Luke 21:24

TribulationSigns said: ↑
Wrong as usual.

Click to expand...

AV1611VET said:

Okie doke.
So what's the deal about the Temple?
I mean, I just joined this thread and all, so I need to catch up.
Do you mind telling me what the significance is about the Temple not being destroyed in AD 70 should have on us?

Click to expand...

Hello Phil.
Would I be correct in saying that a Temple and Sanctuary actually existed in the 1st century.
Why would Jesus go thru all the trouble telling His Jewish followers about a Temple being demolished in 70ad and not have it demolished?

John 2: [Revelation 18:11]
14 and He found in the Temple those selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money-changers sitting, 15 and having made a whip of small cords, He put all forth out of the temple, also the sheep, and the oxen; and of the money-changers he poured out the coins, and the tables he overthrew,
[Nahum 3:2/Reve 18:11-13]

Every thing mentioned in Revelation 18:11-13 concerns the Temple/Sanctuary, Priesthood, sacrifices, etc.........The Jews haven't been able to correctly observe the Passover since 70ad.

The Great City/Harlot/Queen Revelation chapts 17-19

Revelation 18:11
And the merchants of the land are lamenting and are mourning over Her, that the cargo of them no-one is buying not-still
13 and cinnamon and incenses and attars and frankincense and wine and oil and flour and grain
and beasts and sheep and of horses and of chariots and of bodies and souls of men.

TribulationSigns said: ↑
Whose Jerusalem is this? What are the armies? What Judea did Christ talked about here, really!?

AV1611VET said: ↑
Well nuts to it then!

Click to expand...

I'll just move on!

Click to expand...

TribulationSigns said:

Thought so.

You rather take it on face value thinking its about a literal land and city by looking for historical or futuristic fulfillments through the book of Josephus or Dave Hunt. It's okay, as I have warned, only those with spirit through the STUDY of God's Word will understand what Christ really talked about here.

Click to expand...

mkgal1 said:

20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. (Luke 21:20–21 NKJV) ​

= part of the context of Luke 21:24

Click to expand...

Yes.
I try to quote all 3 Gospel writers when I can. Luke, Matthew and Revelation go together like white on rice........

Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke's Temple/Jerusalem Discourses harmonized

Matthew 24:16
then those in the Judea let them be fleeing! into the mountains

Mark 13:14
Whenever yet ye may be seeing see the abomination of the desolation<2050>, the one being declared by Daniel the prophet, standing where it is not binding, (whoever is reading let him be understanding!)
Then those in the Judea, let them be fleeing into the mountains

Luke 21
21 then those in the Judea, let them be fleeing into the mountains;
and those in midst of Her, let them be coming out to country;
and those in the countries placed, let them not come be entering into Her
22 That days of vengeance these are, of the to be fulfilled<4130> all the having been written 23 “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great Distress in the land and Wrath upon this people.
=========================
2 Corin 6 and the "them" question

2 Corin 6:17
wherefore come-forth<exelqete 1831> out of midst of them[Mosaic OC]! and be being separated! is saying Lord

The Great City/Harlot/Queen Revelation chapts 17-19
The OC harlot in Revelation

Revelation 18:4
And I hear another Voice out of the heaven saying
"come forth!<exelqete 1831> out of Her My people!......................

TribulationSigns said:

I am about to eat dinner soon. I will respond later tonight.

Click to expand...

Like, Literal Dinner?, Literally Soon?
Or should we understand "Eat Dinner Soon" as some sort of spiritual, elastic, metaphoric code we must uncover?

LittleLambofJesus said:

Hello Phil.
Would I be correct in saying that a Temple and Sanctuary actually existed in the 1st century.

Click to expand...

Yes, indeedy-do.

Some called it "Herod's Temple."

LittleLambofJesus said:

Why would Jesus go thru all the trouble telling His Jewish followers about a Temple being demolished in 70ad and not have it demolished?

Click to expand...

Good question, my friend!

TribulationSigns said: ↑
It is done! Sadly, many are trying to add 70 AD to the prophecy as an addendum, but Christ didn't!
Christ came to the City of Jerusalem (which was His people), and they rejected him as their foundation stone of the city and sanctuary. As a result, by their rejection, they themselves did destroy both city and sanctuary. Nevertheless, Christ has become the headstone of another building.

Click to expand...

Yes.
Josephus says the same thing concerning the Jewish rebellion destroying food reserves just before Titus got there, making the famine of the siege worse.......

Matthew 24:7
“For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
And there will be famines, pestilences<3061>,and earthquakes in various places.
Luke 21:
11 There will be great earthquakes, and famines and pestilences<3061> in different places.


The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

While Jerusalem was a prey to these ferocious and devouring factions, every part of Judea was scourged and laid waste by bands of robbers and murderers, who plundered the towns; and, in case of resistance, slew the inhabitants, not sparing either women or children. Simon, son of Gioras, the commander of one of these bands, at the head of forty thousand banditti, having with some difficulty entered Jerusalem, gave birth to a third faction, and the flame of civil discord blazed out again, with still more destructive fury.
The three factions, rendered frantic by drunkenness, rage, and desperation, trampling on heaps of slain, fought against each other with brutal savageness and madness. Even such as brou't sacrifices to the temple were murdered. The dead bodies of priests and worshipers, both natives and foreigners were heaped together, and a lake of blood stagnated in the sacred courts. John of Gischala, who headed one of the factions, burnt storehouses full of provisions ; and Simon, his great antagonist, who headed another of them, soon afterwards followed his example.
Thus they cut the very sinews of their own strength. At this critical and alarming conjuncture, intelligence arrived that the Roman an army was approaching the city. The Jews were petrified with astonishment and fear ; there was no time for counsel, no hope of pacification, no means of flight:-- all was wild disorder and perplexity :- nothing was to be heard but "the confused noise of the warrior, " -- nothing to be seen but garments rolled in blood," -- nothing to be expected from the Romans but signal and exemplary vengeance. A ceaseless cry of combatants was heard day and night, and yet the lamentations of mourners were still more dreadful.

The consternation and terror which now prevailed induced many inhabitants to desire that a foreign foe might come, and effect their deliverance. Such was the horrible condition of the place when Titus and his army presented themselves, and encamped before Jerusalem...............

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover ; and it is deserving of the very particular attention of the reader, that this was the anniversary of that memorable period in which the Jews crucified their Messiah ! At this season multitudes came up from all the surrounding country, and from distant parts, to keep the festival. How suitable and how kind, then, was the prophetic admonition of our LORD, and how clearly he into futurity when he said "Let not them that are in the countries enter into Jerusalem." Luke xxi. 21.

Nevertheless, the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers, and foreigners from all parts, so that the whole nation may be considered as having been shut up in one prison, preparatory to the execution of the Divine vengeance ; and, according to Josephus this event took place suddenly ; thus, not only fulfilling the predictions of our LORD, that these calamities should come, like the swift-darting lightning" that cometh out of the east and shineth even unto the West," and " as a snare on all of them (the Jews) who dwelt upon the face of the whole earth " (Matt. xxiv. 27, and Luke xxi 35,) but justifying, also, his friendly direction, that those who fled from the place should use the utmost possible expedition..............

.........................
........................

TribulationSigns said:

Christ came to the City of Jerusalem (which was His people), and they rejected him as their foundation stone of the city and sanctuary. As a result, by their rejection, they themselves did destroy both city and sanctuary. Nevertheless, Christ has become the headstone of another building. The kingdom representation was taken from Jews and given to another.

Click to expand...

In Matthew 21:40-45, Jesus tells a strikingly different tale than you do about WHO did the destroying at the taking of the Kingdom from the Jews and giving to another.

Not only that but He also tells a different tale than you do about what event that was. Namely, “The coming of the lord of the vineyard”.

When faced with which of these opposite tales to believe, yours, or that of Christ Jesus, my money is on The Son of God.

LittleLambofJesus said:

What about the fall of the OT congregation?
Tell me this.
What people is the Lord referring to in these Scriptures....

Click to expand...

I am back...

Matthew 24:19
Woe yet to those pregnant, and to those giving suck in those days
Mark 13:17
Woe yet to those pregnant, and to those giving suck in those days

Luke 21:
22 That days of vengeance<1557> these are, of the to be fulfilled<4130> all the having been written
23 “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!
For there will be great Distress in the land and Wrath<3709> upon this people.

Click to expand...

First, I already told you for a thousandth of time, Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 is an Olivet Discourse for NEW TESTAMENT CONGREGATION during the time when the abomination of desolation stands. Not about the Old Covenant Israel or when the abomination of desolation stand in a physical holy place when it was NOT holy in 70AD. Also not about some Jewish mothers with children in the physical city of Jerusalem in 70AD. Let read the context of these three verses, shall we?

Matthew 24:15-20 KJV
[15] When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
[16] Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
[17] Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
[18] Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
[19] And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
[20] But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Mark 13:17-19 KJV
[17] But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
[18] And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter.
[19] For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.

Luke 21:20-24 KJV
[20] And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
[21] Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
[22] For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
[23] But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
[24] And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

These are the parallel passage. So we have undeniable proof that the time of the Sabbath flight, the time of the Winter, the time of the women with child, is "IN THOSE DAYS," of the [thlipsis] (translated affliction here), which it clearly was about the Second Advent, not 70AD. You see your arms too short to box with God. You come up with contradiction after contradiction for one reason. What you tried to say about the city in 70AD is not supported by Scripture.

Matthew 24:5-9 all speak of the same event. And in verse 9 even confirms this unequivocally by saying "THEN" [tote] or "at that time" they shall deliver you up to be in [thlipsis] or affliction, and shall kill you, and ye shall be hated of all nations for Christ's name's sake. Perhaps you should stop do some serious study and think before you write because the context is about the rise of false prophets and Christs in the congregation:

Matthew 24:5

• "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."

The false Christs' and their deception in the Church is concurrent with the Elects who hold truthful testimony being hated, and many being deceived, and they being afflicted for Christ's sake. Christ is talking to His Church here, not the unbelieving Jews in 70AD. Verse 5-9 are all one period. To say less is ridiculous. So where are the verses that mention tribulation of the Jews in AD 70?

Now, what about those with child? Well actually, it refers to both the elect, and the non-elect of the congregation, because it's talking about the Church. Not an unholy Jewish Temple practicing sacrilege in AD 70, but the Church. Period. I hope you realize that the Church is the only physical holy place after the cross that could have abomination stand in it! The Jewish temple in 70AD disqualified because it was not holy at that time. Those told to flee are the elect. Those on the housetops are the elect. Those in the field (at this time) are the elect. Those with a child is a "figure" of the Church (You need to read in Galatians how God illustrated in the allegory that in the New Testament era, the woman that has more children is a figure of the New Testament Church). Selah, thus God is saying, Woe to the Church! Why? Because "she" will be judged of God as the great harlot Babylon that she is. And that is why the elect are commanded to flee to the mountains, that they not be a partaker with her plagues (Revelation 18). Again, when we read it in context and comparing scripture with scripture for our interpretation, we have consistency.

You don't seem to have figured it out yet, but the Old Testament congregation (Israel) ALREADY fell at the Cross and the kingdom representative was ALREADY taken from them and gave to the New Testament congregation that begun her ministry at Pentecost, not 70AD. But pay attention to this... The Old Testament congregation MIRRORS the New Testament congregation so the church, too, shall fall like Israel! This is what the Olivet Discourse talks about - the fall of New Testament congregation prior to Second Coming where she will be filled with false prophets and christs where the church (mother) no longer has the milk of gospel to her children anymore. That is why it is a woe upon her because God is judging her! Before God judges the church, He commanded His people (Elect) to come out of her so they will not partake of her sins (by being deceived by false prophets and christ).

Sorry, Christ did not talk about Jews in Jerusalem in 70AD because Israel already lost her kingdom representative the moment Christ went to the Cross, not when the physical stones of the temple fell when Christ said about her in the first two verses of Olivet Discourse before introduced his prophecy about His New Testament congregation prior to His Second Coming where we only can see the "signs" in the sun, moon and stars. That is why you got the wrong Jersulaem to begin with.

parousia70 said:

In Matthew 21:40-45, Jesus tells a strikingly different tale than you do about WHO did the destroying at the taking of the Kingdom from the Jews and giving to another.

Click to expand...

Please let be rational here. If you believe Christ was talking about someone who physically took "kingdom" from the Jews, then who did the destroyer gave the kingdom to? Humm?

Not only that but He also tells a different tale than you do about what event that was. Namely, “The coming of the lord of the vineyard”.

Click to expand...

Really, you think so? But now you have to explain how something that you go to great lengths to theorize must be taken very literally, is now mysteriously not very literally when it comes to God's very specific qualification of the prophecy as not one stone would be left standing one upon another. It's just this one part that isn't to be taken literally? That's not some generality, that's a very exact, precise and detailed "qualification" of the very stones of both the Temple and the City. In other words, our Lord was precise, explicit and quite unambiguous in what He said about the (so called) literal stones. First, that there would not be "one stone left standing," and then "one upon another." Thus if you are going to take the Temple building and the City construction very literally, then you by definition have to take Christ's qualifying remarks about said Temple destruction literally. Else you have confusion and or personal opinions (private interpretation) about just how much of it must be literal. If the Temple is literal and the City is literal, then the qualifying term of "every single stone" of it falling of it must be literal. Like when Christ said, "Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt." My meaning is that it's contradictory to have one thing both precisely physical in construction and not precisely physical in its destruction.

But There really is no contradiction because when Christ was crucified, both the Temple and Holy City were brought to desolation. Not as a physical entity, but as it represents the congregation of God, and its stones the people of said congregation. ...just as it does in the New Testament dispensation. The Temple building fitly framed together, a holy temple in the Lord, they are the stones where Christ is now the cornerstone of that rebuilding. Likewise the Holy city, as Christ Himself illustrated in Luke 19.

Luke 19:44

• "And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation."

Don't you see that Christ is not talking about a physical city, but the Old Testament congregation of Israel, and how it would be brought to ruin or desolation? It's so obvious. And it is also obvious that it was not in 70 A.D. by the Romans, but by Christ's own people who rejected Him. The Holy City and Sanctuary "represent" the Lord's Old Testament congregation, the people of Israel. Moreover, when God fulfills Scripture, it's not halfway, pick and choose or contradictory, it's total harmony with itself.

Daniel 9:26

• "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

The people who destroyed the city were not the Romans, it was the people of the Prince, the Messiah. Christ was cut off at the cross, not in 70 A.D., and not for Himself--for His people. Indeed true to his prophecy, the city and the sanctuary were destroyed or brought to desolation by the people of the Prince.. This is what Christ spoke about as He wept over the Holy City Jerusalem concerning its desolation. Not that it would take play over 30 years later in 70 A.D., but them being cut off and blinded when He (whom the city and sanctuary represented) was cut off. It's not talking about physical stones falling, but spiritually stones falling as the kingdom was taken from them and given to another. Not God's building the ruins again by physical stones, but by spiritual stones, with Him (whom they had rejected as Messiah) as the chief corner stone of that rebuilding. Sure, there are professing Christians running to and fro looking for a physical rebuilding of the Holy Temple and a Physical restoring of the land and city, but this is private rather than God's interpretation of the Prophecy. Now the vineyard...as it is written:

Mark 12:9-12

• "What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.
• And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:
• This was the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
• And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way."

How is it that the Jews knew, but Christians today with so much more information choose to think in terms of physical stones and buildings. LOL! Come on! Even these of Israel perceived that this building Christ spoke about in parables was about them, and the rebuilding with Christ as the corner stone, was spoken about Him. But no... your, LittleLamb, etc. insisted about how stone falling and being in rebuilding must be taken in a literal fashion simply because of the babbling of Josephus' testimony of the Romans who laid siege upon and sacked Jerusalem. That's all well and Good, but where is the Biblical validation that "this" fulfills prophecy? Simply because it seems so doesn't cut it.

When faced with which of these opposite tales to believe, yours, or that of Christ Jesus, my money is on The Son of God.

Click to expand...

Agreed! My money is on the Lord is the one who righteously Judges and I am comfortable with that! Good luck with your 70AD theory at the feet of the Lord of the Vineyard on Judgment Day!

I'm of the belief that the temples (Solomon's and Herod's) were shadows of the reality to come to those in the first century - the present reality of the living places where God now dwells (in His people). This lecture goes back to 1 Kings 8 (and 2 Chronicles 4), when Solomon's temple was dedicated. The speaker goes through and describes all the elements of the temple and how they point to Christ:


041819 in BSFDSW

So, in my opinion, there's biblical text referring to both the literal shadows (the physical temple/city of Jerusalem) and the spiritual reality of God's presence and His kingdom.

John 11 seems to point to a concern the religious leaders had during the time of Jesus when it's recorded:

Luke 21:24 is perhaps one of the most revealing that is also unique to Revelation.

Let's break it down:

First, the phrase "mouth of a sword"

Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon

4750. stoma probably strengthened from a presumed derivative of the base of 5114;
the mouth (as if a gash in the face); by implication, language (and its relations); figuratively, an opening (in the earth); specially, the front or edge (of a weapon):--edge, face, mouth.

The word "mouth" is never used in Mark's Gospel and neither in Matt 24.
This phrase is unique to Luke 21 in the Gospels and Revelation, thus again showing Luke's 70ad Temple/Jerusalem discourse unique relation to the book of Revelation.

Luke 21
15 “for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist.
24 "And they shall be falling<4098> by mouth/edge<4750> of a sword<3162>, and they shall be being led captive<163> into all the Nations<1484>.
And Jerusalem shall be being trampled<3961> by nations<1484> until which may be being filled/plhrwqwsin <4137> Times<kairos<2540>of Nations/eqnwn <1484> [Ezekiel 30:1/Daniel 12/Revelation 11:2/ 13:10]
===============================
A few OT verses:

Job 5:15
He saves the needy from the sword in their mouth; he saves them from the clutches of the powerful.
Psa 149:6
Let the high praises of God be in their mouth,
And a two-edged sword in their hand,
Isa 1:20
but if you resist and rebel, you will be devoured by the sword.”
For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.
Isa 49:2
He made my mouth like a sharpened sword, in the shadow of his hand he hid me;
he made me into a polished arrow and concealed me in his quiver.
====================================
Luke 21:24 "And they shall be falling<4098> by mouth<4750> of a sword<3162>, and they shall be being led captive<163> into all the Nations<1484>.

Rev 1:16
In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, two edged sword<4501>. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
Rev 2:16
Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword<4501> of my mouth.
Rev 19:15
Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword<4501> with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.”[fn] He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.
Rev 19:21
The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth<4501> of the rider on the horse,
and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.
=============================
Now for the word "sword".

Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon

Luke 21:24
"And they shall be falling<4098> by mouth<4750> of a sword<3162>,
and they shall be being led captive<163> into all the Nations<1484>.

3162. machaira probably feminine of a presumed derivative of 3163;
a knife, i.e. dirk; figuratively, war, judicial punishment:--sword.

This word is unique and used only in Luke of the 70ad Jerusalem/Temple discourse.

1st time used:

Mat 10:34
“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the land.
I did not come to bring peace but a sword<3162> [Revelation 6:4]
=============================
Used when James was killed:

Act 12:2
Then he killed James the brother of John with the sword<3162>.

Rom 13:4
For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword<3162> in vain;
for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
=========================================
3 times in Revelation

Rev 6:4
and there went forth another horse -- red, and to him who is sitting upon it, there was given to him to take the peace from the land,
and that one another they may slay, and there was given to him a great sword<3162> [Ezekiel 38:21 Luke 21:24].
Ezekiel 38:21 Then will I call against him every terror, declareth My Lord Yahweh.
The sword of every man against his brother shall be;
[Matthew 10:34 Revelation 6:4]

Rev 13:10
if any one a captivity doth gather, into captivity he doth go away; if any one by sword<3162> doth kill, it behoveth him by sword<3162> to be killed;
here is the endurance and the faith of the Saints. [Luke 21:24]

Rev 13:14
and it leadeth astray those dwelling on the land, because of the signs that were given it to do before the beast,
saying to those dwelling upon the land to make an image to the beast that hath the stroke of the sword<3162> and did live,

LittleLambofJesus said:

And exercise. Ever since I quit smoking some yrs back, I gained 40lbs..........food just seems to taste so much better.

Click to expand...

"I beat anorexia."

LOL -- You kill me!

LittleLambofJesus said:

That reminds me of what I bring up to people when they ask me if I am hungry.

John 4
31 And in the meanwhile His Disciples were asking Him, saying, ‘Rabbi, eat!’ 32 and He said to them, ‘I have food to eat that ye have not known.’ 33 The Disciples then said one to another, ‘Did any one bring Him anything to eat?’

Click to expand...

The disciples having brought food, they begged Jesus to eat, and so to renew his strength after that morning's work.

Jesus had forgotten about his fatigue. He tells the disciples that he has food to eat of they don't know about.

The disciples thought only of earthly food and of the possibility of someone's having brought him something to eat in their absence. They discussed the matter among themselves.

So Jesus explains to them wherein his food consists. That's food and drink if he does God's will. Jesus is sustained by the feeling which he has concerning the world's salvation.

It was God's will from eternity that this salvation should be gained for humanity, and Jesus wanted to carry out the work given him by God.

Grumman Tomcat said:

MOD HAT ON
Thread deeply pruned due to flaming and goading.
Do not identify a specific member, or a group of members, or a theological viewpoint with a derogatory or inflammatory label.
MOD HAT OFF​

Click to expand...

Post 51 has a pruned post quoted.

AV1611VET said:

Post 51 has a pruned post quoted.

Click to expand...

Dude... you have almost 4 MILLION posts.
Impressive.
Especially since you joined CF 4 years after I did.

Where'd you find the time?
Are you retired perhaps?
I'm not sure I could post 4 million times at gunpoint.

parousia70 said:

Dude... you have almost 4 MILLION posts.
Impressive.
Especially since you joined CF 4 years after I did.

Click to expand...

TYVM

parousia70 said:

Where'd you find the time?
Are you retired perhaps?

Click to expand...

Affirmative.

parousia said:

I'm not sure I could post 4 million times at gunpoint.

Click to expand...

LOL

I posted in the number thread, where I could enter one number after another, using the keypad and keyboard shortcuts (TAB-NUMBER-ENTER-TAB-NUMBER-ENTER, over and over).

I can make a thousand posts in about 45 minutes.

TribulationSigns said:

Josephus was NOT God's prophet at all.

Click to expand...

I never made the claim that Josephus was a prophet of any kind. I just said his writings are helpful from a historical standpoint.

TribulationSigns said:

If you believe Christ was talking about someone who physically took "kingdom" from the Jews, then who did the destroyer gave the kingdom to? Humm?

Click to expand...

Then how do YOU interpret Matthew 21:40-45?

I just want to clarify: it wasn't the Jews, in general (we wouldn't have the early church at all, if it weren't for faithful Jewish followers of Jesus). It was the religious leaders and their power/control of the Temple as they are recorded as having here (and concerned about losing):

TribulationSigns said:

Contrary to some people who posted here, Luke 21:24 is not talking about the physical city of Jerusalem in the Middle East in 70AD

Click to expand...

Quoting Ray Vander Laan---->"It seems that Jesus was saddened because his fellow Jews looked for military solutions to their problems rather than spiritual ones, to a political messiah rather than the Lamb of God. He warned His followers not to take part in that method of bringing in God's kingdom." ~ The Jewish Revolts

Quoting Dr. Joel McDurmon , Jerusalem's "time of visitation"---->
I would like to expand on the theological concept of “visitation” and how it relates to what Jesus did immediately after He used the phrase. This in turn will relate directly to the leveling of the temple that Jesus had just predicted as He wept over Jerusalem: “your enemies will . . . tear you down to the ground . . . And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation” (Luke 19:43–44).


The text proceeds:

And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold, saying to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a den of robbers” (19:45–46).

While we have concerned ourselves mainly with the travel narrative of Luke, it will be helpful in this instance to read the relevant accounts in the other Gospels as well. Matthew and Mark read as follows:

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers” (Matt. 21:12–13).

And he entered Jerusalem and went into the temple. And when he had looked around at everything, as it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the twelve. . . . And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold and those who bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. And he would not allow anyone to carry anything through the temple. And he was teaching them and saying to them, “Is it not written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations’? But you have made it a den of robbers” (Mark 11:12, 15–17).

John also records a temple cleansing:

The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me” (John 2:13–17).

You may notice some differences in the accounts—not necessarily contradictions, but clear differences. The most notable difference has been the subject of much discussion among scholars for a long time: Matthew, Mark, and Luke record a temple cleansing at the very end of Jesus’ ministry while John’s account happens at the very beginning of the ministry. In John’s account, Jesus leaves many believers behind in Jerusalem and eventually goes back home. He is not crucified until years later. In the synoptic accounts, the cleansing follows Jesus’ triumphal entry and it is the very thing that gets Him in trouble with the Priests and scribes, etc., and leads directly to His crucifixion within days. Now liberal scholars have jumped on this problem as evidence that the Gospels are not inspired, but pieced together according to the whims and agendas of their mere mortal authors. Mark used the account for one purpose, John cut and pasted for his own. But this, of course, assumes 1) that the accounts indeed derive from only one incident, or 2) they derive from each other, and/or 3) that even this would disprove the inspiration of the account. This knee-jerk reaction probably says more about the biases of the scholar than it does about the Bible.

The standard conservative response to the problem has been simply to say that Jesus cleansed the temple twice. And while a very decent stand-alone case can be made for two cleansings,[1] it still seems arbitrary for Jesus to have done the same thing in the same place on two separate occasions without any good explanation as to why. The standard explanation is that Jesus was just really passionate about the purity of the temple. But He had just moments before wept and pronounced the soon-coming leveling of that temple, and it seems unlikely He would have undergone such an abrupt emotional change to a zeal for it purity. Our Savior was never one subject to such emotional swings. There must be some better explanation for two cleansings.

Inspection of a Corruption in a House

Indeed, there were two separate cleansings of the Temple, and there is a better explanation for them. What lies behind these separate instances is Jesus fulfilling the role of the High Priest visiting and inspecting the touch of affliction/corruption in the house. This is described in Leviticus 14:33–53. It accounts for the multiple visitations and the repeated act of removing the corruption, then finally pronouncing the house (temple) unclean and decreeing the total destruction of the house. It also fits in with Jesus’ mission against Jerusalem. Now for considerations of space, I will not reproduce the whole long section of Leviticus here, but it is important that you take up your Bible and read it at this point. What follows are the highlights of the priestly duties throughout that passage, and how they pertain to Jesus’ ministry. ~ Jerusalem's "time of visitation" (Luke 19:45-46) The American Vision

mkgal1 said:

Then how do YOU interpret Matthew 21:40-45?

John 11:48 Then the Roman army will come and destroy both our Temple and our nation.” ​

Click to expand...

Ahhh, thanks for bringing up that passage in John.
The greek word used is #g142, which is a taking away, such as captive or "rapture".

Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon

142. airo a primary root;
to lift up; by implication, to take up or away; figuratively, to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind), specially, to sail away (i.e. weigh anchor); by Hebraism (compare 5375) to expiate sin:--away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, take (away, up).

John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans
and they shall be taking away<142> of Us
and the Place
and the Nation."

John 11:48
ean <1437> {IF EVER} afwmen <863> (5632) {WE MAY BE LETTING} auton <846> {HIM} outwV <3779> {THUS,} panteV <3956> {ALL} pisteusousin <4100> (5692) {SHALL BE BELIEVING} eiV <1519> {INTO} auton <846> {HIM,} kai <2532> {AND} eleusontai <2064> (5695) {SHALL BE COMING} oi <3588> {THE} rwmaioi <4514> {ROMANS} kai <2532> {AND} arousin <142> (5692) {SHALL BE TAKING AWAY} hmwn <2257> {OF US} kai <2532> {AND} ton <3588> {THE} topon <5117> {PLACE} kai <2532> {AND} to <3588> {THE} eqnoV <1484> {NATION.}

G142 is used in the 70ad Jerusalem/Temple discourse:

Matthew 24 Mount of Olives and Titus's 10th Legion on Mt Olives 70ad

Mat 24:39
17 “Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house.
18 “And let him who is in the field not go back to take his clothes.
39 “and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Mar 13:
15“Let him who is on the housetop not go down into the house, nor enter to take anything out of his house.
16 “And let him who is in the field not go back to take his clothes.

Luk 17:31
“In that day, he who is on the housetop, and his goods are in the house, let him not come down to take them away. And likewise the one who is in the field, let him not turn back.
========================================
The Roman denari is also mentioned in the book of Revelation concerning the destruction of 1st century Jerusalem. This depicts the famine Luke spoke of:

Luke 21:
22 For these are the days of vengance, to fulfill all things having been written.
23 But woe to those having in womb, and to the ones nursing in those days. For there will be great distress<318> upon the land and wrath<3709> on this people. [Daniel 12:1 Revelation 6:6]

Revelation 6:6
And I hear as a sound in midst of the four living ones, saying: "measure of grain Denari and three measure of barleys a Denari,
and oil and the wine no you should be injuring".

Revelation 18:13
and cinnamon, and ginger, and incenses, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine and oil, and fine flour, and grain, and cattle/beasts, and sheep, and of horses, and of chariots, and of bodies and souls of men.

https://www.preteristarchive.com/JewishWars/timeline_military.html
"..probably the greatest single slaughter in ancient history."
ROMAN SIEGE AND SACK OF JERUSALEM

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover.

and it is deserving of the very particular attention of the reader, that this was the anniversary of that memorable period in which the Jews crucified their Messiah ! At this season multitudes came up from all the surrounding country, and from distant parts, to keep the festival. How suitable and how kind, then, was the prophetic admonition of our LORD, and how clearly he into futurity when he said "Let not them that are in the countries enter into Jerusalem." Luke xxi. 21.

Nevertheless, the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers, and foreigners from all parts, so that the whole nation may be considered as having been shut up in one prison, preparatory to the execution of the Divine vengeance ; and, according to Josephus this event took place suddenly ; thus, not only fulfilling the predictions of our LORD, that these calamities should come, like the swift-darting lightning" that cometh out of the east and shineth even unto the West," and " as a snare on all of them (the Jews) who dwelt upon the face of the whole earth " (Matt. xxiv. 27, and Luke xxi 35,) but justifying, also, his friendly direction, that those who fled from the place should use the utmost possible expedition.