NT support for a third temple

[Hammster]

That's not what I said.

Well, it really should have been.

 

[Hammster]

No. How many have there been?

I can think of at least three or four without even looking it up.

 

[Aldebaran]

I can think of at least three or four without even looking it up.

Can you tell me how your question and answer relate to what I was saying about how the OT has most of the prophecies about the future?

 

[DavidPT]

There’s no mention of anti-Christ in 2 Thessalonians. (In fact, anti-Christ only appears in 1 John and 2 John, and it refers to those who deny that Christ came in the flesh.)And the temple was still standing when Paul wrote it, so he’s referring to the existing temple. That’s how his readers would have understood it.

The temple mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is not meaning a literal brick and mortar temple, period. Therefore, it is neither meaning the 2nd temple or a 3rd temple. There is not a single mention of Jerusalem anywhere in that chapter. Most of that ch has to be interpreted spiritually not literally.

 

[Hammster]

Can you tell me how your question and answer relate to what I was saying about how the OT has most of the prophecies about the future?

I was responding to post 153.

 

[Aldebaran]

I was responding to post 153.

Post 153:

Since you said Tribulation happened in the first century, I was curious about how you'd view it, and how you'd deal with it, if it turned out to be happening in the near future. But you call it a "fantasy world", so I take it that you don't believe it will happen. Keep your eyes open for it, because it's shaping up to take place.

Your answer in post 162:

I can think of at least three or four without even looking it up.

Sorry, but I see no relation between these.

 

[Hammster]

Post 153:


Your answer in post 162:


Sorry, but I see no relation between these.

Your view is that this is near future event. We’ve been getting these near future event predictions for countless years. They all rely on things supposedly gleaned from scripture. They all fail because the NT writers were referring to a completely different event.

 

[parousia70]

Per Premil, or at least my version, the nations that were deceived before the thousand years, are no longer deceived during the thousand years, but become deceived once again after the thousand years.

So nobody Sins during the thousand years per your version of Premil?

 

[Timtofly]

There will be no more sin after Christ’s final enemy is put under His feet. That last enemy will be death. After that, Christ then will subject Himself to the Father.

There is still that point about reigning without sin before death is defeated. I guess one can overlook that point, since obviously the last 1900 years have had sin. You all are so used to living in sin, you reject that God can remove sin even before defeating death.

 

[DavidPT]

So nobody Sins during the thousand years per your version of Premil?

If Zechariah 14:16-19 involves the millennium, the fact some might refuse to go up, that would seem to involve sinning for refusing to do as commanded. But it wouldn't involve satan having anything to do with that decision since he would be in the pit at the time. The mortal survivors still have free will during and after the millennium. And since, Adam, a mortal at the time, almost lived an entire thousand years in this age, it is then not unreasonable that mortals could live an entire thousand years and then some, post the 2nd coming. To this day no mortal has ever lived an entire thousand years. What about the next age, though? Keeping in mind I'm meaning mortals not immortals. Why can't mortals be allowed to live an entire thousand years in that age, something that was impossible in this age?

Just because some of the ones meant in Zechariah 14:16-19 might not initially comply with what is commanded of them doesn't mean they continue to not comply throughout the entire millennium. Then, when satan is loosed they have some choices to make. Do they continue to submit to what has been commanded of them, or do they rebel instead? Apparently, it's the latter.

 

[Leavened yet Adopted]

Christ can't be crucified twice Hebrews 6:6

 

[Hammster]

There is still that point about reigning without sin before death is defeated. I guess one can overlook that point, since obviously the last 1900 years have had sin. You all are so used to living in sin, you reject that God can remove sin even before defeating death.

Okay, where is reigning without sin for a 1000 years found?

 

[parousia70]

If Zechariah 14:16-19 involves the millennium, the fact some might refuse to go up, that would seem to involve sinning for refusing to do as commanded. But it wouldn't involve satan having anything to do with that decision since he would be in the pit at the time.

You are arguing FOR the flip side of the Coin you are arguing AGAINST.

If nations can not be deceived at that time, how can anyone be decieved?

And If People can still committ the gravest of Sins WHILE Satan is in the Pit, How is that different from today?

Are you claiming that during the millennium, even the unrepentant will share in Christ's victory over Satan?

That During the Millennium, even the unrepentant will be freed from Satanic Influence?

 

[parousia70]

There is still that point about reigning without sin before death is defeated. I guess one can overlook that point, since obviously the last 1900 years have had sin. You all are so used to living in sin, you reject that God can remove sin even before defeating death.

At what point in the timeline do the unrepentant achieve victory over Sin?
Is it During the Millenium?

 

[Timtofly]

So, you have mortal flesh and blood humans inheriting the kingdom of God. That directly contradicts what Paul taught.

1 Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

No, stop misquoting me. A resurrected soul is not mortal nor immortal. That is Greek pagan thinking. Paul said this corruptible will be changed for incorruptible. The soul moves from one corruptible body to a new incorruptible body. It is the reverse process that happened to Adam on the day he disobeyed God, and physically died. Adam went from a permanent God made incorruptible body to a sin nature corruptible body. Those who live in the Millennium will have a permanent incorruptible physical body like Adam had prior to sin entering the world. No sin, thus no corruptible bodies. That is why the 1000 years starts with a physical resurrection.

The reign on earth currently ongoing is not on earth, but spiritual. God is calling out of Adam's flesh and blood, descendants to dwell in Paradise forever. That is why it is invisible to those who dwell on the earth. It is spiritual, because it exist in Paradise, not on the earth.

The Millennial Kingdom is not the same Kingdom that is being gathered in Paradise. The Millennium Kingdom cannot even start until the Second Coming brings an end to sin being in the world, and the spiritual separation placed on all of Adam's offspring. The only people who choose to live during the last 1000 years, are those who get their head chopped off instead of receiving the mark during the last 42 months of Satan's rule on this earth. The choice between beheading and being removed from the Lamb's book of life can only happen during those 42 months mentioned in Revelation 13.

The current choice is to live forever in Paradise/the New Jerusalem, as that is what the Atonement was all about. That is the only point the fullness of the Gentiles represents. Not some future reign on earth. The NHNE is a totally different reality and paradigm altogether.

No one currently on earth in their current state is going to inherit any thing. The soul moves into a totally different physical body.

 

[DavidPT]

You are arguing FOR the flip side of the Coin you are arguing AGAINST.

If nations can not be deceived at that time, how can anyone be decieved?

And If People can still committ the gravest of Sins WHILE Satan is in the Pit, How is that different from today?

Are you claiming that during the millennium, even the unrepentant will share in Christ's victory over Satan?

That During the Millennium, even the unrepentant will be freed from Satanic Influence?

I'm arguing that the nations which are deceived when Christ returns, thus are allowed to remain rather than being destroyed at the time, they are no longer being deceived during the millennium because Christ and His saints are ruling the planet, and that satan is in the pit at the time, and that the beast and fp have been cast into the LOF. Thus, there is no one to deceive them since Christ and His saints obviously would not be trying to deceive them in any manner. It is not until satan is loosed that anyone is then being deceived again. My proposal involves satan setting out to deceive again someone no longer deceived, and not someone already deceived since you typically deceive someone not already deceived rather than someone that is already deceived. If they are already deceived, why do they still need to be deceived? So then, you only deceive someone already deceived, thus never deceive someone that is not deceived instead?

Then we are back to some of the questions I asked, that you never bothered to try and answer yet.

Per Amil who is it Amils think are deceived after the thousand years? Do Amils think it are the ones that remained deceived during the thousand years? Since Amils take the thousand years to be the here and now, let's assume this thousand years ends tomorrow, thus satan is loosed. Who is it that Amils see being the ones satan deceives, the number which are as the sand of the sea? Someone already deceived, or someone no longer deceived? Don't forget about Eve. Was she already deceived before satan deceived her? Thus, satan set out to deceive someone already deceived. Or did satan instead set out to deceive someone not deceived?

 

[Timtofly]

Why would God temporarily remove sin only to allow it again when the 1000 years end? That is complete nonsense.

Also, you believe that Zechariah 14 describes the same time period as the thousand years, right? How can you say there would be no sin during that time when it talks about God punishing people for not going up to Jerusalem to worship Him during that time (Zech 14:17-19)? Clearly, people not doing what God commanded them to do would be sinning.

1000 years is not temporary. 1000 days would be temporary. Sin does not enter at all. Disobedience results in Death, not sin. There is no more temporary chance to "get it right". Sin is living with disobedience non stop. These current physical bodies are dead and thrive in sin and non stop disobedience.

Clearly disobedience brings sin into the world as it did in Adam's case. God will not let that happen during the 1000 year reign on earth.

 

[Timtofly]

That’s not from the NT. You’d think with all of that supposed reference to the third temple, there’d be at least some NT references to back that up. But alas…

It was not fulfilled in the first century. You just pointed out the error of preterism. If it had happened in the NT, they would have written it into the NT. It is still future, thus not spelled out in God's Word, the NT.

 

[Hammster]

It was not fulfilled in the first century. You just pointed out the error of preterism. If it had happened in the NT, they would have written it into the NT. It is still future, thus not spelled out in God's Word, the NT.

I don’t suppose you see the error in your logic, do you.

 

[Timtofly]

Okay, where is reigning without sin for a 1000 years found?

Zechariah and Isaiah.