Contact David Nikao Wilcoxson

If you have a comment about a particular study, please use the comment section on that page to aide the discussion about that topic.

You can comment on the bottom of this page for general questions or comments.

If you want to send me a personal message but don’t want it published, just let me know. Then I will be able to reply to your comment using your email address.

Here’s a link to the About Page that shares my story.

Here’s a link to the End Times Deceptions Facebook group.

Here’s a link to the Buzzsprout Podcast page.

Here’s a link to the End Times Deceptions YouTube channel.

Here’s a link to the Rumble video channel.

You can sign up for the email list to be notified about new posts and videos.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

14 thoughts on “Contact David Nikao Wilcoxson”

  1. Hi David,
    A group of us have been going through your studies – we completed the Daniel 9 study and are now working our way through the Olivet Discourse.
    We are somewhat confused between the definition of the “overpsreading of abomination” that you give in Daniel 9 (page 207 ff) – ie the continuing of the Jewish leaders to offer sacrifices, after Messiah had offered Himself as the final sacrifice. And the definition offered in the Olivet Discourse (page 102 ff) that it was the Roman Army, as defined in Luke 21: 20-21.

    We also have a question re the prince in Daniel 9:26. The Geneva Bible Notes clearly identify the prince as Titus, Vespasian’s son, as do most of the commentators that you quote, but we remembered in doing the Daniel Study that you said the prince is Messiah.
    We felt that the middle of Daniel 9:26 seems to refer to the siege of Jerusalem and the final destruction of the temple in AD 70.

    We agree that Daniel 9 and the Olivet Discourse clearly seem to have been fulfilled in the 1st Century AD, but just appreciate your response to the above questions.

    Thank you

    • Hi Mary, the “overspreading of abominations” is a similar but different term than the “abomination of desolation.” It’s interesting that the Jews abomination of delivering their promised Messiah up to be killed, led to the army being sent to desolate the unbelieving Jewish nation.

      Regarding Daniel 9:26, I think that a more congruent explanation is that the ‘prince’ is always Messiah, as Daniel gave that definition. The Jews caused Jerusalem and the temple to be destroyed; so you’re right that Daniel 9:26 points to the desolation in 70 AD.

      Matthew 24:30 points to Messiah the Prince coming in power and glory in using the Roman army to bring judgment on the unbelieving Jews.

      Keep learning and growing in The Way of Messiah!

  2. David, 07/08/2024
    Like many others, I as a lifetime Catholic, am dissatisfied with the church’s explanation/silence concerning the true meaning of Matthew 24:29-36. Your analysis of predictions preceding 24:29 are, in my opinion, plausible, reasonable and correct; however, thereafter begin problems with your explanation provided in “The Olivet Discourse Decoded”.
    Matthew 24:29, your analysis on page 84 begins with: “People tend to take this passage literally,” …….. “But Messiah is speaking to his disciples, who understood the Old Testament concepts and symbolism.”
    The problem is, if the disciples understood, why did all of them believe and teach that Jesus would return in their lifetime? When that did not happen, many Jewish converts lost their faith in Jesus.
    So, the mystery is, did the Gospel writers either misunderstand Jesus or was he wrong, or did the Father overrule and delay the events/timing predicted; whichever, the Holy Spirit was “silent”.
    Verses 29 through 36 must be presented in their entirety, starting with the word: “Immediately”, and ending with “Father only.”, as that provides context, rather than breaking down into short segments which can be misconstrued.
    Another interpretation of Matthew 24:29-36 is based on the pre-conditions that Jesus indicated must be met before the second coming can take place, (please see): Matthew 23:37-39; 24-14; 24:36.
    The ultimate timing of the second coming will be determined by the will of God the Father, not the Son. Jesus, having a dual nature, (while alive on earth) is subject to the will of the Father, example demonstrated in the agony of the garden, Matthew 26:39.
    Was the second coming delayed? As humans, we can only speculate; perhaps, we should trust that our Creator and Savior know what is in our best interests.
    Your comments will be welcomed.

    • Steve, You state that “all of the disciples believed and taught that Jesus would return in their lifetime.” Where is the proof that they all proclaimed that?



Leave a Comment