predicting Christ's coming

Bible2 · Mar 4, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 178:

The fact that he also believes there are seven Holy Spirits and that the image of the antichrist will be an android also doesn't help his credibility.

Regarding "seven Holy Spirits", what has been said is that just as the one God is at the same time three Persons (Mt. 28:19), so the one Holy Spirit of God could at the same time be seven Spirits of God (Rev. 1:4, Rev. 3:1, Rev. 4:5, Rev. 5:6), which could be the Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of wisdom, the Spirit of understanding, the Spirit of counsel, the Spirit of might, the Spirit of knowledge, and the Spirit of the fear of the Lord (Isaiah 11:2).

eclipsenow said in post 178:

The fact that he also believes there are seven Holy Spirits and that the image of the antichrist will be an android also doesn't help his credibility.

Regarding "the image of the antichrist", what has been said is that the "image of the beast" (Rev. 13:15) could be an android image of the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) which the Antichrist's False Prophet (Rev. 13:11-16, 19:20) could cause to be made after the Antichrist receives a terrible head wound (Rev. 13:3,14b). For this injury could leave the Antichrist's facial & bodily appearance permanently marred, & could render him unable to speak clearly (like someone after a bad stroke), so that the Antichrist himself won't want to appear or speak in public again.

Did you ever see that movie "Dave"? It had a President who was in a coma, so his handlers found a regular guy who looked exactly like the President, & had him be a public stand-in for the President. He was able to speak just like the President did. It could be like that with the Antichrist's image. It could be the Antichrist's "Dave", his double, that appears & speaks (Rev. 13:15) before the world instead of his wounded self. But instead of letting people think the Antichrist's android image is the Antichrist himself, the False Prophet could tell people from the beginning the image isn't the Antichrist himself, but still fully represents him.

In Rev. 13:15, the original Greek word translated as "life" or "breath" (pneuma, G4151) can mean "spirit" in the sense of consciousness (1 Cor. 2:11a, Lk. 1:47), so that the android could appear to have a spirit, to have consciousness. The way this could be achieved would be through the android having wireless connections to huge banks of supercomputers running advanced artificial intelligence software. The False Prophet could claim the Antichrist's consciousness dwells within the android by means of neural networks imprinted with the Antichrist's brain patterns. But this could be a lie, in that the android won't actually have the Antichrist's consciousness, or any true consciousness, but will only appear to have consciousness, by its being able to pass even the most stringent Turing Test. This is a test whereby one speaks with a computer & can't tell whether it has consciousness or not, because all its answers are the same as if it had consciousness.

But the android's "consciousness" could appear far more advanced than any human's, for it could have access to huge databases containing every fact known to man, so that the android will appear to be omniscient. In this way, it could convince the world that it's not just a machine, but a material incarnation, a machine avatar, of the true God, a literal "deus ex machina", a literal "God from a machine". And this machine "God" could boast not only of his mental powers, but also of his physical powers: he could be extremely strong. And he could boast of the "immortality" of his machine body, which could be made of titanium, covered with some practically-everlasting flesh-like silicone. People could just be completely awestruck by his (what they could call) "omniscient wisdom, his strength, his indestructibility". They could consider him more than worthy of worship by (in their words) "mere humanity, which is so mentally and physically limited, made out of mere flesh and blood, which is so weak and so mortal". The world will actually worship the Antichrist's image (Rev. 13:15), just as it will actually worship Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist (Rev. 13:4,8, 12:9).

The Antichrist's image could be placed standing in the holy place of a 3rd Jewish temple in Jerusalem, so that the image will become the abomination of desolation (Mt. 24:15, Dan. 11:31). And in order to make it easy for everyone in the world to be able to see the image & worship it (Rev. 13:15), it could appear on every cell phone, television, computer, GPS navigation system, & electronic billboard at set times each day. And to make it possible for everyone to interact with it personally, it could appear as a computer generated image on each individual's cell phone, speaking in & understanding each individual's language, conversing with each individual with personalized messages & responses devised by supercomputers running artificial intelligence & language software.

And it could discuss with them even the most intimate details of their lives, for it could have access to huge databases compiled by the Antichrist's worldwide intelligence, law enforcement, economic, & health agencies, databases containing all the facts about everyone: who their family & friends are, where they live & work, who their neighbors & coworkers are, how much they make, what cars & properties they own & use, where they go, where they shop, what they buy, where they eat out, what shows & videos they watch, what they read, what they say, what they write on the internet, what their health problems are, etc., so that the Antichrist's image could seem to know everything about everyone.

eclipsenow said in post 178:

The disciples drew Jesus attention to all those buildings, and Jesus said they would be destroyed in that generation.

Regarding "all those buildings", in Matthew 24:1, the original Greek word (oikodome, G3619) translated as "buildings" includes "structures" in general (Strong's Greek Dictionary), which would including a retaining wall, and not just structures which we English speakers would consider to be "buildings".

eclipsenow said in post 178:

The disciples drew Jesus attention to all those buildings, and Jesus said they would be destroyed in that generation.

Regarding "Jesus said they would be destroyed in that generation", Matthew 24:34 refers to the fulfillment of "all these things", all the events of the tribulation and Jesus' second coming and gathering together (rapture) of the church immediately after the tribulation (Mt. 24:29-31; cf. 2 Thes. 2:1-8, 1 Thes. 4:15-17), which events Jesus had just finished describing in Matthew 24:2-31, and which he would later show in great detail in Revelation chapters 6 to 19. Matthew 24:34 didn't mean that the tribulation, second coming, and rapture would be fulfilled during the temporal generation alive at the time of Jesus' first coming, for none of those things was fulfilled during that temporal generation.

Instead, Matthew 24:34 could mean that the temporal generation which would see the 1948 AD re-establishment of Israel, which could be symbolized by the rebudding of the fig tree (Mt. 24:32-34, Hos. 9:10, Joel 1:6-7, Lk. 13:6-9, Mt. 21:19,43), won't pass, that is, won't die off completely, until the future tribulation and second coming of Matthew 24/Revelation chapters 6 to 19 are fulfilled. A temporal generation may not pass until seventy or eighty years (Ps. 90:10), or a hundred and twenty years (Gen. 6:3).

This doesn't require that the second coming will occur right before, like one year, before that generation will pass: that is, sixty-nine, or seventy-nine, or a hundred and nineteen years after 1948: in 2017, 2027, or 2067. And if the tribulation which will immediately precede the second coming and rapture (Mt. 24:29-31, 2 Thes. 2:1-8, Rev. 19:7-20:6) will last seven years (Dan. 9:27), the tribulation's first year didn't have to be in 2011, and won't have to be in 2021, or 2061, but could be in a future year (for example, 2020) earlier than 2021.

Matthew 24:34 could also include the meaning that the figurative, all-times generation of the elect (Mt. 24:22, Lk. 16:8b, Col. 3:12, 1 Thes. 1:4) won't pass away from the earth during the future tribulation of Matthew 24/Revelation chapters 6 to 18, but that some of the elect will survive (Mt. 24:22) until Jesus' second coming (1 Thes. 4:15-17; 1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-53) immediately after the tribulation of Matthew 24/Revelation chapters 6 to 18 (Mt. 24:29-31; 2 Thes. 2:1-8, Rev. 19:7 to 20:6).

eclipsenow said in post 178:

A normal reading of the text shows the disciples pointed out the temple buildings to Jesus which were beautifully decorated, not it's unremarkable retaining wall!

The retaining wall is remarkable, still today, for the immense size of its stones, each of which, at the time of Jesus' first coming, was no doubt polished to an amazing, gleaming perfection.

eclipsenow said in post 178:

He's looking back through time and 'disqualifying' this event and demanding that Matt 24 talk about some future, hypothetical, still to be built third temple.

It's not hypothetical, for the reasons given in the "hypothetical 3rd temple" part of post 112.

eclipsenow said in post 178:

If Jesus had been talking about a third temple, I'm pretty sure he would have just come out and SAID SO, and not deceived the disciples like this.

There was no deceit. He just didn't tell them everything at that time (see John 16:12-13), like he would later in, for example, the Holy Spirit-inspired scriptures written by the apostles Paul and John.

eclipsenow said in post 178:

Luke obviously thought the antichrist was so important that he forgot to even mention him, and just mentions Titus's armies instead! (See Luke 21).

Luke 21:24 makes no mention of Titus, nor was it fulfilled by Titus' armies, for it refers to the same future treading down of Jerusalem by the Gentiles as Revelation 11:2b, during the Antichrist's future, literal 42-month worldwide reign (Rev. 13:5-18).

Bible2 · Mar 4, 2013

Ronald said in post 180:

He destroyed the Old Temple and prior to that, when Jesus died, that Temple became obsolete.

The temple in itself didn't become obsolete, but was still accepted by God as a valid temple, even after Jesus died (Lk. 24:53, Acts 22:17).

Ronald said in post 180:

Sure we all co-exist with false religions, false philosophies, evil and sin too, but does that mean they are acceptable to God?

Nothing false is acceptable to him, but the Old Covenant Mosaic law (the OCML) in itself isn't false, but in itself remains holy before God (Rom. 7:12). That's why God still keeps an ark of the OCML in his temple building in heaven (Rev. 11:19), and why it was possible for the apostle Paul one time to involve himself with the 2nd temple's OCML practices without him committing sin (Acts 21:20-26, 1 Cor. 9:20). This isn't to say that when the ultra-Orthodox Jews in the future build an OCML 3rd temple and restart the OCML sacrifices, that their Jesus-denying motives will be holy before God, but that the OCML 3rd temple in itself and its OCML animal sacrifices in themselves will be holy before God because the OCML in itself remains holy before God (Rom. 7:12), even though its letter is no longer meant to be practiced by people (Rom. 7:6) because the New Covenant has been inaugurated by Jesus and his once-for-all-time sacrifice on the Cross for our sins (Heb. 10:1-23, Mt. 26:28).

Ronald said in post 180:

Besides, don't you think the animal activists will be out demonstrating against these presumed sacrifices?

Possibly, just as they hate any slaughter of animals, even in factories to make food for people.

Bible2 · Mar 4, 2013

Frenchfrye said in post 181:

Hebrews talks about how the law that ended was the sacrificial laws because they were a representation of Christ so sacrificing after he died is trying to say that he wasn't good enough

It is not just the letter of the old sacrificial laws that believers are no longer supposed to perform, but the letter of the entire Old Covenant Mosaic law (Romans 7:6), for the reasons given in the "Old Covenant Mosaic law" part of post 81.

eclipsenow · Mar 4, 2013

Bible2 said:
Regarding "seven Holy Spirits", what has been said is that just as the one God is at the same time three Persons (Mt. 28:19), so the one Holy Spirit of God could at the same time be seven Spirits of God (Rev. 1:4, Rev. 3:1, Rev. 4:5, Rev. 5:6), which could be the Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of wisdom, the Spirit of understanding, the Spirit of counsel, the Spirit of might, the Spirit of knowledge, and the Spirit of the fear of the Lord (Isaiah 11:2).

I'm sorry, but that's heresy. There is one God in 3 persons, and He is Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Not Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Wisdom Ghost, Counsel Ghost, Might Ghost, etc.

I skipped over your 20 million paragraphs on the Android image of the antichrist because it bores me stupid, and it's your same usual tactic of give an inch, take 20 million miles.

Regarding "all those buildings", in Matthew 24:1, the original Greek word (oikodome, G3619) translated as "buildings" includes "structures" in general (Strong's Greek Dictionary), which would including a retaining wall, and not just structures which we English speakers would consider to be "buildings".

The NAS doesn't interpret it as 'structures' like that at all. It has a lot to do with buildings, and some to do with edifying, but nothing really to do with retaining walls. Sorry.

NAS Word Usage - Total: 18building 8, buildings 3, edification 5, edifying 1, upbuilding 1
Oikodome - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard

The NIV says:
24 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 Do you see all these things? he asked. Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.

the NET, CEV, ASV, and ESV all say "Buildings of the temple".
ESV
24 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple.

Sorry pal, but it just says buildings. That's what it says. Not some retaining wall way down beneath the buildings: the disciples were overwhelmed by the TEMPLE buildings.

Regarding "Jesus said they would be destroyed in that generation", Matthew 24:34 refers to the fulfillment of "all these things", all the events of the tribulation and Jesus' second coming and gathering together (rapture) of the church immediately after the tribulation (Mt. 24:29-31; cf. 2 Thes. 2:1-8, 1 Thes. 4:15-17),

In verse 2 Jesus says "These things" describing the destruction of the temple in AD70. It's the same phrase he uses in verse 33. "So also, when you see all *these things*, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away."

At the very gates. That's Titus. Titus we can anticipate. Titus we can flee from. Titus we can know.

The only reason some might be confused and place this chapter near the end is because Jesus *does* compare the false messiah's with his universal, inescapable, glorious return. That's verses 23-31, comparing Jesus very real, very unmistakable return with that of the false promises of false Messiahs. 31 talks about the end of the world, a subject the disciples had just asked about!

But in verse 32 we are suddenly back to then, to the imminent and *predictable* destruction of the temple and the need for Christians to get out of Jerusalem.

32 From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.

In other words, when you see the Romans coming, get out of town! But when Jesus returns what can you do? Nothing. It's inescapable and everywhere.

But the end of the world? 'That day'? Instead of being like AD70, like Titus, predictable, local, escapable that day is unpredictable, unknowable, and utterly inescapable.

36 But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. 37 For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, 39 and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. 42 Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

which events Jesus had just finished describing in Matthew 24:2-31, and which he would later show in great detail in Revelation chapters 6 to 19.

Sorry, but Rev 6 to 19 is not really about Titus.

Matthew 24:34 didn't mean that the tribulation, second coming, and rapture would be fulfilled during the temporal generation alive at the time of Jesus' first coming,

That's because Jesus jumps from COMPARING his mysterious, unknowable, unpredictable, inescapable return with the VERY knowable, predictable, and escapable Titus.

Instead, Matthew 24:34 could mean that the temporal generation

No it can't or Jesus was lying to his disciples, intentionally deceiving them. They asked about THAT temple and he answered about THAT temple. He said "these things" would be destroyed, and "when you see all these things" occurred in AD70.

which would see the 1948 AD re-establishment of Israel, which could be symbolized by the rebudding of the fig tree (Mt. 24:32-34, Hos. 9:10, Joel 1:6-7, Lk. 13:6-9, Mt. 21:19,43),

We are the rebudding of the fig tree. Don't forget, Jesus also cursed the fig tree.

won't pass, that is, won't die off completely, until the future tribulation and second coming of Matthew 24/Revelation chapters 6 to 19 are fulfilled. A temporal generation may not pass until seventy or eighty years (Ps. 90:10), or a hundred and twenty years (Gen. 6:3).

Just keep counting, because I'm CERTAIN modern Israel has no eschatological significance at all.

This doesn't require that the second coming will occur right before, like one year, before that generation will pass: that is, sixty-nine, or seventy-nine, or a hundred and nineteen years after 1948: in 2017, 2027, or 2067. And if the tribulation which will immediately precede the second coming and rapture

The tribulation was the destruction of Jerusalem, the hyperbole describing Jerusalem's worst period of destruction and persecution ever.

Matthew 24:34 could also include the meaning that the figurative, all-times generation of the elect (Mt. 24:22, Lk. 16:8b, Col. 3:12, 1 Thes. 1:4)

No bible scholar I know accepts that theory. "This generation" ALWAYS means the generation of people alive when Jesus was speaking. It's a semantic cheat to pretend anything else. Show me ONE other instance of "This generation" meaning another period in all of the gospels.

We're in the tribulation now, which is why John wrote Revelation and 1 John to his disciples. How do we know we are in the Last Hour? There are antichrists. See 1 John.

The retaining wall is remarkable, still today, for the immense size of its stones, each of which, at the time of Jesus' first coming, was no doubt polished to an amazing, gleaming perfection.

It's nothing compared to the actual temple buildings that the disciples were actually showing to Jesus and that Jesus was actually talking about!

It's not hypothetical, for the reasons given in the "hypothetical 3rd temple" part of post 112.

It's totally hypothetical because Jesus was talking about HEROD's temple, as that was the temple Jesus was looking at when he spoke, and 'these things' were going to happen in that generation. See the rest of this post for the other reasons it was to occur in Jesus generation.

There was no deceit. He just didn't tell them everything at that time (see John 16:12-13), like he would later in, for example, the Holy Spirit-inspired scriptures written by the apostles Paul and John.

Now you're telling me this conversation didn't even happen as recorded? Are you kidding me? What do you mean "He just didn't tell them everything at that time"? I don't think you've thought this part of your answer out at all! You're totally undermining the bible here.

Luke 21:24 makes no mention of Titus, nor was it fulfilled by Titus' armies,

Luke makes NO mention of an all powerful, worldwide deceiving antichrist either! Funny that! However, Luke DOES use language completely consistent with Roman warfare, sieges, occupations, and military strategy.
20 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, 22 for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. 23 Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Doesn't mention modern warfare. It says a SWORD! It actually means a sword. Because despite all your silly semantic games that amount to self-deception but nothing more, Jesus WAS talking about THAT temple which actually DID fall in AD70, get it!???

for it refers to the same future treading down of Jerusalem by the Gentiles as Revelation 11:2b, during the Antichrist's future, literal 42-month worldwide reign (Rev. 13:5-18).

Fail! Presumption and assumption and semantic games. You've utterly failed to say anything convincing here.

Bible2 · Mar 5, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 185:

The NAS doesn't interpret it as 'structures' like that at all.

It doesn't matter how the NAS interprets it. What matters is what the Greek word itself can mean.

It doesn't always have to mean "buildings" in the English sense of that word. Just as it can sometimes mean "edification" (for example, 2 Corinthians 10:8), in the sense of spiritual "confirmation" (Strong's Greek Dictionary), so it can mean any physical "structure" (Strong's Greek Dictionary), which would include a retaining wall.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

In verse 2 Jesus says "These things" describing the destruction of the temple in AD70.

The things in Matthew 24:2 can include the temple's retaining wall, for the reasons given in the "Herod's temple" part of post 86.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

It's the same phrase he uses in verse 33. "So also, when you see all *these things*, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

It's the same phrase, but not the same subject, for the reasons given in the "Matthew 24:34" part of post 182, which also addressed the "this generation" part of Matthew 24:34.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

But the end of the world? 'That day'? Instead of being like AD70, like Titus, predictable, local, escapable… that day is unpredictable, unknowable, and utterly inescapable.

It may not be unknowable, for the reasons given in post 67.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Sorry, but Rev 6 to 19 is not really about Titus.

That's right, just as Matthew 24 isn't.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

We are the rebudding of the fig tree.

Not necessarily. It can refer to the 1948 re-establishment of Israel.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Don't forget, Jesus also cursed the fig tree.

Jesus' cursing of the fruitless fig tree (Mt. 21:19) was symbolic of his curse on the part of Old Covenant Israel which rejected him (Mt. 21:43), for a fig tree can represent Israel (Hos. 9:10, Joel 1:6-7, Lk. 13:6-9).

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Just keep counting, because I'm CERTAIN modern Israel has no eschatological significance at all.

It could.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

The tribulation was the destruction of Jerusalem, the hyperbole describing Jerusalem's worst period of destruction and persecution ever.

The tribulation wasn't the destruction of Jerusalem, because Jesus didn't return "immediately after" that tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31).

eclipsenow said in post 185:

"This generation" ALWAYS means the generation of people alive when Jesus was speaking.

Not necessarily.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Show me ONE other instance of "This generation" meaning another period in all of the gospels.

Matthew 24:34 / Mark 13:30 / Luke 21:32 can be the only instance, just as, for example 2 Pet. 3:10,12 can be (& in fact is) the only place in the NT where the Greek word "stoicheion" (G4747) is used to refer to physical elements, and just as, e.g., Rev. 6:6 can be (& in fact is) the only place in the NT where the Greek word "choinix" (G5518) is used at all.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

We're in the tribulation now, which is why John wrote Revelation and 1 John to his disciples.

Regarding Revelation 1:9, see the "Rev. 1:9" part of post 176.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

How do we know we are in the Last Hour? There are antichrists. See 1 John.

That doesn't require that the tribulation of Matthew 24/Revelation chapters 6-18 has started yet.

Also, the existence of many antichrists (1 Jn. 2:18) doesn't contradict that there will be an individual man (2 Thes. 2:3-4,9, Rev. 13:4-18) who is commonly called the Antichrist, just as on the side of good the existence of many sons of God (Jn. 1:12) doesn't contradict that there's an individual man (Jesus Christ of Nazareth) who is called the Son of God (Jn. 20:31).

The man commonly called the Antichrist is the individual "man of sin" (2 Thes. 2:3) who will sit in a 3rd Jewish temple in Jerusalem and proclaim himself God (2 Thes. 2:4, Dan. 11:36). He's the individual "man" aspect of the "beast" who will come (Rev. 13:18) and bring the world into the worship of Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and himself (Rev. 13:4,8, 12:9). He will rule the earth for 3.5 literal years (Rev. 13:5-10, Dan. 7:25, 12:7) and will have a miracle-working False Prophet (Rev. 19:20, 16:13) who by amazing Luciferian miracles (cf. 2 Thes. 2:9), such as calling fire down from heaven (Rev. 13:13), will deceive the people of the world into worshipping a speaking (possibly an android) image of the Antichrist (Rev. 13:15) and receiving a mark of the Antichrist's name or gematrial name-number (666) on their right hand or forehead (Rev. 13:16-18). The Antichrist and his False Prophet will ultimately be cast into the lake of fire at Jesus' 2nd coming (Rev. 19:20), while at that time Satan will be bound in the bottomless pit for a thousand years (Rev. 20:1-3). None of these things has happened yet.

The idea of a future, individual-man Antichrist was correctly recognized in the scriptures by the church from early on. Irenaeus (born c. 140 AD) used the term: "speaking of Antichrist, [Paul] says, 'who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped'" (Against Heresies 3:6:5; 2 Thes. 2:4); "...by means of the events which shall occur in the time of Antichrist is it shown that he, being an apostate and a robber, is anxious to be adored as God" (Against Heresies 5:25:1; 2 Thes. 2:4, Dan. 11:36, Rev. 13:8); "...when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem" (Against Heresies 5:30:4b; Rev. 13:5, 2 Thes. 2:4, Dan. 7:25, 12:7); "...the number of the name of the beast ... the name of Antichrist" (Against Heresies 5:30:1; Rev. 13:17c-18).

The gematrial numerical values of the letters in the Antichrist's name will add up to 666 (Rev. 13:17c-18).

eclipsenow said in post 185:

It's nothing compared to the actual temple buildings that the disciples were actually showing to Jesus and that Jesus was actually talking about!

They all could have been including the retaining wall, with its amazingly huge stones, which still today stand one on top of the other. Compare the disciples' exclamation: "see what manner of stones ... are here!" (Mark 13:1).

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Now you're telling me this conversation didn't even happen as recorded?

It did.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

What do you mean "He just didn't tell them everything at that time"

The conversation at that time didn't include all the information that Jesus would reveal later (John 16:12-13).

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Luke makes NO mention of an all powerful, worldwide deceiving antichrist either!

He doesn't have to for it to be true.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

However, Luke DOES use language completely consistent with Roman warfare, sieges, occupations, and military strategy.

He refers to nothing that is limited to ancient Roman warfare.

eclipsenow said in post 185:

Doesn't mention modern warfare. It says a SWORD!

That could include a modern bayonet. Also, "sword" could be used figuratively in the sense of any weapon, just as, for example, the truth of the adage: "The pen is mightier than the sword" applies to any physical weapon, not just a sword. For, in the sense of the adage, the pen is mightier than a gun as well.

*******

eclipsenow said in post 178:

See my post 777 where I reveal all your posts to be 666. [Wink]

What do you mean by 666? And are you referring to the "666" in Rev. 13:17c-18? If so, what the Bible means by the "666" in Rev. 13:17c-18 is the number six hundred and sixty-six, the "number of the name" of the individual "man" who is the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast). The number of a name (Rev. 13:17c-18, 15:2) is determined by employing the ancient method of gematria, by which numerical values are assigned to the letters of any alphabet as follows: the first nine letters are 1 through 9, the next nine letters are 10 through 90 (counting by tens), and the rest of the letters are 100, 200, 300, etc., to the end of the alphabet. In Rev. 13:18, the "counting", the adding up, of the gematrial number of the Antichrist's name should be done in the same way that the gematrial numerical values of the three Greek letters (Chi, Xi, and Stigma) at the end of Rev. 13:18 (in the original Greek Textus Receptus, the TR) are added up to arrive at the number six hundred and sixty-six. The numerical values of the letters of the ancient Greek alphabet (including the three obsolete letters of Stigma, Qoppa, and Sampi) were as follows:

Alpha = 1, Beta = 2, Gamma = 3, Delta = 4, Epsilon = 5, Stigma = 6, Zeta = 7, Eta = 8, Theta = 9, Iota = 10, Kappa = 20, Lambda = 30, Mu = 40, Nu = 50, Xi = 60, Omikron = 70, Pi = 80, Qoppa = 90, Rho = 100, Sigma = 200, Tau = 300, Upsilon = 400, Phi = 500, Chi = 600, Psi = 700, Omega = 800, Sampi = 900.

Just as the numerical values of Chi, Xi, and Stigma at the end of Rev. 13:18 (TR) add up to 666, so the numerical values of the letters in the Antichrist's name will add up to 666 (Rev. 13:17c-18). John used the Greek alphabet because it was the most common one used by believers when the book of Revelation was written. Today, the English alphabet is the most common one used by believers, insofar as English is the current lingua franca of the world. So the Antichrist's name will most likely add up to 666 in the English alphabet. The whole purpose of Rev. 13:17c-18 is to facilitate for believers, not to make difficult for them, the identification of a certain man as possibly being the Antichrist. If the letters in his name had to be transliterated into the Greek alphabet, this would vitiate this purpose, for almost all believers today wouldn't know how to properly perform this transliteration, and so different believers would come up with different transliterations, and so would come up with different gematrial numbers for the name of the man in question.

If believers think that someone is the Antichrist, they need to check and make sure that his name adds up to 666 in gematria (Rev. 13:17c-18). If it doesn't, then he isn't the Antichrist. If it does, then he could be, and they need to be especially wary of him and not be taken in by any deceptive charisma, intelligence, or amazing deeds that he might display. But even if someone's name adds up to 666, this doesn't mean that he's definitely the Antichrist, for just by chance there could be more than one person in the world whose name adds up to 666. The Antichrist also has to come from a country the territory of which used to be part of one of the four Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded Alexander the Great (Dan. 8:8-9,21-25). These kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezek. 28:2, 2 Thes. 2:4), and have a name like (for example) "Nabil Abdullah Falakal al-Hakim", which adds up to 666.

But if a man from the Middle East has a name which adds up to 666, even this doesn't assure that he's the Antichrist, for he also has to sit in a 3rd Jewish temple in Jerusalem and proclaim himself God (2 Thes. 2:3-4, Dan. 11:31,36, Mt. 24:15, Rev. 11:1-2). Once he does that, there won't be any room for doubt over whether or not he's the Antichrist; his identity will have been definitely revealed (2 Thes. 2:3b-4).

The gematrial numerical values of the letters of the English alphabet are: A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4, E=5, F=6, G=7, H=8, I=9, J=10, K=20, L=30, M=40, N=50, O=60, P=70, Q=80, R=90, S=100, T=200, U=300, V=400, W=500, X=600, Y=700, Z=800. The way that the gematrial number of a name is "counted" (Rev. 13:17c-18), is added up, is simply by adding up the gematrial numerical values of all the letters in that name. So, for example, the number of the name "John Mark Smith" is 636, because: J=10, O=60, H=8, N=50, M=40, A=1, R=90, K=20, S=100, M=40, I=9, T=200, H=8. Total = 636. The Antichrist's name will add up to 666 (Rev. 13:17c-18).

eclipsenow · Mar 5, 2013

Bible2 said:
It doesn't matter how the NAS interprets it. What matters is what the Greek word itself can mean.

Exactly: like...

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Geneva]

(the act of) building, building up
metaph. edifying, edification
1. the act of one who promotes another's growth in Christian wisdom, piety, happiness, holiness
a building (i.e. the thing built, edifice)

[/FONT]http://classic.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3619

The most common use is building, and that's what the context tells us the disciples were actually discussing with Jesus.

Luke 21 "And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, 6 As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down. "

But hey, what Luke REALLY meant to say was "while some of them were speaking of the out-of-sight retaining wall, down out of the way as they walked past all the amazing TEMPLE BUILDINGS"....

Come on pal. Just admit it. They were talking about the temple. It says so. Clearly. In the GREEK!

ἱεροῦ
Luke 21:5 Biblos Interlinear Bible

Ooops! Just thought you'd run another gospel all over me and ignore this pertinent bit of information did you? Or while we're looking at it, how much of the retaining wall had "noble stones and offerings". They just put noble stones and OFFERINGS outside the temple structure did they? Come on, pull the other one, it plays jingle bells.

The things in Matthew 24:2 can include the temple's retaining wall, for the reasons given in the "Herod's temple" part of post 86.

No they can't for the reasons given in the paragraph above focussing on Luke 21. (Why I let you ignore that for so long I'll never guess. Oh, yes I will. I'm too busy responding to all your other heresies, like God having seven spirits!)

It may not be unknowable, for the reasons given in post 67.

I think you TOTALLY missed the point. Back when you were in school (assuming you ever did school), did you ever do a 'compare and contrast' exercise? That's what Jesus is doing here. He's saying the armies of Titus, bearing their very real swords (see Luke 21 which has no AoD remember?) will be predictable and avoidable, but his return will be unpredictable and unavoidable. For more detail see Post 185 which explains why Matthew 24 is actually comparing Titus predictable, escapable destruction of Jerusalem to Jesus unpredictable, inescapable return on Judgement Day. (And you secretly *know* it is!)
http://www.christianforums.com/t7725405-19/#post62556583

Not necessarily. It can refer to the 1948 re-establishment of Israel.

The rest of the New Testament forbids it. Read Romans, Galations, and especially Hebrews. Do we need sacrifice? No. Jesus replaces it. Do we need a High Priest? No. Jesus replaces it. Do we even need a temple? No. Jesus was the temple that was destroyed and raised again in 3 days. Every single bit of national ID, of Jewish culture, of the Old Testament was fulfilled in Jesus. And Acts 1:8 shows Jesus answer about restoring the kingdom.... GO OUT TO THE WORLD! It's not about national identities any more. Take the gospel to the world.

Jesus' cursing of the fruitless fig tree (Mt. 21:19) was symbolic of his curse on the part of Old Covenant Israel which rejected him (Mt. 21:43), for a fig tree can represent Israel (Hos. 9:10, Joel 1:6-7, Lk. 13:6-9).

Exactly: as did Titus's destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. It all fits. Why can't you see that? The temple was destroyed in AD70 as predicted in Luke 21. You simply don't get to turn Jesus into a liar over this!

The disciples simply had no way to know which bits of the foundation would survive or not. If I were one of the disciples watching Rome's armies approaching Israel, I would know it was time to actually OBEY what Jesus said would happen in my generation, and get out of the city! Spread the gospel to the world. Run for it! Because Jerusalem was going DOWN... just as the cursed fig tree represents. If ANYTHING, the fig tree rebudding refers to us Christians, those who dwell in the vine of Jesus. That's us fulfilling all sorts of agricultural prophecies in the Old Testament.

eclipsenow · Mar 5, 2013

I said:

"This generation" ALWAYS means the generation of people alive when Jesus was speaking. Not necessarily.

You said: "Not necessarily.".

Go on mate, prove it! I asked you to show me one instance where 'this generation' meant anything other than the generation of people alive at the time. You started going on about irrelevancies. We're not talking about physical elements but the generation, aren't we? What, you thought you'd just start rambling and hope I wouldn't notice how off topic you were?
My argument is that in no other place in Luke does the term 'this generation' refer to anyone but people alive when Jesus was alive. Check it out baby!

γενεὰ

Γενεὰ (Genea) — 17 OccurrencesMatthew 12:39 N-NFS
BIB: εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Γενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ
NAS: and adulterous generation craves
KJV: adulterous generation seeketh after
INT: he said to them A generation evil and
Matthew 12:45 N-DFS
BIB: καὶ τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ τῇ
NAS: be with this evil generation.
KJV: unto this wicked generation.
INT: also to generation this the
Matthew 16:4 N-NFS
BIB: Γενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ
NAS: and adulterous generation seeks after
KJV: adulterous generation seeketh after
INT: A generation evil and
Matthew 17:17 N-VFS
BIB: εἶπεν Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος καὶ
NAS: and perverted generation, how
KJV: perverse generation, how long
INT: said O generation unbelieving and
Matthew 24:34 N-NFS
BIB: παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ἕως
NAS: to you, this generation will not pass away
KJV: This generation shall not
INT: will have passed away the generation this until
Mark 8:12 N-NFS
BIB: Τί ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ζητεῖ
NAS: does this generation seek
KJV: this generation seek after
INT: Why the generation this seeks
Mark 8:12 N-DFS
BIB: δοθήσεται τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ σημεῖον
NAS: will be given to this generation.
KJV: be given unto this generation.
INT: There will be given to the generation this a sign
Mark 8:38 N-DFS
BIB: ἐν τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ τῇ
NAS: and sinful generation, the Son
KJV: and sinful generation; of him also
INT: in the generation this
Mark 9:19 N-VFS
BIB: λέγει Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος ἕως
NAS: O unbelieving generation, how long
KJV: faithless generation, how long
INT: says O generation unbelieving until
Mark 13:30 N-NFS
BIB: παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη μέχρις
NAS: to you, this generation will not pass away
KJV: that this generation shall not
INT: will have passed away the generation this until
Luke 9:41 N-VFS
BIB: εἶπεν Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος καὶ
NAS: and perverted generation, how long
KJV: and perverse generation, how long
INT: said O generation unbelieving and
Luke 11:29 N-NFS
BIB: λέγειν Ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη γενεὰ
NAS: This generation is a wicked
KJV: an evil generation: they seek
INT: to say the generation this generation
Luke 11:29 N-NFS
BIB: γενεὰ αὕτη γενεὰ πονηρά ἐστιν
NAS: is a wicked generation; it seeks
INT: generation this generation an evil is
Luke 11:30 N-DFS
BIB: ἀνθρώπου τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ
NAS: of Man be to this generation.
KJV: be to this generation.
INT: of man to the generation this
Luke 21:32 N-NFS
BIB: παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ἕως
NAS: to you, this generation will not pass away
KJV: This generation shall not
INT: will have passed away the generation this until

Greek Concordance: ÎÎµÎ½Îµá½° (Genea) -- 17 Occurrences

Your tribulation references completely ignore the many times I've already shown that John wants everyone to obey his letter (Revelation) because the tribulation was already starting.

Also, the existence of many antichrists (1 Jn. 2:18) doesn't contradict that there will be an individual man (2 Thes. 2:3-4,9, Rev. 13:4-18) who is commonly called the Antichrist,

Dude, John so completely turns it into a metaphor that we see the 2 Thess 2 'man of lawlessness' (who is NOT called the antichrist) we see a literary figure, not a real person.

just as on the side of good the existence of many sons of God (Jn. 1:12) doesn't contradict that there's an individual man (Jesus Christ of Nazareth) who is called the Son of God (Jn. 20:31).

Good argument, but it ignores what I was saying about exactly how 1 John transforms our understanding of the word.

He doesn't really say 'such a person is AN antichrist' but says "is ANTICHRIST!" It's more of a metaphorical descriptor than a title by the time John's finished with his passage, and 2 Thess does the same thing.

The man commonly called the Antichrist is the individual "man of sin" (2 Thes. 2:3) who will sit in a 3rd Jewish temple

There is no 3rd temple yet. Blah blah blah, you just rush off the pertinent details in an effort to distract from the FACT that Jesus was discussing THE TEMPLE, the one they could see (Luke 21) and Jesus said THAT TEMPLE would be destroyed.

It was.

They all could have been including the retaining wall, with its amazingly huge stones, which still today stand one on top of the other. Compare the disciples' exclamation: "see what manner of stones ... are here!" (Mark 13:1).

No, wrong wrong wrong: see Luke 21. And yes, the temple had real big stones as well. And NOBLE stones and OFFERINGS. Did the retaining wall have those scattered around it's base? I don't think so.

That could include a modern bayonet. Also, "sword" could be used figuratively in the sense of any weapon, just as, for example, the truth of the adage: "The pen is mightier than the sword" applies to any physical weapon, not just a sword. For, in the sense of the adage, the pen is mightier than a gun as well.

Sorry pal, you're stretching to use metaphors rather than admit the literal truth now. How ironic! You cannot read metaphors and symbols when they ARE metaphors and symbols, but when Jesus says SWORD and actually means SWORD, because the Romans DID come and and destroy the TEMPLE that Jesus WAS actually talking about (Luke 21) in AD70, guess what? They used swords. Are we getting it yet? :doh:

eclipsenow · Mar 5, 2013

I said:

"This generation" ALWAYS means the generation of people alive when Jesus was speaking. Not necessarily.

You said: "Not necessarily.".

Go on mate, prove it! I asked you to show me one instance where 'this generation' meant anything other than the generation of people alive at the time. You started going on about irrelevancies. We're not talking about physical elements but the generation, aren't we? What, you thought you'd just start rambling and hope I wouldn't notice how off topic you were?
My argument is that in no other place in Luke does the term 'this generation' refer to anyone but people alive when Jesus was alive. Check it out baby!

γενεὰ

Γενεὰ (Genea) 17 OccurrencesMatthew 12:39 N-NFS
BIB: εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Γενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ
NAS: and adulterous generation craves
KJV: adulterous generation seeketh after
INT: he said to them A generation evil and
Matthew 12:45 N-DFS
BIB: καὶ τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ τῇ
NAS: be with this evil generation.
KJV: unto this wicked generation.
INT: also to generation this the
Matthew 16:4 N-NFS
BIB: Γενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ
NAS: and adulterous generation seeks after
KJV: adulterous generation seeketh after
INT: A generation evil and
Matthew 17:17 N-VFS
BIB: εἶπεν Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος καὶ
NAS: and perverted generation, how
KJV: perverse generation, how long
INT: said O generation unbelieving and
Matthew 24:34 N-NFS
BIB: παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ἕως
NAS: to you, this generation will not pass away
KJV: This generation shall not
INT: will have passed away the generation this until
Mark 8:12 N-NFS
BIB: Τί ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ζητεῖ
NAS: does this generation seek
KJV: this generation seek after
INT: Why the generation this seeks
Mark 8:12 N-DFS
BIB: δοθήσεται τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ σημεῖον
NAS: will be given to this generation.
KJV: be given unto this generation.
INT: There will be given to the generation this a sign
Mark 8:38 N-DFS
BIB: ἐν τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ τῇ
NAS: and sinful generation, the Son
KJV: and sinful generation; of him also
INT: in the generation this
Mark 9:19 N-VFS
BIB: λέγει Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος ἕως
NAS: O unbelieving generation, how long
KJV: faithless generation, how long
INT: says O generation unbelieving until
Mark 13:30 N-NFS
BIB: παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη μέχρις
NAS: to you, this generation will not pass away
KJV: that this generation shall not
INT: will have passed away the generation this until
Luke 9:41 N-VFS
BIB: εἶπεν Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος καὶ
NAS: and perverted generation, how long
KJV: and perverse generation, how long
INT: said O generation unbelieving and
Luke 11:29 N-NFS
BIB: λέγειν Ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη γενεὰ
NAS: This generation is a wicked
KJV: an evil generation: they seek
INT: to say the generation this generation
Luke 11:29 N-NFS
BIB: γενεὰ αὕτη γενεὰ πονηρά ἐστιν
NAS: is a wicked generation; it seeks
INT: generation this generation an evil is
Luke 11:30 N-DFS
BIB: ἀνθρώπου τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ
NAS: of Man be to this generation.
KJV: be to this generation.
INT: of man to the generation this
Luke 21:32 N-NFS
BIB: παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ἕως
NAS: to you, this generation will not pass away
KJV: This generation shall not
INT: will have passed away the generation this until

Greek Concordance: ÎÎµÎ½Îµá½° (Genea) -- 17 Occurrences

Your tribulation references completely ignore the many times I've already shown that John wants everyone to obey his letter (Revelation) because the tribulation was already starting.

Also, the existence of many antichrists (1 Jn. 2:18) doesn't contradict that there will be an individual man (2 Thes. 2:3-4,9, Rev. 13:4-18) who is commonly called the Antichrist,

Dude, John so completely turns it into a metaphor that we see the 2 Thess 2 'man of lawlessness' (who is NOT called the antichrist) we see a literary figure, not a real person.

just as on the side of good the existence of many sons of God (Jn. 1:12) doesn't contradict that there's an individual man (Jesus Christ of Nazareth) who is called the Son of God (Jn. 20:31).

Good argument, but it ignores what I was saying about exactly how 1 John transforms our understanding of the word.

He doesn't really say 'such a person is AN antichrist' but says "is ANTICHRIST!" It's more of a metaphorical descriptor than a title by the time John's finished with his passage, and 2 Thess does the same thing.

The man commonly called the Antichrist is the individual "man of sin" (2 Thes. 2:3) who will sit in a 3rd Jewish temple

There is no 3rd temple yet. Blah blah blah, you just rush off the pertinent details in an effort to distract from the FACT that Jesus was discussing THE TEMPLE, the one they could see (Luke 21) and Jesus said THAT TEMPLE would be destroyed.

It was.

They all could have been including the retaining wall, with its amazingly huge stones, which still today stand one on top of the other. Compare the disciples' exclamation: "see what manner of stones ... are here!" (Mark 13:1).

No, wrong wrong wrong: see Luke 21. And yes, the temple had real big stones as well. And NOBLE stones and OFFERINGS. Did the retaining wall have those scattered around it's base? I don't think so.

That could include a modern bayonet. Also, "sword" could be used figuratively in the sense of any weapon, just as, for example, the truth of the adage: "The pen is mightier than the sword" applies to any physical weapon, not just a sword. For, in the sense of the adage, the pen is mightier than a gun as well.

Sorry pal, you're stretching to use metaphors rather than admit the literal truth now. How ironic! You cannot read metaphors and symbols when they ARE metaphors and symbols, but when Jesus says SWORD and actually means SWORD, because the Romans DID come and and destroy the TEMPLE that Jesus WAS actually talking about (Luke 21) in AD70, guess what? They used swords. Are we getting it yet? :doh:

prewrathrap · Mar 5, 2013

ALLorNOTHINGatall4CHRIST said:
Since the Bible says no man shell know the date or the hour how much is acceptable when it comes to predicting His return? Is it OK to predict He come within your lifetime within the next 100 years or should we not try at all?

If we are not to know, then why did the prophets write down words, visions, dreams, and angelic visits?

God warned Noah - how many saved?
God warned Lot - how many saved?
God sends two witnesses - how many saved out of Rahabs house?

How many virgins are at the door on the day the bridegroom is to come?

It is wise to study what the Lord has said through his servants, the prophets.
Even Daniel had a most excellent prayer and angelic visit after understanding the 70 years in Jeremiah the prophecy of coming of the Messiah.

Shalom
Mark

Bethwhite · Mar 5, 2013

prewrathrap said:
If we are not to know, then why did the prophets write down words, visions, dreams, and angelic visits?

God warned Noah - how many saved?
God warned Lot - how many saved?
God sends two witnesses - how many saved out of Rahabs house?

How many virgins are at the door on the day the bridegroom is to come?

It is wise to study what the Lord has said through his servants, the prophets.
Even Daniel had a most excellent prayer and angelic visit after understanding the 70 years in Jeremiah the prophecy of coming of the Messiah.

Shalom
Mark

eclipsenow · Mar 6, 2013

prewrathrap said:
If we are not to know, then why did the prophets write down words, visions, dreams, and angelic visits?

It depends what we're talking about. Daniel warned Israel of Antiochus Epiphanes. Jesus warned his disciples of Titus.

God warned Noah - how many saved?
God warned Lot - how many saved?
God sends two witnesses - how many saved out of Rahabs house?

As I said above: Daniel gave Israel the heart to keep going and trusting in God, as Antiochus Epiphanes would not rule forever. Jesus warned the disciples to get out of town when the Romans came: so it's hard to know how many were saved but Jesus was very specific about it.

It is wise to study what the Lord has said through his servants, the prophets.

Agreed, but most of what they wrote was fulfilled in Jesus death and resurrection. Hebrews 1.

1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son

The gospel so fulfils the Old Covenant that the days of the New Covenant are known as the Last Days. See Acts 2 for more.

Even Daniel had a most excellent prayer and angelic visit after understanding the 70 years in Jeremiah the prophecy of coming of the Messiah.

Good.

Bethwhite · Mar 6, 2013

eclipsenow said:
It depends what we're talking about. Daniel warned Israel of Antiochus Epiphanes. Jesus warned his disciples of Titus.

As I said above: Daniel gave Israel the heart to keep going and trusting in God, as Antiochus Epiphanes would not rule forever. Jesus warned the disciples to get out of town when the Romans came: so it's hard to know how many were saved but Jesus was very specific about it.

Agreed, but most of what they wrote was fulfilled in Jesus death and resurrection. Hebrews 1.

1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son

The gospel so fulfils the Old Covenant that the days of the New Covenant are known as the Last Days. See Acts 2 for more.

Good.

He's not done yet. Jesus will come again and restore all things after two days (2000 years), on the 3rd day (millennium).

Acts 3:21 Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.

Hosea 6:1 Come, let us return to the Lord.
He has torn us to pieces
but he will heal us;
he has injured us
but he will bind up our wounds.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will restore us,
that we may live in his presence.

Amos 9:8 Surely the eyes of the Sovereign Lord
are on the sinful kingdom.
I will destroy it
from the face of the earth.
Yet I will not totally destroy
the descendants of Jacob,
declares the Lord.
9 For I will give the command,
and I will shake the people of Israel
among all the nations
as grain is shaken in a sieve,
and not a pebble will reach the ground.
10 All the sinners among my people
will die by the sword,
all those who say,
Disaster will not overtake or meet us.

11 In that day
I will restore Davids fallen shelter
I will repair its broken walls
and restore its ruins
and will rebuild it as it used to be,

Keachian · Mar 6, 2013

Bethwhite said:
He's not done yet. Jesus will come again and restore all things after two days (2000 years), on the 3rd day (millennium).

Christ already returned on the third day that is why we celebrate his Resurrection, the link then to our Resurrection is tenuous at best.

eclipsenow · Mar 6, 2013

Bethwhite said:
He's not done yet. Jesus will come again and restore all things after two days (2000 years), on the 3rd day (millennium).

Why? I don't see any prophecy corresponding with any timing whatsoever, whether on the century or millennium timeframes.

Acts 3:21 Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.

True, but this doesn't tell us a time does it?

Hosea 6:1 Come, let us return to the Lord.
He has torn us to pieces
but he will heal us;
he has injured us
but he will bind up our wounds.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will restore us,
that we may live in his presence.

Jesus was and is the temple that was torn down and rebuilt on the third day!

Amos 9:8 Surely the eyes of the Sovereign Lord
are on the sinful kingdom.
I will destroy it
from the face of the earth.
Yet I will not totally destroy
the descendants of Jacob,
declares the Lord.
9 For I will give the command,
and I will shake the people of Israel
among all the nations
as grain is shaken in a sieve,
and not a pebble will reach the ground.
10 All the sinners among my people
will die by the sword,
all those who say,
Disaster will not overtake or meet us.

I'm not an expert on the Old Testament, but isn't this talking about the exile?

11 In that day
I will restore Davids fallen shelter
I will repair its broken walls
and restore its ruins
and will rebuild it as it used to be,

As happened under Cyrus, resetting the stage for Jesus to walk the streets of Jerusalem.

Bethwhite · Mar 6, 2013

progmonk said:
Christ already returned on the third day that is why we celebrate his Resurrection, the link then to our Resurrection is tenuous at best.

eclipsenow said:
Why? I don't see any prophecy corresponding with any timing whatsoever, whether on the century or millennium timeframes.

True, but this doesn't tell us a time does it?

Jesus was and is the temple that was torn down and rebuilt on the third day!

I'm not an expert on the Old Testament, but isn't this talking about the exile?

As happened under Cyrus, resetting the stage for Jesus to walk the streets of Jerusalem.

What did Jesus say to Israel?

Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

How long would they be desolated?

Hosea 6:1 Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. 2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
3 Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the Lord: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth.

Israel was not desolated for 2 twenty-four hour days before He comes and they say, "blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord".

Israel is desolated for 2000 years before He comes and they will say, "blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord".

Keachian · Mar 6, 2013

Bethwhite said:
What did Jesus say to Israel?

Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

How long would they be desolated?

Hosea 6:1 Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. 2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
3 Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the Lord: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth.

Israel was not desolated for 2 twenty-four hour days before He comes and they say, "blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord".

Israel is desolated for 2000 years before He comes and they will say, "blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord".

Hosea is a pre-exilic northern prophet, so the desolation and call back can line up with the return of Israel to the land, I'm not sure why we need to place him in 2nd Temple Judaism and link him to Jesus' lament over Jerusalem

Keachian · Mar 6, 2013

I know futurists and historicists go on about amillenialists having horrible hermeneutics, but I really think that knowing the background of the prophecies is important, or is that just me?

Bible2 · Mar 6, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 187:

Exactly: like...

1. (the act of) building, building up
2. metaph. edifying, edification
the act of one who promotes another's growth in Christian wisdom, piety, happiness, holiness
3. a building (i.e. the thing built, edifice)

Oikodome - Greek Lexicon

The most common use is building, and that's what the context tells us the disciples were actually discussing with Jesus.

Luke 21 "And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, 6 “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” "

Regarding "the most common use is building", the most common use of the Greek word "oikodome" (G3619) in the New Testament is not to refer to a building in the literal sense of the English word "building". In fact, nothing requires that the word is ever used that way in the New Testament. For Matthew 24:1, Mark 13:1, and Mark 13:2 can be using the word in the sense of any literal "edifice" (part of the third, studylight.org definition quoted above). And a retaining wall can be referred to even in English as an "edifice", for in English an "edifice" can be any "large or massive structure" (Webster's English Dictionary), just as Strong's Greek Dictionary says that oikodome (G3619) can refer to any "structure", not just to "buildings" in the literal English sense of that word.

Similarly, Romans 14:19, Romans 15:2, 1 Corinthians 14:3, 1 Corinthians 14:5, 1 Corinthians 14:12, 1 Corinthians 14:26, 2 Corinthians 10:8, 2 Corinthians 12:19, 2 Corinthians 13:10, Ephesians 4:12, Ephesians 4:16, and Ephesians 4:29 use the same Greek word oikodome (G3619) to refer not to any "buildings" in the literal English sense of that word, but to how Christians should spiritually "edify" one another.

And 1 Corinthians 3:9 and Ephesians 2:21 refer to only a figurative building made up of all believers together. And 2 Corinthians 5:1 refers to only a figurative building related to the individual body of each individual believer.

So not once in the New Testament do we find an instance where the Greek word oikodome (G3619) must be referring to "buildings" in the literal English sense of that word.

eclipsenow said in post 187:

The most common use is building, and that's what the context tells us the disciples were actually discussing with Jesus.

Luke 21 "And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, 6 “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” "

Luke 21:5-6 can refer to the stones of the entire second temple complex, including the Wailing Wall.

eclipsenow said in post 187:

But hey, what Luke REALLY meant to say was "while some of them were speaking of the out-of-sight retaining wall, down out of the way as they walked past all the amazing TEMPLE BUILDINGS"....

Nothing requires that the retaining wall was out of sight. Indeed, Mt. 24:2 could even have been spoken just to the north and west of the Wailing Wall (also called the Western Wall), for it was spoken just after Jesus had departed from the temple complex (Mt. 24:1), and one of the main temple complex exits (called Wilson's Arch and bridge by archaeologists) was just to the north of the Wailing Wall and at the same level as the top of the Temple Mount (see the temple complex map insert in the Dec. 2008 issue of National Geographic magazine).

eclipsenow said in post 187:

Or while we're looking at it, how much of the retaining wall had "noble stones and offerings".

Regarding "offerings", in Luke 21:5, the original Greek word (anathema, G0334) translated as "gifts" (KJV) is derived from the Greek word anatithemai (G0394), which can mean to "communicate" (Galatians 2:2). Even today Jews stick pieces of paper with prayer requests between the stones of the Wailing Wall hoping that this will help them to communicate with God.

eclipsenow said in post 187:

Or while we're looking at it, how much of the retaining wall had "noble stones and offerings".

Regarding "noble stones", in Luke 21:5, the original Greek word (kalos, G2570) translated as "goodly" (KJV) can mean "beautiful" (Strong's Greek Dictionary). At the time of Jesus' first coming, the stones of the Wailing Wall could have been quite beautiful, polished to an amazing, gleaming perfection.

*******

eclipsenow said in post 188:

My argument is that in no other place in Luke does the term 'this generation' refer to anyone but people alive when Jesus was alive.

There does not have to be any "other place", for the reasons given in the "only instance" part of post 186.

eclipsenow said in post 188:

Your tribulation references completely ignore the many times I've already shown that John wants everyone to obey his letter (Revelation) because the tribulation was already starting.

Regarding "John wants everyone to obey his letter (Revelation)", that was addressed in the "Rev. 1:3" part of post 104.

eclipsenow said in post 188:

Your tribulation references completely ignore the many times I've already shown that John wants everyone to obey his letter (Revelation) because the tribulation was already starting.

Regarding "because the tribulation was already starting", are you referring to Revelation 1:9? If so, that was addressed in the "Rev. 1:9" part of post 176.

Bible2 · Mar 7, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 186:

He's saying the armies of Titus, bearing their very real swords (see Luke 21 which has no AoD remember?) will be predictable and avoidable, but his return will be unpredictable and unavoidable.

Regarding "Luke 21 which has no AoD", Luke 21 is still the same Olivet Discourse as Matthew 24, which does refer to the abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:15, Daniel 11:31). See the "in Mt. 24:15, Jesus is referring to Dan. 11:31" part of post 111.

eclipsenow said in post 186:

He's saying the armies of Titus, bearing their very real swords (see Luke 21 which has no AoD remember?) will be predictable and avoidable, but his return will be unpredictable and unavoidable.

Regarding "his return will be unpredictable", it could be predictable, for the reasons given in post 66.

eclipsenow said in post 186:

And Acts 1:8 shows Jesus answer about restoring the kingdom.... GO OUT TO THE WORLD! It's not about national identities any more.

Regarding Acts 1:8, it does not contradict the fact that the rebudding of the fig tree (Matthew 24:32) can refer to the 1948 re-establishment of Israel, just as Acts 1:8 does not contradict the fact that Jesus' cursing of the fig tree (Matthew 21:19) was symbolic of his curse on unbelieving Old Covenant Israel (Matthew 21:43). The Israel that was re-established in 1948 is the same Old Covenant Israel that Jesus cursed at his first coming, for it still rejects Jesus and still considers itself to be under the Old Covenant. This Israel's merely "putting forth leaves" again (Matthew 24:32) in 1948 was nothing more than a restoration to what the fig tree in Matthew 21:19,43 had been before it was cursed by Jesus and then destroyed in 70 AD: a tree with leaves, but without any fruit.

Also, the unbelieving, Old Covenant Israel that was re-established in 1948 may never bear fruit, for it could be destroyed before Jesus' second coming by a Baathist army, just as it had been destroyed back in 70 AD by a Roman army.

eclipsenow said in post 186:

And Acts 1:8 shows Jesus answer about restoring the kingdom....

Regarding "restoring the kingdom" to Israel (Acts 1:6), that means restoring the kingdom of Israel in a physical way in which it will bear fruit, which will not happen until Jesus' second coming. See the "Jesus' kingdom is Israel" part of post 76.

eclipsenow said in post 186:

It's not about national identities any more.

It is still about a national identity, for just as all believers are individual branches in the vine which is Jesus (Jn. 15:5), the only way to salvation (Jn. 14:6, Acts 4:12), so all believers are individual branches in the good olive tree of Israel, the Jews' own tree (Rom. 11:17,24). For all Jewish believers remain part of Israel (Rom. 11:1) as the natural branches in the tree of Israel (Rom. 11:24), & all Gentile believers have been grafted as branches from a wild olive tree into the tree of Israel (Rom. 11:17,24, Eph. 2:12,19, Gal. 3:29) so they can partake of the salvation of the New Covenant (Mt 26:28, 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 9:15) made only with Israel (Jer. 31:31-34, Jn. 4:22b). This doesn't mean a wild branch becomes a natural branch, that a Gentile believer becomes a genetic Jew, but that Gentile believers, even while remaining branches from a wild olive tree, even while remaining genetic Gentiles, are still grafted in to become part of the good olive tree of Israel (Rom. 11:17,24).

Under the New Covenant, only some Jews are cut off from the tree of Israel (Rom. 11:17,24) because of their unbelief in Jesus (Rom. 11:20) & his saving, New Covenant Passover death on the Cross for our sins (1 Cor. 5:7b, Mt. 26:28). Compare the Old Covenant cutting off of only some Israelites from Israel if they failed to keep the Old Covenant Passover (Num. 9:13).

eclipsenow · Mar 7, 2013

Bible2 said:
Regarding "the most common use is building", the most common use of the Greek word "oikodome" (G3619) in the New Testament is not to refer to a building in the literal sense of the English word "building". In fact, nothing requires that the word is ever used that way in the New Testament. For Matthew 24:1, Mark 13:1, and Mark 13:2 can be using the word in the sense of any literal "edifice" (part of the third, studylight.org definition quoted above). And a retaining wall can be referred to even in English as an "edifice", for in English an "edifice" can be any "large or massive structure" (Webster's English Dictionary), just as Strong's Greek Dictionary says that oikodome (G3619) can refer to any "structure", not just to "buildings" in the literal English sense of that word.

But context is the key! They're speaking about beautiful buildings, not just a large wall. :doh:

I'm sick of playing this pedantic semantic game with you. Everything in the context refers to the buildings, nothing in the context excludes the buildings or specifically mentions the wall. You're grasping at straws and drowning in the attempt. :doh:

The buildings were knocked down in AD70, period.

Similarly, Romans 14:19, Romans 15:2, 1 Corinthians 14:3, 1 Corinthians 14:5, 1 Corinthians 14:12, 1 Corinthians 14:26, 2 Corinthians 10:8, 2 Corinthians 12:19, 2 Corinthians 13:10, Ephesians 4:12, Ephesians 4:16, and Ephesians 4:29 use the same Greek word oikodome (G3619) to refer not to any "buildings" in the literal English sense of that word, but to how Christians should spiritually "edify" one another.

Granted, which shows how similar the word 'building' is in the English! 'It was a remarkable building!'
'He was building the group.'
The disciples were remarking on the amazing buildings. Amazing, hey? :doh:

And 1 Corinthians 3:9 and Ephesians 2:21 refer to only a figurative building made up of all believers together. And 2 Corinthians 5:1 refers to only a figurative building related to the individual body of each individual believer.

Yes, but it's still a figurative building, not a retaining wall in mind! :doh:

You're only proving my point for me.

So not once in the New Testament do we find an instance where the Greek word oikodome (G3619) must be referring to "buildings" in the literal English sense of that word.

What? WHAT? You're just plain off with the pixies here.

Luke 21:5-6 can refer to the stones of the entire second temple complex, including the Wailing Wall.

You're stretching for those straws again, aren't you!? Sorry mate, but you're wrong. The word specifically says temple, not building, so all your attempts to abstract the word BUILDING above just fall flat on their face. Right here, right now, Luke 21 burns your argument. The TEMPLE would be destroyed, not one stone left on another. Sorry Pal, but that's a VERY specific outcome. Your argument from silence whimpers away like a burp in a thunderstorm.

Nothing requires that the retaining wall was out of sight. Indeed, Mt. 24:2 could even have been spoken just to the north and west of the Wailing Wall (also called the Western Wall), for it was spoken just after Jesus had departed from the temple complex (Mt. 24:1), and one of the main temple complex exits (called Wilson's Arch and bridge by archaeologists) was just to the north of the Wailing Wall and at the same level as the top of the Temple Mount (see the temple complex map insert in the Dec. 2008 issue of National Geographic magazine).

Blah blah blah... 'could have': why not just say "I WISH it said this because then it would be so much more convenient. Sorry Pal, just more burps in a thunderstorm. Luke 21 spells out that the temple would be destroyed. Why don't you go on a word hunt and try and disprove that the bible means temple when it says TEMPLE! :doh:

Regarding "offerings", in Luke 21:5, the original Greek word (anathema, G0334) translated as "gifts" (KJV) is derived from the Greek word anatithemai (G0394), which can mean to "communicate" (Galatians 2:2). Even today Jews stick pieces of paper with prayer requests between the stones of the Wailing Wall hoping that this will help them to communicate with God.

1. Well, is the word "gifts" or not? You can harp on all you want about "communicate" but that's another word. This word is "gifts", isn't it? Talk about changing the subject to divert attention away from an inconvenient fact. :doh:

Why don't you tell us all where the Jews used to put their gifts, hey?

2. And where's the evidence that is what they did back then when they still had this thing we call the temple? Hmmm? They only do that now because it's the only sad little reminder they have of the once proud and glorious temple building. But that's gone now, isn't it, after it was destroyed, with not one stone on another, exactly as Jesus predicted.

Regarding "noble stones", in Luke 21:5, the original Greek word (kalos, G2570) translated as "goodly" (KJV) can mean "beautiful" (Strong's Greek Dictionary). At the time of Jesus' first coming, the stones of the Wailing Wall could have been quite beautiful, polished to an amazing, gleaming perfection.

Mate, this is just plain absurd. This ridiculous argument from silence you have isn't fooling anyone but yourself. You need a glass of warm milk and a nap, because you're obviously not thinking straight. You are trying (and failing) to 'disqualify' AD70 from fulfilling the obvious meaning of the Olivet discourse, especially the obvious meaning of Luke 21. But you are just wasting pixels right now. Your argument rests on something the scriptures never actually spell out: that the only way these verses could be fulfilled is if the retaining wall was also destroyed. That's an argument from silence. The bible never says that. It says the word 'buildings' and the word 'temple'. This was literally fulfilled in AD70.

But not only this, the disciples had no way to guess that the foundations would survive. When early Christians saw Romans surrounding Jerusalem, do you think they agonised over whether or not to OBEY Jesus and make a run for it (as he commanded the to!) based on the fact that the retaining walls MIGHT survive? That's absurd! Josephus made some enormous claims for this horrible event. Check it out.

Josephus claims that 1,100,000 people were killed during the siege, of which a majority were Jewish, and that 97,000 were captured and enslaved, including Simon bar Giora and John of Giscala.[4]
Siege of Jerusalem (70) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Over a million Jews were murdered. The temple and its buildings were destroyed. The Roman soldiers even sacrificed to their Eagle standard in honour of Rome and their General, Titus. Buildings all through Jerusalem burn.

And here you are, 2000 years later in a wealthy country with the luxury of being removed from all that suffering, and a hobby of playing 'guess the end times tables', and you patronisingly think think the disciples were back there wondering whether that was actually it? How can you think they ever doubted it was the AoD that Jesus mentioned? It was exactly like Antiochus Epiphanes... no, it was far, far worse! More Israelites died, and the temple destroyed for 2000 years and counting! That's the heart of the Kingdom of Israel, GONE! Until Jesus died for us all, that was the heart of the sacrificial system, the visible outward symbol of God's reconciliation with them, the focal point of Israel's security and national identity: all destroyed in one foul attack! The sacrificial system? Desolate! The temple worship? Desolate! The sense of a kingdom of God? Desolate! The very nation of Israel? DESOLATE!

And you think the disciples sat around and wondered whether this was the Abomination that causes desolation? Do you really think first century Christians ignored Jesus words to flee to the hills!? Do you think they didn't notice one million of their countrymen murdered? Do you think they just huddled together in cold corners as the rest of Jerusalem burned, and told each other, "Don't worry, it will be all right, we're still God's people because the retaining wall is still intact?"

predicting Christ's coming

Bible2

Guest

Bible2

Guest

Bible2

Guest

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Bible2

Guest

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Newbie

Regular Member

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Regular Member

On Sabbatical

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Regular Member

On Sabbatical

On Sabbatical

Bible2

Guest

Bible2

Guest

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Similar threads