Dispensational Premillennialism????

Would you define me as a Dispensational Premillennialist?

  • No

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I think you have some aspects of this belief pattern.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I think that you have many aspects of Dispensational Premillennialism.

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Total voters
    2

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's rubbish.......
No it's not. Many of the elect did not understand the gospel until after Christ's work was done and He explained it to them clearly - including those of the elect who were closest to Him in His ministry - including His cousin John.
Yes, it does. It is a works-before-faith salvation not a faith-that-begets-works-salvation. The different path makes it a different salvation and you just went on record acknowledging it is a different path.
People like those who brought sacrifices for sin (including Mary the mother of Jesus) did take a different path than the one I took when I received with gladness the simple message of the gospel when it was explained clearly to me some 52 year ago.

People like those who obeyed God in the wilderness and worshiped at the tabernacle through the bringing of their animal sacrifices did take a different path than Billy Graham and Martin Luther.

And no - you are wrong. They did not understand the mechanism for salvation clearly as Billy, and I did when they were justified because of their faith and attendant works.

I have no idea where you get the idea that the saints of old understood the gospel as clearly as we do. It certainly isn't from Hebrews 11.
And as to the Wiki article, when I have the time I'll gladly get my books down from my library and quote Chafer, Ryrie, Pentecost and the rest to show you what DPism teaches.
I doubt very much that you will represent what they teach truthfully. Anyone can prove pretty much anything they want about the teachings of others by taking their quotes out of context.
You must think about what the logic of DPism leads to, His student. By saying the Gentiles can simply come to Christ but the Jews of bloodline Israel mus take another path Dispensationalism is unwittingly asserting a second soteriology than the one the church has asserted for centuries. John Darby showed up and changed all that.
No one is teaching any such thing. In fact no one has ever said that the later day Jews can have their acts of faith accredited to them as righteousness as their forefathers did - without a full understanding of the works of Christ on their behalf as you and I did.

That being said ----

*** Lets cut to the chase and get one thing perfectly clear when it comes to the teachings of Dispensational Premillenialists - lest you labor under a misunderstanding (I.e. - a straw man you yourself were taught about what they teach).

It seems that you think that Dispensationalists teach that God will "institute" temple worship and animal sacrifice in the later days much as He did in the wilderness and beyond for instance. They teach no such thing.

Them teaching that temple worship and animal sacrifice has been predestined to occur in the later days by the acts of Christ rejecting Jews (before all Israel comes to Christ) does not equate to God instituting such worship and sacrifice in place of or to replace the gospel.

Where on earth did you get such an idea?

God also predestined the rise of the Roman Catholic cult in the dark ages and that does not equate to Him "instituting" those false teachings or approving of them as a means unto salvation.

While it is true that Dispensationalists (and I as well) believe that Jews will begin temple worship and animal sacrifice in a later day nation called Israel and that that worship and sacrificial system will eventually lead to their reception of Christ as the true Messiah when it is all brought to naught by the acts of the Anti Christ and the False Prophet - that says nothing about God accepting that form of worship as being efficacious unto salvation before or until they so turn to Jesus Christ as Messiah.

Is that what you think Dispensationalists believe? It is not.

Believing such a straw man explains why you feel so strongly against Dispensationalists. But it doesn't make you right about them being wrong. It only makes you wrong about your ideas about what they believe.

We can approach what most of them believe concerning the Millennium and any temple activities that occur in that Millennial reign of Christ only if and when you correct your beliefs about what they teach concerning "later day" temple related worship before and during the "time of Jacob's trouble".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The many dispensationalists I know actually preach the same Gospel to Gentile and Jew alike.
Yes, they do. That has already been noted.

Salvation is by grace through faith. That is what Christians believe, including Dispensational Premillennialists, and if a DPists happens to be sharing the gospel toady or tomorrow or next Saturday with a person who turns out to be Jewish that is what that person will hear; salvation by grace through faith in Jesus the Messiah, God's anointed one.

No one here, including me, has any problem with that.

The problem arises when we examine the rest of DPism. The problem arises when we examine the DP eschatology in particular because it is there that the reality of what the teach regarding Israel and how Israel will come to faith in Christ later. Right now anyone may hear the gospel, repent, and be saved by grace through faith in Christ but that's all gonna change because real soon now we're going to exit the "church age," a term nowhere found in scripture and God's gonna remove all the Christians and the Jews/Israel is gonna live an Old Testament existence with a new temple and a return to the old laws and a return to the animal sacrifices that don't do anything - God is going to have them restart a now-meaningless slaughter ritual because, well, you know that's what God does; he re-starts up rituals He made meaningless by His Son's fulfillment of those rituals. Not only are they going to have to do all that works stuff but....

God's gonna kill a third of them any way.

It's got to be that way before Jesus comes back. Jesus doesn't come back untill all that's done because God promised them a postage stamp sized parcel of land at the east end of the Mediterranean and He's got to keep His promise even with covenant-breakers.

Only after that will Israel be saved.

So, yes, this day and tomorrow, and next week the sharing of the gospel goes on as usual and if a Jew or ten happens to repent and come to faith by that means then yaaaay, but eventually a whole other path to the blood of Christ is gonna have to happen. A path built of works, animal sacrifices (and human sacrifices).

Because that's the way God planned it.

According to Dispensational Premillennialism, at any rate.



All the rest of Christendom believes something entirely different and did so almost uniformly prior to John Darby in the mid-a800s.


So, farouk, before responding further read through the posts already posted because your post isn't new. Its content was previously addressed and I'm not a big fan of having to unnecessarily repeat content in a text-based medium.
 
Upvote 0

Brian Mcnamee

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2017
2,308
1,294
64
usa
✟213,965.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, they do. That has already been noted.

Salvation is by grace through faith. That is what Christians believe, including Dispensational Premillennialists, and if a DPists happens to be sharing the gospel toady or tomorrow or next Saturday with a person who turns out to be Jewish that is what that person will hear; salvation by grace through faith in Jesus the Messiah, God's anointed one.

No one here, including me, has any problem with that.

The problem arises when we examine the rest of DPism. The problem arises when we examine the DP eschatology in particular because it is there that the reality of what the teach regarding Israel and how Israel will come to faith in Christ later. Right now anyone may hear the gospel, repent, and be saved by grace through faith in Christ but that's all gonna change because real soon now we're going to exit the "church age," a term nowhere found in scripture and God's gonna remove all the Christians and the Jews/Israel is gonna live an Old Testament existence with a new temple and a return to the old laws and a return to the animal sacrifices that don't do anything - God is going to have them restart a now-meaningless slaughter ritual because, well, you know that's what God does; he re-starts up rituals He made meaningless by His Son's fulfillment of those rituals. Not only are they going to have to do all that works stuff but....

God's gonna kill a third of them any way.

It's got to be that way before Jesus comes back. Jesus doesn't come back untill all that's done because God promised them a postage stamp sized parcel of land at the east end of the Mediterranean and He's got to keep His promise even with covenant-breakers.

Only after that will Israel be saved.

So, yes, this day and tomorrow, and next week the sharing of the gospel goes on as usual and if a Jew or ten happens to repent and come to faith by that means then yaaaay, but eventually a whole other path to the blood of Christ is gonna have to happen. A path built of works, animal sacrifices (and human sacrifices).

Because that's the way God planned it.

According to Dispensational Premillennialism, at any rate.



All the rest of Christendom believes something entirely different and did so almost uniformly prior to John Darby in the mid-a800s.


So, farouk, before responding further read through the posts already posted because your post isn't new. Its content was previously addressed and I'm not a big fan of having to unnecessarily repeat content in a text-based medium.
Hi your mistaking prophecy with the plan of God as if everything was ordered a certain way rather than God prophesied it to happen because He is outside of time and and knows the choices we make that effect everyone. God works all things indirectly to the counsel of His will. So when God declares the things to come of which you mock the covenant which God made unconditionally with Abraham for that postage stamp piece of land. If we test the scriptures to see if God will cast off Israel I think you will find that the law was a conditional covenant and that did require destruction and banishment for breaking it. The new covenant specifically says it is replacing the covenant made with the fathers when they were taken out of Egypt. This is the covenant for the removal of sin. Jesus took the cup and announced that this was the new covenant made in His blood. Now the sacrifices and rituals are over. The covenant with Abraham still stands. The promise in the law when Israel is judged, destroyed and exiled.

You shall perish among the nations, and the land of your enemies shall eat you up.
39 And those of you who are left shall waste away in their iniquity in your enemies’ lands;
also in their fathers’ iniquities, which are with them, they shall waste away.
40 ‘But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, with their unfaithfulness in which they were unfaithful to Me, and that they also have walked contrary to Me,
41 and that I also have walked contrary to them and have brought them into the land of their enemies;
if their uncircumcised hearts are humbled, and they accept their guilt—
42 then I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and My covenant with Isaac and My covenant with Abraham I will remember;
I will remember the land.
43 The land also shall be left empty by them, and will enjoy its sabbaths while it lies desolate without them;
they will accept their guilt, because they despised My judgments and because their soul abhorred My statutes.
44 Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, nor shall I abhor them, to utterly destroy them and break My covenant with them;
for I am the LORD their God.
45 But for their sake I will remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: In the previous post I noted Jer 31 which announced the new covenant which God in His foreknowledge understood 70 AD was coming clearly doubly asserts that Israel will not cease to be a nation and then note he will not cast them off for all they have done. Then he mentions a day when Jerusalem is rebuilt and then holly and never torn down again from that point on. You see God chose that place to put His name and Zech 14 shows life continuing on earth after the LORD is king over all the earth.

Psalm 105
Seek the LORD and His strength;
Seek His face evermore!
5 Remember His marvelous works which He has done,
His wonders, and the judgments of His mouth,
6 O seed of Abraham His servant,
You children of Jacob, His chosen ones!
7 He is the LORD our God;
His judgments are in all the earth.
8 He remembers His covenant forever,
The word which He commanded, for a thousand generations,
9 The covenant which He made with Abraham,
And His oath to Isaac,
10 And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,
To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
11 Saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan
As the allotment of your inheritance,”
12 When they were few in number,
Indeed very few, and strangers in it.

The day of vengeance of God is the day Israel sees Jesus as Joseph saved his brothers and was unknown to them until he was revealed this is what is going to happen. Jesus predicted if another comes in his own name Israel would accept him. The return of the sacrifices are the stage set for the man of sin. Then he persecuted Jews for 42 months. This next temple is not setting up the law as an acceptable means to God. This is what is accomplished in the day of vengeance. Note again Zion is to be rebuilt and also note the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles.

And the day of vengeance of our God;
To comfort all who mourn,
3 To console those who mourn in Zion,
To give them beauty for ashes,
The oil of joy for mourning,
The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness;
That they may be called trees of righteousness,
The planting of the LORD, that He may be glorified.”
4 And they shall rebuild the old ruins,
They shall raise up the former desolations,
And they shall repair the ruined cities,
The desolations of many generations.
5 Strangers shall stand and feed your flocks,
And the sons of the foreigner
Shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers.
6 But you shall be named the priests of the LORD,
They shall call you the servants of our God.
You shall eat the riches of the Gentiles,
And in their glory you shall boast.
7 Instead of your shame you shall have double honor,
And instead of confusion they shall rejoice in their portion.
Therefore in their land they shall possess double;
Everlasting joy shall be theirs.
8 “For I, the LORD, love justice;
I hate robbery for burnt offering;
I will direct their work in truth,
And will make with them an everlasting covenant.
9 Their descendants shall be known among the Gentiles,
And their offspring among the people.
All who see them shall acknowledge them,
That they are the posterity whom the LORD has blessed.”

70AD was a judgment on Israel for they did not know the day of their visitation. The 2nd coming and kingdom age is a much larger global judgment that transitions into the kingdom age.


micah
1 Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD’s house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And peoples shall flow to it.
2 Many nations shall come and say,
“Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths.”
For out of Zion the law shall go forth,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
3 He shall judge between many peoples,
And rebuke strong nations afar off;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore.[fn]

So the LORD will reign over them in Mount Zion
From now on, even forever.
8 And you, O tower of the flock,
The stronghold of the daughter of Zion,
To you shall it come,
Even the former dominion shall come,
The kingdom of the daughter of Jerusalem.”
9 Now why do you cry aloud?
Is there no king in your midst?
Has your counselor perished?
For pangs have seized you like a woman in labor.
10 Be in pain, and labor to bring forth,
O daughter of Zion,
Like a woman in birth pangs.
For now you shall go forth from the city,
You shall dwell in the field,
And to Babylon you shall go.
There you shall be delivered;
There the LORD will redeem you
From the hand of your enemies.
11 Now also many nations have gathered against you,
Who say, “Let her be defiled,
And let our eye look upon Zion.”
12 But they do not know the thoughts of the LORD,
Nor do they understand His counsel;
For He will gather them like sheaves to the threshing floor.
13 “Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion;
For I will make your horn iron,
And I will make your hooves bronze;
You shall beat in pieces many peoples;
I will consecrate their gain to the LORD,
And their substance to the Lord of the whole earth.”
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No it's not. Many of the elect did not understand the gospel until after Christ's work was done and He explained it to them clearly - including those of the elect who were closest to Him in His ministry - including His cousin John.
They didn't have to reform a nation, re-institute the Mosaic Law, start sacrificing animals again, and go through seven years of egregious suffering wherein a third of them would be destroyed.

It is rubbish.
People like those who brought sacrifices for sin (including Mary the mother of Jesus) did take a different path than the one I took when I received with gladness the simple message of the gospel when it was explained clearly to me some 52 year ago.

People like those who obeyed God in the wilderness and worshiped at the tabernacle through the bringing of their animal sacrifices did take a different path than Billy Graham and Martin Luther.
Not according to scripture. According to scripture the blood of animals could never and did never take away sin and it is only through faith any of them got saved. The righteous lived by faith.

Hebrews 9:11-10:18
"But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption... For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, 'This is my blood of the new covenant which God commanded you.' And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him. For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, 'Sacrifice and offering you have not desired, but a body you have prepared for me; in whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you have taken no pleasure. Then I said behold, I have come (in the scroll of the book it is written of me) to do your will, O God.' .....He takes away the first in order to establish the second. By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward untill his enemies are made a footstool for his feet. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified...... Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin."
]

Ephesians 2:1-16
"And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called 'Uncircumcision' by the so-called 'Circumcision,' which is performed in the flesh by human hands— remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity."

Habakkuk 2:4
"Behold, as for the proud one, His soul is not right within him; But the righteous will live by his faith."

Romans 1:13-17
"I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that often I have planned to come to you (and have been prevented so far) so that I may obtain some fruit among you also, even as among the rest of the Gentiles. I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. So, for my part, I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, 'But the righteous man shall live by faith.'"

Galatians 3:1-18
"You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? ....does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, 'All the nations will be blessed in you.' So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer. For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all the things written in the book of the law, to perform them.' Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, 'The righteous man shall live by faith.' However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, 'He who practices them shall live by them.' Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree' — in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is only a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it. Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, 'And to seeds,' as referring to many, but rather to one, 'And to your seed,' that is, Christ. What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise."

Jesus obtained eternal redemption.
The new covenant was commanded of the Jews; it was Jews sitting around the meal of the last supper.
He's already cleaned all the vessels of the then existing ministry.
They were at the consummation of the ages when the author of Hebrews wrote his epistle.
Animal sacrifices don't take away sin.
God never desired such sacrifices; He'd prepared another body.
That body God prepared perfected all who are sanctified.
There's no more sacrifice for sin.

We are saved by grace.
We are saved by grace through faith (not by faith).
The uncircumcised were brought near to the commonwealth of Israel.
The enmity between the two is abolished and peace is established.
One new man is made from both, reconciling them both in one new body through the cross.

The standard of the righteous living by faith was first spoken in the old covenant to Jews, to Israel.
That standard remained in place even near the end of Paul's life.
Jesus, not the Hebrews, Jews, nor Israel, was the promised seed.
The Law came 400 years after the covenant with Abraham and it did not invalidate that covenant.
God granted Abraham by means of a promise.

That all happened in the first century.

The standard of living by faith occurred long before the Law was given to Moses. It remained the standard all throughout the period of the Mosaic Law. It remains in effect among the uncircumcised converts who have been brought near to the commonwealth of Israel and made one with them.


That is what the Bible actually states. That's not what I made it say. I didn't apply a single bit of interpretation. I offer it as evidence as written, plainly read.

The other poster's comments were rubbish; rubbish garnered through Dispensational eisegesis, not plain reading of what is actually stated.

And no - you are wrong. They did not understand the mechanism for salvation clearly as Billy, and I did when they were justified because of their faith and attendant works.
False cause fallacy. They didn't have to understand "the mechanism for salvation as Billy, you, or I do in order to be saved. I did not understand that mechanism as I now do when I got saved! It is because I am saved that I now understand more than they did.

Y'all got the cart before the horse and you're arguing a false cause fallacy. Understanding does not beget salvation. Salvation is by grace through faith. The righteous sshal live by faith.

The righteous do not live by reconstituting a nation, building a building of hewn stone (which was against the laws of God to begin with), re-instituting the Law, re-starting animal sacrifices that don't do anything to begin with but foreshadow God's own sacrifice, and suffering egregiously. That is all works, not grace.
I have no idea where you get the idea that the saints of old understood the gospel as clearly as we do.
I have no idea where you get the idea they had to do so in order to be saved by Calvary. It is not in the Bible.
It certainly isn't from Hebrews 11.
Actually, it is in Hebrews 11,

Hebrews 11:1-2
"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval."

They gained approval.
The approval they gained came through faith.
They were sure of what they hoped for and had a conviction of things they never saw.

Hebrews 11:39-40
"And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect."

They gained approval through faith.
The gained approval through faith even though they did not receive what was promised.
They are made perfect by us who have heard the gospel as described at the beginning of Hebrews.
They did so to obtain "a better resurrection" (vs. 11:35).

Which resurrection would that be?

Look at that last part of Hebrews, where the author describes the horrible suffering those of faith suffered at the hands of the covenant-breakers and compare it to the last part of the "seven woes" passage in Matthew 23.

Again: unlike what I have received, I have provided scripture as written, plainly read, for what it actually factually, undeniably, irrefutably states, not what I or some theologian made it say.
I doubt very much that you will represent what they teach truthfully.
lol. The evidence speaks for itself.
Anyone can prove pretty much anything they want about the teachings of others by taking their quotes out of context.
Yep. Nearly everyone with whom I've traded posts so far has done just that.
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
*** Lets cut to the chase and get one thing perfectly clear when it comes to the teachings of Dispensational Premillenialists - lest you labor under a misunderstanding (I.e. - a straw man you yourself were taught about what they teach).

It seems that you think that Dispensationalists teach that God will "institute" temple worship and animal sacrifice in the later days much as He did in the wilderness and beyond for instance. They teach no such thing.

Them teaching that temple worship and animal sacrifice has been predestined to occur in the later days by the acts of Christ rejecting Jews (before all Israel comes to Christ) does not equate to God instituting such worship and sacrifice in place of or to replace the gospel.
If God prophesied it would happen then it happens according to His purpose(s). No prophesy is the product of human invention.

2 Peter 1:17-21
"For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, "This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased"— and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

The moment God said that is what will happen then there can be no other outcome.

If the DP interpretation of those prophesies is correct then Jews/Israel can do nothing other than what has been prescribed. They will do as it has been decided they will do and they will do so of their own still-sinfully compromised dead and enslaved will.
Them teaching that temple worship and animal sacrifice has been predestined to occur in the later days by the acts of Christ rejecting Jews (before all Israel comes to Christ) does not equate to God instituting such worship and sacrifice in place of or to replace the gospel.
I did not say it did replace the gospel. You are the one arguing the straw man.
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I personally am of the belief that I should support the Jewish people in their desire to rebuild their Jerusalem Third Temple and / or an Ezekiel Temple complex.....
Show me where the Bible states there will be a third temple. Show me.


The temple Ezekiel saw was a vision. It is stated as a vision by the scripture text itself. If you read through the description you'll find the temple has no roof. If you do the math you'll find what is described is so big it will stick off the edged of the mountain upon which Jerusalem sits.

The mentions of a temple in the NT occur when there was a temple still standing.

If you examine the Law of Moses ( Ex. 20:25; Dt. 27:5; Jsh. 8:31) you'll see that God did not permit hewn stones in His altars, nor did he permit the applying of man-made tools to the shaping of the stones in His altars. That's why you find David and those preceding his incident at Onan's threshing floor always stacked rocks as found to build their altars. God made those stones.

The temple David built did not have stones to which tools had been applied, but the stones were hewn (1 Kng. 6:7); the were hewn so perfectly no mortal was needed to set them in place.

If you read 2 Samuel 7 you will note God asks rhetorically, "When have I ever asked 'Why have you not built me a house'?" (paraphrase). God, through the prophet Nathan, then tells David three people will build His temple: 1) God will build His temple (v 11), 2) David's son will build the temple (v13), and 3) God's son would build the temple (v14). So either three people would build that temple or one person meeting all three measures. That person would be a man of peace. Solomon was not a man of peace. He thought life was vanity. God told David to name that son Jedidiah (2 Sam. 12:25) but David named him "Peace" (Solomon means peace). Solomon was not in line for the throne. He was something like ninth born.

Isaiah has God asking the same rhetorical question:

Isaiah 66:1
"This is what the LORD says: "Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What kind of house will you build for Me? Or where will My place of repose be?'"

The NT appeals to 2 Sam. 7:5-7 repeatedly.

Acts 7:44-50 ESV
“Our fathers had the tent of witness in the wilderness, just as he who spoke to Moses directed him to make it, according to the pattern that he had seen. Our fathers in turn brought it in with Joshua when they dispossessed the nations that God drove out before our fathers. So it was until the days of David, who found favor in the sight of God and asked to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. But it was Solomon who built a house for him. Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?’"

Acts 17:22-30 ESV
"So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: 'Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked..."


Lastly, the NT tells who and or what is the temple of God.

John 2:13-22
"The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables; and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business." His disciples remembered that it was written, 'Zeal for your house will consume me.' The Jews then said to Him, 'What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?' Jesus answered them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.' The Jews then said, 'It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of His body. So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken."

The temple of God is Christ crucified and resurrected.

1 Corinthians 3:10-17
"According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are."

The body of Christ crucified and resurrected is the temple of God. That is the temple God built. That is the temple to which God was referring in 2 Sam. 7.



Now before any of you start trying to refute what I just posted first answer the question asked:

Where does the Bible state there will be a third temple built?

Don't show me where you infer a reference to a third temple. Don't show me where you interpret the text to say there will be a third temple. Show me where the text states a third temple will be built. You don't get to change the subject without providing parity. You don't get to ask all the questions and never answer questions put first to you.

Where does the Bible state there will be a third temple built?
 
Upvote 0

1Reformedman

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2019
454
152
57
St. Louis
✟4,261.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you.... these last two years have been extraordinary in so many ways.

I try to be very open about what I am being shown about the darkness within myself in hopes that perhaps by my admitting what I am seeing within myself that I do not like at all this may make it easier for other Christians to make that jump themselves as well.

2018 outpouring, are you feeling it? I am!





Stay focused on Jesus not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit doesn't Glorify itself like many erroneously teach these days.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1Reformedman

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2019
454
152
57
St. Louis
✟4,261.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Would you mind clarifying that? What, exactly, specifically, do read as the straw man being asserted?
His last statement seems to indicate he may not know what a straw man is since a straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. So yeah, I agree with ya at this point.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
They didn't have to reform a nation, re-institute the Mosaic Law, start sacrificing animals again, and go through seven years of egregious suffering wherein a third of them would be destroyed.
Of course those closest to Jesus didn't have to do any such thing. What a silly thing to say.
Not according to scripture. According to scripture the blood of animals could never and did never take away sin and it is only through faith any of them got saved. The righteous lived by faith...................
As they like to say in the Geico commercials, "Everyone knows that".
Nor does anyone say other wise - including Dispensationalists (unless you can quote them as saying otherwise).

Why are you telling us things from the scriptures that everyone from John Walvoord, to Hal Lindsey and me) already know and have taught for decades?
The standard of living by faith occurred long before the Law was given to Moses. It remained the standard all throughout the period of the Mosaic Law. It remains in effect among the uncircumcised converts who have been brought near to the commonwealth of Israel and made one with them.

That is what the Bible actually states. That's not what I made it say. I didn't apply a single bit of interpretation. I offer it as evidence as written, plainly read.
And it seems that everyone in the Dispensational camp knows that - unless you can show otherwise.
That all happened in the first century.
Although you haven't told me so - I'm betting that you don't believe what is written in the Book of Revelation concerning the literal thousand year reign of Christ. Am I right?
Hebrews 11:1-2
"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval."
They gained approval.
The approval they gained came through faith.
Everyone knows that - and they have not said otherwise.
Look at that last part of Hebrews, where the author describes the horrible suffering those of faith suffered at the hands of the covenant-breakers and compare it to the last part of the "seven woes" passage in Matthew 23.
Ahhh. So it appears that you really don't believe what is written in the Book of Revelation. You're one of those "spiritual" guys who think Revelation was written to obscure the truth rather than to reveal the truth. We probably won't be able to make any headway here until you believe what the scriptures tell us in the Book of Revelation.
Again: unlike what I have received, I have provided scripture as written, plainly read, for what it actually factually, undeniably, irrefutably states, not what I or some theologian made it say.
It seems to most of us that the truth is just the opposite of what you claim to be your method of interpretation.
The other poster's comments were rubbish; rubbish garnered through Dispensational eisegesis, not plain reading of what is actually stated.
I can't speak for the other posters.
They didn't have to understand "the mechanism for salvation as Billy, you, or I do in order to be saved. I did not understand that mechanism as I now do when I got saved! It is because I am saved that I now understand more than they did.
You didn't believe the gospel in order to be saved?
The righteous do not live by reconstituting a nation, building a building of hewn stone (which was against the laws of God to begin with), re-instituting the Law, re-starting animal sacrifices that don't do anything to begin with but foreshadow God's own sacrifice, and suffering egregiously. That is all works, not grace.
Everyone knows that - and no one has said otherwise (unless you can provide a quote for us).
Yep. Nearly everyone with whom I've traded posts so far has done just that.
No they have not - you are in most cases simply reiterating your straw man rendition of what they believe and say.

And no one said that you or I don't understand salvation better now that the Holy Spirit is in our lives to enlighten us more and more.

You seem to be reading things into my posts that I have not said.:scratch:
If God prophesied it would happen then it happens according to His purpose(s). No prophesy is the product of human invention.
Of course. Everyone knows that.

And by the way - prophecies are the product of God. The way they are fulfilled is often the product of the choices made by men - whether good or bad choices.
The moment God said that is what will happen then there can be no other outcome.
Everyone knows that.
If the DP interpretation of those prophesies is correct then Jews/Israel can do nothing other than what has been prescribed. They will do as it has been decided they will do and they will do so of their own still-sinfully compromised dead and enslaved will.
You use the word prescribed as if they teach that God instituted the building of the 3rd temple and approves of it. They do not.

Again - you argue against a straw man.

But yes - what God says will happen (and indeed what He knows will happen by the free will of men) will indeed happen.
I did not say it did replace the gospel. You are the one arguing the straw man.
To be precise - you are the one who says that Dispensationalists say that God replaced the gospel. They do not.

Again the straw man.

It's obvious that you not only don't believe the scriptures as written.
You simply cannot or will not cease from misrepresenting the beliefs of others.

Unless you correct your misrepresentaions of what I and others have said - we will have to call it a day.

It's your choice to make of course - even if it was predestined to be made by you.:)

That'll probably go right by you since your overall theology seems to be rather shallow on top of your shallow eschatology.
 
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi your mistaking prophecy with the plan of God as if everything was ordered a certain way rather than God prophesied it to happen because He is outside of time and and knows the choices we make that effect everyone
This seems to be one of the root causes of his errors. It's not the only one. But it's one of them.

It seems that he equates God's prophesying things (like His prophesying the betrayal of Judas for instance) means that God forces the choices made by men on people like Judas - and on those who reinstitute animal sacrifice in a 3rd. temple.

No Dispensationalist I know of believes or teaches such things.

I suppose, with that kind of thinking - it's only natural that he would say that God prophesying that men would preach a false gospel in the last days is the same as God forcing men to do so and or that doing so pleased God.

He believes that people saying that the scriptures show that men will build a 3rd temple in modern Jerusalem and reinstitute animal sacrifices is the same thing as saying that God will replace the gospel with animal sacrifice.

I think he's pretty well dug in on that kind of thinking. I doubt that he's going to admit the error of his straw man arguments.

I can't, for the life of me, understand why people discussing such things will not admit when they have made such an obvious error.

I suppose it's understandable that people arguing in person would (out of pride) be unwilling to admit error and then continue after discontinuing that error. After all - I'm a bit of a sinner myself.:)

His position could perhaps be argued without the straw man I suppose. There are somewhat good arguments to be made.

But why people who are anonymous and arguing theology online won't admit errors like this obvious straw man and correct their mistake before continuing - I just don't get. :scratch:

After all the only one who really knows who they are and what they are doing and with whom they have to do and give an account to when they refuse to change is God Himself.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Brian Mcnamee

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2017
2,308
1,294
64
usa
✟213,965.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Show me where the Bible states there will be a third temple. Show me.


The temple Ezekiel saw was a vision. It is stated as a vision by the scripture text itself. If you read through the description you'll find the temple has no roof. If you do the math you'll find what is described is so big it will stick off the edged of the mountain upon which Jerusalem sits.

The mentions of a temple in the NT occur when there was a temple still standing.

If you examine the Law of Moses ( Ex. 20:25; Dt. 27:5; Jsh. 8:31) you'll see that God did not permit hewn stones in His altars, nor did he permit the applying of man-made tools to the shaping of the stones in His altars. That's why you find David and those preceding his incident at Onan's threshing floor always stacked rocks as found to build their altars. God made those stones.

The temple David built did not have stones to which tools had been applied, but the stones were hewn (1 Kng. 6:7); the were hewn so perfectly no mortal was needed to set them in place.

If you read 2 Samuel 7 you will note God asks rhetorically, "When have I ever asked 'Why have you not built me a house'?" (paraphrase). God, through the prophet Nathan, then tells David three people will build His temple: 1) God will build His temple (v 11), 2) David's son will build the temple (v13), and 3) God's son would build the temple (v14). So either three people would build that temple or one person meeting all three measures. That person would be a man of peace. Solomon was not a man of peace. He thought life was vanity. God told David to name that son Jedidiah (2 Sam. 12:25) but David named him "Peace" (Solomon means peace). Solomon was not in line for the throne. He was something like ninth born.

Isaiah has God asking the same rhetorical question:

Isaiah 66:1
"This is what the LORD says: "Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What kind of house will you build for Me? Or where will My place of repose be?'"

The NT appeals to 2 Sam. 7:5-7 repeatedly.

Acts 7:44-50 ESV
“Our fathers had the tent of witness in the wilderness, just as he who spoke to Moses directed him to make it, according to the pattern that he had seen. Our fathers in turn brought it in with Joshua when they dispossessed the nations that God drove out before our fathers. So it was until the days of David, who found favor in the sight of God and asked to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. But it was Solomon who built a house for him. Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?’"

Acts 17:22-30 ESV
"So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: 'Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked..."


Lastly, the NT tells who and or what is the temple of God.

John 2:13-22
"The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables; and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business." His disciples remembered that it was written, 'Zeal for your house will consume me.' The Jews then said to Him, 'What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?' Jesus answered them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.' The Jews then said, 'It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of His body. So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken."

The temple of God is Christ crucified and resurrected.

1 Corinthians 3:10-17
"According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are."

The body of Christ crucified and resurrected is the temple of God. That is the temple God built. That is the temple to which God was referring in 2 Sam. 7.



Now before any of you start trying to refute what I just posted first answer the question asked:

Where does the Bible state there will be a third temple built?

Don't show me where you infer a reference to a third temple. Don't show me where you interpret the text to say there will be a third temple. Show me where the text states a third temple will be built. You don't get to change the subject without providing parity. You don't get to ask all the questions and never answer questions put first to you.

Where does the Bible state there will be a third temple built?
 
Upvote 0

Brian Mcnamee

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2017
2,308
1,294
64
usa
✟213,965.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Show me where the Bible states there will be a third temple. Show me.


The temple Ezekiel saw was a vision. It is stated as a vision by the scripture text itself. If you read through the description you'll find the temple has no roof. If you do the math you'll find what is described is so big it will stick off the edged of the mountain upon which Jerusalem sits.

The mentions of a temple in the NT occur when there was a temple still standing.

If you examine the Law of Moses ( Ex. 20:25; Dt. 27:5; Jsh. 8:31) you'll see that God did not permit hewn stones in His altars, nor did he permit the applying of man-made tools to the shaping of the stones in His altars. That's why you find David and those preceding his incident at Onan's threshing floor always stacked rocks as found to build their altars. God made those stones.

The temple David built did not have stones to which tools had been applied, but the stones were hewn (1 Kng. 6:7); the were hewn so perfectly no mortal was needed to set them in place.

If you read 2 Samuel 7 you will note God asks rhetorically, "When have I ever asked 'Why have you not built me a house'?" (paraphrase). God, through the prophet Nathan, then tells David three people will build His temple: 1) God will build His temple (v 11), 2) David's son will build the temple (v13), and 3) God's son would build the temple (v14). So either three people would build that temple or one person meeting all three measures. That person would be a man of peace. Solomon was not a man of peace. He thought life was vanity. God told David to name that son Jedidiah (2 Sam. 12:25) but David named him "Peace" (Solomon means peace). Solomon was not in line for the throne. He was something like ninth born.

Isaiah has God asking the same rhetorical question:

Isaiah 66:1
"This is what the LORD says: "Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What kind of house will you build for Me? Or where will My place of repose be?'"

The NT appeals to 2 Sam. 7:5-7 repeatedly.

Acts 7:44-50 ESV
“Our fathers had the tent of witness in the wilderness, just as he who spoke to Moses directed him to make it, according to the pattern that he had seen. Our fathers in turn brought it in with Joshua when they dispossessed the nations that God drove out before our fathers. So it was until the days of David, who found favor in the sight of God and asked to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. But it was Solomon who built a house for him. Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?’"

Acts 17:22-30 ESV
"So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: 'Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked..."


Lastly, the NT tells who and or what is the temple of God.

John 2:13-22
"The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables; and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business." His disciples remembered that it was written, 'Zeal for your house will consume me.' The Jews then said to Him, 'What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?' Jesus answered them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.' The Jews then said, 'It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of His body. So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken."

The temple of God is Christ crucified and resurrected.

1 Corinthians 3:10-17
"According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are."

The body of Christ crucified and resurrected is the temple of God. That is the temple God built. That is the temple to which God was referring in 2 Sam. 7.



Now before any of you start trying to refute what I just posted first answer the question asked:

Where does the Bible state there will be a third temple built?

Don't show me where you infer a reference to a third temple. Don't show me where you interpret the text to say there will be a third temple. Show me where the text states a third temple will be built. You don't get to change the subject without providing parity. You don't get to ask all the questions and never answer questions put first to you.

Where does the Bible state there will be a third temple built?
Where in the Bible does it say God is a trinity ? Nowhere, so do you believe God is 3 persons Father Son and Spirit?
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
His last statement seems to indicate he may knot know what a straw man is since a straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. So yeah, I agree with ya at this point.
What is the argument not presented against which he is arguing?

What is your argument, the argument he should be correctly addressing?
 
Upvote 0

1Reformedman

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2019
454
152
57
St. Louis
✟4,261.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What is the argument not presented against which he is arguing?

What is your argument, the argument he should be correctly addressing?
#1 I didn't bring an argument. #2 The other poster did and he called it a straw man argument when it wasn't.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Where in the Bible does it say God is a trinity? Nowhere, so do you believe God is 3 persons Father Son and Spirit?
I've already addressed that matter. Beat you to it. I wish to avoid an argument from silence by bringing the silence into the conversation so it can be addressed in context of what is stated.


Apparently you missed that.


There is no place where the Bible states there will be a third temple built. There is a temple standing - two of them - during the NT epistolary so there is no need to imagine any other temple is being referenced. The idea there will be a third temple is always a function of eisegetic inference, not exegetical inference.

Think otherwise? Okay. Start by either citing where scripture states there will be a thord temple or state for the record there isn't any such statement in the entirety of the Bible. Then make your case and do so avoiding eisegetic inferences by correctly exegeting the texts.

Like I did.

Because, Brian, you just wasted a posted on content we all already know. Or.. if you didn't know then that's on you and that lack of knowledge disqualifies you from having anything informed to say on the matter. So figure it out. Can you do what you need to do or not? You don't have to like the way I post but if you wish to be persuasive you do have to show up with a reasonable and rational case of well-rendered scripture. Avoiding the question asked when asked does not do that.

Where does scripture state there will be a third temple built?
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why do you seem to be so arrogant and cantankerous in your replies?
Attribution error. Luke 6:45.

It's a text-based medium. Things like "arrogance," and "cantankerous" are things read into the text, not motives or emotions from which I write. People assign those things because of the abundance twithin them, not the unknown motive of the writer.

One of the most basic fundamental rules in netiquette is "If something can be misinterpreted then it probably will be misinterpreted by someone." So I write plainly. I have no nefarious intent. When I ask, "What's the straw man?" it's because I missed it. I read through the posts to see if I could figrue it out and didn't. So I asked. No arrogant or cantankerous motive. I've asked "Where does the Bible state a third temple will be built because the Bible does not state any such thing. I asked the question to get the matter on record so 1) we can build from consensus, 2) there's context for what hopefully will be two or more comparative cases for why each poster believes what s/he believes, and 3) some poster will not answer questions asked. I know, as you do, and as other know, that those who don't or won't collaboratively answer questions and take turns answering questions are not going to be posters with whom cogent discourse is possible.

The goal for any and all of us is, presumably....


a polite and respectful, reasonable and rational, topical case of well-rendered scripture.

That is persuasive.

But it's challenging.

Attributional error, for those who don't know, is the condition whereby one person assigns thoughts, emotions, motives, etc. to another. It's associated with confirmation bias. John Gottman, a researcher into marriage relationships has studied the problem for more than two decades and he has discovered that the average spouse attributes motive to his her spouse accurately only 12% of the time! It is destructive to conversation. Other research in the field of communication show that most of what we take away from a conversation is dependent upon facial expression and body language. That is bsent in text-based mediums. So the average person fills it in. Usually incorrectly.



I am not above correction. If I am shown where I erred then I will repent, make amends as best can be done in an internet forum, seek forgiveness, and work toward reconciliation. This is easily done with facts. I get a fact incorrect and am shown the correct fact, that's a no brainer. With attributions the onus on the plaintif (or accuser) is much greater. Scripture tells us it is to a person's honor to overlook an offense (Pr. 19:11). Where wrongdoing damages relationship we are directed to go to the person and present our cae and work things out (Mt. 5 & 18). So if and when I am shown how something I wrote is necessarily arrogant or cantankerous then I will work to effect change within myself. But any complaint where the necessity or objective nature of the accusation is missing then it's a function of attribution and that's not on me that's on the reader. It is Luke 6:45 one way or the other.

Galatians tells us divisiveness, factionalism, enmity, etc. are works of the flesh so I know someone who levels accusations but either won't or can't isn't just disobeying Matthew 5/18; they are also acting according to the flesh. This is true of those who deply logical fallacies, too. The Holy Spirit does not inspire, prompt, or empower fallacy.

It's not personal. Those are the facts of scripture. Inconvenient sometimes but who is our Master? Self, or God and His word?

So I've just had arrogance and cantankerousness assigned to me.

Prove it. Make that case.

Or follow another one of the most basic foundational rules of netiquette:


Keep the posts about the posts, not the posters.

We all agreed to do that when we agreed to the forum's tou. Romans 13:1 Those who don't practice that? Covenant-breakers. Galatians 5:20
 
Upvote 0

Brian Mcnamee

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2017
2,308
1,294
64
usa
✟213,965.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I've already addressed that matter. Beat you to it. I wish to avoid an argument from silence by bringing the silence into the conversation so it can be addressed in context of what is stated.


Apparently you missed that.


There is no place where the Bible states there will be a third temple built. There is a temple standing - two of them - during the NT epistolary so there is no need to imagine any other temple is being referenced. The idea there will be a third temple is always a function of eisegetic inference, not exegetical inference.

Think otherwise? Okay. Start by either citing where scripture states there will be a thord temple or state for the record there isn't any such statement in the entirety of the Bible. Then make your case and do so avoiding eisegetic inferences by correctly exegeting the texts.

Like I did.

Because, Brian, you just wasted a posted on content we all already know. Or.. if you didn't know then that's on you and that lack of knowledge disqualifies you from having anything informed to say on the matter. So figure it out. Can you do what you need to do or not? You don't have to like the way I post but if you wish to be persuasive you do have to show up with a reasonable and rational case of well-rendered scripture. Avoiding the question asked when asked does not do that.

Where does scripture state there will be a third temple built?
Hi the 3rd temple in Ezekiel 47 is built at a time when water is flowing from the temple and eastward into the dead sea and the dead sea is healed and the specifics are that it will be a fishing bonanza with many trees and it notes the salt marshes will not be healed this comes at the time when the LORD declares He is keeping his oath to the fathers and divides the inheritance with specific boundaries in Israel and even makes provision for an inheritance for the aliens who have lived along side the Jews in this day. In Zech 14 a chapter you seem to want to dodge this same living water is declared to flow years round and in two directions one of them eastward and it also declares this water flows year round which shows life continuing after the LORD has come to fight and is declared king over all the earth. This theme can be integrated with hundreds of the other passages but you do not want to go into the scriptures to much to untangle it so Ill leave it with this conclusion that the dead sea has not been healed and no river is flowing from the Mt of Olives so it is future. You claim you like solid exegesis and this conclusion can be made by a 10 years simply reading and believing what it says will happen.
The thing is the kingdom age does not end at the end of the 1000 years. Jesus was promised David's throne and the righteousness in the earth when the LORD is king will be unlike anything we have seen the last 2000 years. If I am given a class of 5 year olds to be in charge of at Sunday school and someone came in the class was in chaos with kids running amok playing with matches and knives I would be removed because the room was placed under my authority and the order of the room would reflect on my leadership. The last 2000 years do not reflect Jesus being king over all the earth with Satan bound. In fact quite the opposite. In Isaiah 61 Jesus said the passage was about him and noted that the one declaring the goodness and the acceptable year of the LORD but the passage continues and talks about what is accomplished in the day of vengeance of our God. It is Zion focused and Zion is saved , redeemed and blessed at the end of the day of vengeance. This does not fit 70ad either and fits with the futurist ideas. The LORD is not king over all the earth until Zech 14 and that river will flow and the dead sea will be healed.
At the time the sea is healed this is the promise,
13 Thus says the Lord GOD: “These are the borders by which you shall divide the land as an inheritance among the twelve tribes of Israel. Joseph shall have two portions. 14 You shall inherit it equally with one another; for I raised My hand in an oath to give it to your fathers, and this land shall fall to you as your inheritance.
15 “This shall be the border of the land on the north: from the Great Sea, in the new jerusalem there is no more sea so please reconcile this.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi the 3rd temple in Ezekiel 47 is built at a time when.....
There is no third temple. The temple in Ezekiel is a vision! It is not real. Go back and re-read the book of Ezekiel to verify what I just said. Then realize that every lesson you ever heard/read about Ezekiel's third temple was wrong. I know this is difficult, Brian, folks, I went through the same experience. It's challenging to watch your pastors, teachers, leaders look confused or get angry at you when you ask honest and sincere questions about plainly read scripture that contradicts what the teach, what they themselves were taught errantly.

Do it anyway.

God's word as written, plainly read, properly exegeted is the authority, not what men make it say to fit their eschatology.

The temple in Ezekiel is a vision, not an actual temple.
The temple in Ezekiel has no roof.
The temple in Ezekiel is huge in size. If built it would extend off the mountain on which Jerusalem sits.

The temple in Ezekiel is huge in size. If built it would extend off the mountain on which Jerusalem sits. If translated into miles the temple grounds of Ezekiel's temple would by 52 miles by 21 miles! Current, modern day Jerusalem measures only 49 square miles. Look it up. Ezekiel's temple grounds cover almost 1100 square miles. It would hang off the mountain upon which Jerusalem sits by miles.

It is a vision. It is not a literal temple; it is figurative, symbolic of something other than a temple of brick and stone.

Go back and re-read the book of Ezekiel and verify what I just posted.

Then adjust your thinking, doctrine, and practice accordingly....

...because the post to which I now reply is wrong. There is no place in the entire Bible where we are told another, third temple will be built. Scripture never says any such thing. This was all covered in post#66 in this op. Before you think to bring up an alternative deal with what has already been posted because whatever anyone posts they're going to have to address the facts of scripture. You cannot describe what a third temple will be like if there is not going to be a third temple. A lot of money is being made selling the message of a third temple, profiteering over something scripture never reports. If you are as critical and discerning with your sources as you are with my posts you'll see what I have posted is correct.

The temple of Ezekiel is a vision; it is not reported to be real. We understand this as the truth scripture itself asserts because the temple in Ezekiel has no roof and it is ginormous, so huge it is bigger the city in which it is built and so huge it would hang off the whole mountain upon which it is built.

Look it up.
 
Upvote 0