27b would be pointing to Antichrist. In addition to the NKJV, other translations infer a separate subject as well in 9:27b, such as the ESV (“And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate …”), the NASB (and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate …”), the RSV (“and upon the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate …”), ASV (“and upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate …”) as well as others.

    Like

    • Mike
      11/15/2013 at 11:30 PM
      Reply

      I’ve heard of that interpretation before, but I think it is problematic.

      At some midpoint in the antichrist’s agenda (middle of the week) a person of great power and deceptive influence (the “he” of Dan 9:27) reneges on a covenant (compact) agreement and puts a stop to “sacrifice and grain offerings”.

      The identity of what is being referred to as “sacrifices and grain offerings” is very significant because from an Islamic end time’s perspective, the abomination who makes desolation is the one who brings them to an end. What exactly are the “sacrifice and grain offerings” referred to in Dan 9:27? It cannot be referring to a cessation of temple sacrifices and offerings at Jesus’ crucifixion, because Judaism continued long after Jesus’ crucifixion and even after the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem in AD70. It must be referring to something else. New Testament Scriptures provide us with clues.

      Romans 12:1, “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a LIVING SACRIFICE, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.”

      Hebrews 13:15, “By him therefore let us offer THE SACRIFICE OF PRAISE to God continually, that is, the fruit of [our] lips GIVING THANKS to his name.”

      1 Peter 2:5,“And now God is building you, as living stones, into his spiritual temple. What’s more, you are God’s holy priests, who OFFER THE SPIRITUAL SACRIFICES that please him because of Jesus Christ.”

      The stopping of sacrifices and grain offerings is referring to the cessation, or stopping of worship.

      The text implies that for the first part of this end time period, worship of Jesus will be allowed under this covenant, but will then be abruptly stopped. We are seeing this today. Under the Pact of Umar’s stipulations of Christians being allowed to worship (but not louder than the Muslims nearby, and the no ringing of church bells), the reneging of this covenant ends their protection of limited Christian worship of God under Islamic subjugation. Now, in Muslim majority countries all over the world but particularly in the middle east, Christians are not just prohibited from worshiping, they no longer have that protection and are instead being murdered.

      It would seem very fantastic if we are in some midpoint of end times events, the “middle of the week” of Daniel 9:27, and have 3.5 years to go before Christ’s return. I’m not so sure the “week” of Daniel is a literal, exact time frame but perhaps used just to denote a separation of events, not times. I’m open to other interpretations on this, but as far as the rest of the interpretation, it seems remarkably similar to what is happening today, right now, in Muslim majority countries.

      What are your thoughts on this?

      Like

  3. ICA
    11/18/2013 at 3:21 PM
    Reply

    Mike, “At some midpoint in the antichrist’s agenda (middle of the week) a person of great power and deceptive influence (the ‘he’ of Dan 9:27) reneges on a covenant (compact) agreement and puts a stop to ‘sacrifice and grain offerings’.”

    Remember, in the context of Daniel 9 the word “covenant” is Messianic. It is not referring to a “peace treaty” as some have often imagined. Hebrews 10 explains how sacrifices were merely a shadow of what was to come — Messiah — and now through Messiah’s sacrifice the old sacrifices ceased from being offered (10:2) because of the new covenant (10:16) that was confirmed by Christ (Gal 3:17), through which we learn that Christ is the heir of all the promises. Jesus came “to confirm the promises made to the fathers” (Rom 15:8) and is the Seed of Abraham upon whom the blessings are bestowed, the only One to “bring in everlasting righteousness” (Dan 9:24). Galatians 3:14 clearly tells us that receiving the Holy Spirit is fulfillment of the covenant God made with Abraham. When were we to receive the Holy Spirit? After Messiah confirmed the covenant upon His death (Gal 3:17; Matt 26:28; Dan 9:27a; cf. John 16:7):

    Daniel 9:27, “Then he shall confirm a covenant [‘the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ’ (Gal 3:17)] with many [‘this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many’ (Matt 26:28)] for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering [‘For the law … can never with these same sacrifices … make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered?’ (Heb 10:1-2)]. [{– Christ | Antichrist –}] And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate. [‘when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel … then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again (Matt 25:15,21)].”

    Mike, “The identity of what is being referred to as “sacrifices and grain offerings” is very significant because from an Islamic end time’s perspective, the abomination who makes desolation is the one who brings them to an end.”

    There are two different subjects in Daniel 9:27. Let us remember that although the text in inspired, chapter and verse divisions are not. They were later added by men. If those who added verse divisions had split verse 27 in to two separate verses, it would be easier for many to see, but since it is a single verse many assume it is referring to the same subject. For instance:

    Daniel 9:27, “Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.” (NKJV)

    Daniel 9:28, “And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.” (NKJV)

    Of course, 9:28 is actually 9:27b, but this does not change the fact that Daniel 9:27b appears to be referring not to Messiah, but to someone else as the Hebrew seems to infer (perhaps to the “people of the prince that shall come”?) In addition to the NKJV, other translations suggest a separate subject as well in 9:27b, such as the ESV (“And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate …”), the NASB (and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate …”), the RSV (“and upon the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate …”), ASV (“and upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate …”) as well as others. The one who comes to make the temple desolate is after the One who confirms the covenant with many. Per above, Christ already confirmed the covenant. Antichrist will be the one who makes desolate until the consummation.

    Mike, “The stopping of sacrifices and grain offerings is referring to the cessation, or stopping of worship. The text implies that for the first part of this end time period, worship of Jesus will be allowed under this covenant, but will then be abruptly stopped.”

    We are already offering our bodies as living sacrifices, offering up our sacrifices of praise today. But this may soon end and the Great Tribulation begin when the Antichrist stands in/against the Temple of God (Messianic and Gentile believers) and demands that they stop worshipping YHWH and convert to Islam, or die. We’re starting to see some clerics issuing fatwas/decrees in Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan like this, demanding that Christians convert to Islam or die. A fatwa like this issued against Jews and Christians by someone like the Mahdi, for instance, on the temple mount would send shockwaves all throughout the Islamic world. If that were to happen “then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Matt 24:21).

    Mike, “It would seem very fantastic if we are in some midpoint of end times events, the ‘middle of the week’ of Daniel 9:27, and have 3.5 years to go before Christ’s return. I’m not so sure the ‘week’ of Daniel is a literal, exact time frame but perhaps used just to denote a separation of events, not times. I’m open to other interpretations on this, but as far as the rest of the interpretation, it seems remarkably similar to what is happening today, right now, in Muslim majority countries.”

    Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober …

    Like

  4. Mike
    11/22/2013 at 9:20 PM
    Reply

    ICA, What is fascinating about the Pact of Umar, is that it is worded as if those who are under it were the authors, as if it was their own intention to subjugate themselves. For reasons that are not apparent to me at this time, that seems to be very significant,…Perhaps it will come to me later.

    I agree the “covenant” is not referring to a peace treaty, especially not some multi-national peace treaty of the likes that is propagated by mostly pre-trib rapturists and the whole RFID microchip mark of the beast camp.

    I also agree that the context of Dan 9:26 is Christ, at least at its beginning. But where we respectfully disagree is on whether Christ is seen in the second part of Dan 9:26 and into Dan 9:27 or not. I maintain that the covenant is made in relation to the “he” of the “people of the prince to come” in Dan 9:26, since the desolation is contextually linked to that “he”.

    Notice also the “then”. This is a sequential order of events set within an end times context. One event follows the other. The confirming of the covenant, then the abrupt stop of sacrifices and grain offerings, all of this is happening in the time period just prior to Christi’s return, not 2000 years ago. As before, sacrifices and grain offerings did not stop with Christ, nor at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. So it must be referring to something else.

    (Dan 9:27) “And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

    If we were to go with your view, we would have to include the “for one week” portion as well. Did Christ confirm His covenant for only 7 years?

    You maintain that the covenant is made by Christ of Dan 9:26 and have interesting, and remarkably similar Scriptures. However, anyone can look to other contexts in the Bible and find Scriptures with similar wording and then draw conclusions from it. It’s interesting, and I’m not ruling it out but I think Jack Smith’s view is the stronger view.

    Additionally, it is the nature of satan to mimic what God does. We should not be surprised to see similar terms used to describe what the adversary does to mimic what God has done.

    The allah of Islam, as many already know is according to the quran, the “best of deceivers” (s. 3:52-54). This has a corollary in the biblical deceiver, satan, who is called “deceiver of the whole world” (Rev 12:9)

    The Arabic term “allahu akbar” means “god is greater”, and in the bible, satan is the “great dragon” (Rev 12:9) and there is the evil “Babylon the great” (Rev 17:5, 18:2) but the God of the Bible said…(Joh 10:29) “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all;…”. There seems to be a competition between satan and God about who is greater, each using similar terms.

    Just as the God of the Bible refers to all genuine believers as His Bride that is spotless and clean, satan has a spiritual woman, the whore, Islam, that tries to mimic and then corrupt all that God does.

    Just as the God of the Bible will reveal a new Jerusalem that is shaped like a cube, there is a satanic copy…the kaaba, the square box that has for its entire history has been the center of Islamic pagan idolatry to this very day.

    The holy Son of God is the cornerstone of the Christian faith, yet Islam again has its own cornerstone, the idolatrous Black Stone, located on the corner of the kaaba

    There are many more examples. So I think it should not be a surprise that the adversary first upholds a covenant agreement with “the many” (note, not all) that is later rescinded with subsequent murderous death, destruction and suffering increasing like what we are witnessing today in many Muslim majority countries, using terms that are similar to the covenant agreement confirmed in Christ.

    It is one of the most interesting topics for me, and should be for all believers. We are warned to “….See to it that no one misleads you….”” (Matthew 24:4), warning of all manner of spiritual deception and in particular, pertaining to discerning the false christ(s) just prior to His return.

    (Mar 13:37) And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

    Like

  5. ICA
    11/22/2013 at 11:13 PM
    Reply

    Mike, “I also agree that the context of Dan 9:26 is Christ, at least at its beginning. But where we respectfully disagree is on whether Christ is seen in the second part of Dan 9:26 and into Dan 9:27 or not. I maintain that the covenant is made in relation to the ‘he’ of the ‘people of the prince to come’ in Dan 9:26, since the desolation is contextually linked to that ‘he’.”

    Just as Daniel 9:26 has two subjects in view — the Messiah and “the people of the prince to come” — the original Hebrew also infers two separate subjects are in view as well in the very next verse. In Daniel 9:27 this, contextually, would obviously need to be the Messiah and “the people of the prince to come” per the preceding verse. Although some English translations do not fully convey this distinction in 9:27, other translations such as the New King James Version translate the verse more clearly. With that in mind, let us also make note that even though Scripture is inspired, chapter and verse divisions are not. They were later added by men. If those who added verse divisions had therefore separated v. 27 into two separate verses both subjects would be much more obvious for English readers. For instance, here is the NKJV with both subjects separated into their own respective verse:

    Daniel 9:27, “Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.”

    Daniel 9:28, “And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.”

    Of course, in the example above Daniel 9:28 is actually 9:27b, but it serves to highlight the fact that 9:27 in its entirety is not just referring to the Messiah, but rather to both the Messiah and the “people of the prince that shall come” of the preceding verse. Other translations are careful to make this distinction as well in Daniel 9:27, such as the ESV (“And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate …”), the NASB (and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate …”), the RSV (“and upon the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate …”), the ASV (“and upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate …”) as well as a few others. The One who confirms the Covenant is not the Abomination who desolates. The One who confirms the covenant is Christ. The Abomination that desolates is Antichrist.

    Mike, “As before, sacrifices and grain offerings did not stop with Christ, nor at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. So it must be referring to something else.”

    This is not the intent of the text. The focus is the Messiah and what the Messiah did, not what those who rejected the Messiah continued to do. Christ’s substitutionary death rendered all sacrifices and offerings from the moment He was killed completely ineffectual. The substance of the shadow had now come and those who reject Messiah, those who reject the substance who came, now required that their faith be in the actual substance, not in the shadow of the old Mosaic law. Remember, Jesus came “to confirm the promises made to the fathers” (Romans 15:8) and is the Seed of Abraham upon whom the blessings are bestowed. In Galatians 3:14 the Apostle Paul lets us know that our receiving of the Holy Spirit is fulfillment of the covenant God made with Abraham. And when did we receive the Holy Spirit? After Messiah confirmed the covenant upon His death. After Paul tells us that the Holy Spirit is fulfillment of the covenant God made with Abraham he then nails it for us by telling us in no uncertain terms that the covenant “was confirmed before by God in Christ” (Gal 3:17). Paul quotes Daniel 9:27 almost verbatim.

    Mike, “If we were to go with your view, we would have to include the ‘for one week’ portion as well. Did Christ confirm His covenant for only 7 years?”

    The Hebrew text says that He confirms the covenant “one” week, not in the sense that the covenant itself only lasts for the duration of “one week” (7 years), but rather that the confirmation of the covenant is what happens in the one week. It’s easier to see this if we read the preceding verse very carefully. Daniel 9:26 does not say that Messiah being “cut off” is what ends the 7+62 weeks. Rather, Daniel is saying that after the 7+62 weeks is when the Messiah would be “cut off”. In other words, the Messiah is killed during the 70th week. The NIV renders Dan 9:26 to say that He “will have nothing”, however the Hebrew also means “but not for Himself”, which is precisely how it is translated in many Bibles. The Messiah would die after the 69, but He would not die for Himself. Why? Because He would be dying for others. This describes Christ’s work, His substitutionary death on the Cross perfectly.

    When Jesus was anointed and began His ministry, Daniel’s 70th week began. John the Baptist called Jesus the Lamb of God and, as the lamb of God, is fulfillment of the Passover (1 Cor 5:7). In the middle of the week He was “cut off” and because of His sacrifice, the sacrifices and oblations (offerings) of the old law ceased. The book of Hebrews makes this abundantly clear even while referring to temple sacrifices in the present tense as if they were still being performed, making no mention of any temple destruction, which suggests a composition prior to 70 AD:

    Hebrews 10:1-10, “For the law … can never with these same sacrifices … make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered?… For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: ‘Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin You had no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come — In the volume of the book it is written of Me — To do Your will, O God.’’ … then He said, ‘Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.’ He takes away the first that He may establish the second. By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

    Thus, in the middle of the one week — the 70th –Jesus, the Anointed One, confirmed the covenant by shedding His blood for many, and His sacifice was perfect and final and accepted by God. From that point on, all other sacrifices that were made for one’s sin were no longer acceptable to God, for through Messiah “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

    Mike, “It’s interesting, and I’m not ruling it out but I think Jack Smith’s view is the stronger view.”

    Let each be convinced in there own mind. :)

    Mike, “Additionally, it is the nature of satan to mimic what God does. We should not be surprised to see similar terms used to describe what the adversary does to mimic what God has done.”

    If physical offerings take place in the future, then we can expect to see either an altar (it’s already built) or a rebuilt temple (given the state of the Muslim world right now and the fact that they’ll be in an uproar if even a Jew is caught drinking from a fountain on the temple mount, a rebuilt temple would have to take a miracle!) If, however, the prophecy refers to the eschatonic temple that is the Ekklesia (the temple and the church are synonymous in the NT — we are God’s holy priests (1 Pet 2:5) who offer up our bodies as living sacrifices (Rom 12:1) by offering praises to God continually (Heb 13:15)), then I would surmise that the Great Tribulation begins when the Antichrist stands against the Temple of God (Messianic and Gentile believers) and demands that they stop worshipping YHWH and convert to Islam, or die. Would he not be “mimicing” what Christ did by causing the spiritual sacrifices and offerings that we offer up to cease? We’re starting to see some clerics issuing fatwas/decrees in Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan like this, demanding that Christians convert to Islam or die. A fatwa like this issued against Jews and Christians by the Mahdi on the temple mount, for example, would send shockwaves all throughout the Islamic world. If that were to happen “then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Matt 24:21).

    Mike, “(Mar 13:37) And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.”

    Amen to that!

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of MidnightWatcher's Blogspot. Although differences of opinion are welcomed, please refrain from personal attacks and inappropriate language. This blog reserves the right to edit or delete any comments that fail to do so.