This *shouldn't* be controversial in Christianity

[mkgal1]

I came across this sermon of Andy Stanley's about Jesus' claim that "something greater than the Temple" had come to the world and that the Temple would, in fact, be destroyed (and just how shocking those claims were).

The fact that Jesus predicted this, that it DID happen (in the timeframe He predicted it) AND that it's verifiable by unbiased historic records shouldn't be controversial, but instead, standard Christian teaching. But it's not.

This is only about 30 minutes long - and I believe it's well worth the time.

 

[Aussie Pete]

I came across this sermon of Andy Stanley's about Jesus' claim that "something greater than the Temple" had come to the world and that the Temple would, in fact, be destroyed (and just how shocking those claims were).

The fact that Jesus predicted this, that it DID happen (in the timeframe He predicted it) AND that it's verifiable by unbiased historic records shouldn't be controversial, but instead, standard Christian teaching. But it's not.

This is only about 30 minutes long - and I believe it's well worth the time.

The controversy is new to me. I also can't imagine why it should be anything to fuss about. Still, Christians have a way of confecting disputes over non-issues.

 

[timothyu]

Perhaps the early gentile heavy church feared showing just how vulnerable another super institution could be. Especially at a time when they were trying to build their own kingdom in their own image, it would be counter-productive to announce Jesus had already replaced their institution also.

I do agree with his statement than far too many defend their church and religion more than each other (or the teachings of Jesus). Kudos for teaching that Jesus said we have it all backwards.

 

[mkgal1]

The controversy is new to me. I also can't imagine why it should be anything to fuss about. Still, Christians have a way of confecting disputes over non-issues.

Were you able to watch any of the video, by chance? I'm presuming, based on your screen name that you live in Australia. Is that true? The US seems to have its own version of Christianity - in mainstream Evangelical churches. This is off the mainstream path - but probably closer to the rest of the world's Christianity.

 

[mkgal1]

I do agree with his statement than far too many defend their church and religion more than each other (or the teachings of Jesus). Kudos for teaching that Jesus said we have it all backwards.

I loved that point. Unfortunately, I agree too.

 

[redleghunter]

Were you able to watch any of the video, by chance? I'm presuming, based on your screen name that you live in Australia. Is that true? The US seems to have its own version of Christianity - in mainstream Evangelical churches. This is off the mainstream path - but probably closer to the rest of the world's Christianity.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I came across this sermon of Andy Stanley's about Jesus' claim that "something greater than the Temple" had come to the world and that the Temple would, in fact, be destroyed (and just how shocking those claims were).

The fact that Jesus predicted this, that it DID happen (in the timeframe He predicted it) AND that it's verifiable by unbiased historic records shouldn't be controversial, but instead, standard Christian teaching. But it's not.

This is only about 30 minutes long - and I believe it's well worth the time.

Where did Jesus set a date for 70AD events?

 

[Daniel Marsh]

The controversy is new to me. I also can't imagine why it should be anything to fuss about. Still, Christians have a way of confecting disputes over non-issues.

It is a debate on minor theology about end times.

 

[mkgal1]

Where did Jesus set a date for 70AD events?

He didn't set a date, but said it would be in their generation (understood to be 40 years)

Matthew 24:34 - Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.​

 

[Carl Emerson]

This raises the issue of why on earth any believer would want to applaud the plan to build the third temple...

Yet there is very strong Christian support for this plan.

 

[Carl Emerson]

If discussion on this point does not take off here, I will raise it on a new thread.

 

[timothyu]

If discussion on this point does not take off here, I will raise it on a new thread.

Why build another Temple. The Christian religion falsely built itself into one even though it already knew Jesus was the Temple with God within, just as are those who are doing God's will rather than their own.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

He didn't set a date, but said it would be in their generation (understood to be 40 years)

Matthew 24:34 - Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.​

"So, when we read “generation” in the Bible, we have to consider the context. Usually, a generation in the Bible is roughly thirty years long or the people living during that time, the same as what we understand a generation to be in everyday talk" How long is a generation in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

Psalm 90:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

Since people in the Bible can live to be 70 to 80 years old, would not a generation be 70 or 80 years old?

 

[timothyu]

would not a generation be 70 or 80 years old?

One would think it would be based on reproductive cycles, like from the time you are born until the time your offspring would normally reprocreate.

 

[Carl Emerson]

For the record, the thrust of this message is not new to me and is pretty basic to my understanding of what Jesus did for us.

 

[Carl Emerson]

One would think it would be based on reproductive cycles, like from the time you are born until the time your offspring would normally reprocreate.

In biblical times this could be less than 20 years by this definition.

 

[timothyu]

In biblical times this could be less than 20 years by this definition.

So you and your offspring would both have kids at ten years? I was thinking having offspring around 20 then offspring likewise at 20 which would be 40 yrs to a generation.

 

[Carl Emerson]

So you and your offspring would both have kids at ten years? I was thinking having offspring around 20 then offspring likewise at 20 which would be 40 yrs to a generation.

Sorry maybe I misunderstood...

In biblical times folks married quite young in their teens.

 

[timothyu]

In biblical times folks married quite young in their teens.

I agree but in today's society that would be frowned upon so I kept it PC Of course Abraham was a late bloomer.

 

[mkgal1]

Significance of the number 40 in the Bible

And from Wiki:
This period of years represents the time it takes for a new generation to arise (Numbers 32:13). Several Jewish leaders and kings are said to have ruled for "forty years", that is, a generation. Examples include Eli (1 Samuel 4:18), Saul (Acts 13:21), David (2 Samuel 5:4), and Solomon (1 Kings 11:42).