New Jerusalem vs Babylon the Great

claninja · Jan 4, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
I provided enough evidence, linked to enough 100% reliable external resources, and quoted two different dictionaries (two witnesses + more) that 100% support the fact that the Greek word hieron does not include the holy court or holy of holies. I'm not going to repeat all my posts in this thread merely because you are determined to open your post with a falsehood which is produced from your motive: Trying to prove your error to be Christian doctrine, or Christian theology.

Like I said, Christians understand this.

this is not about a “doctrine” or “theology”, this is just about the definition of a word, which you are clearly in error on.

For the benefit of the readers, let’s take a look at multiple definitions of “Hieron”

Strongs concordance states “Hieron” may refer to the WHOLE building OR the outer courts. It does not say it cannot refer to the central sanctuary: “a temple, either the whole building, or specifically the outer courts, open to worshippers.”

Helps Word-studies states “Hieron” can refer to the entire complex INCLUDING the central sanctuary. it does not say it cannot refer to the sanctuary : (from 2413 /hierós, "sacred") – the entire Temple complex, i.e. all its enclosures (precincts, courtyards) and the central sanctuary.

Thayer Greek lexicon states “Hieron” can refer to the entire complex INCLUDING the sanctuary. It does not say it cannot refer to the sanctuary: of the temple at Jerusalem twice in the Sept., Ezekiel 45:19; 1 Chronicles 29:4; more frequent in the O. T. Apocrypha; in the N. T. often in the Gospels and Acts; once elsewhere, viz. 1 Corinthians 9:13. τό ἱερόν and ὁ ναόςdiffer, in that the former designates the whole compass of the sacred enclosure, embracing the entire aggregate of buildings, balconies, porticos, courts (viz., that of the men or Israelites, that of the women, that of the priests), belonging to the temple; the latter designates the sacred edifice properly so called, consisting of two parts, the 'sanctuary' or 'Holy place'

strongs exhaustive concordance states “Hieron” refers to the entire precincts (plural). It does not say it does not include the sanctuary. It only concludes that “naos” is used to refer only to the sanctuary:
temple. Neuter of hieros; a sacred place, i.e. The entire precincts (whereas naos denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere) -- temple.

NOT one definition states “Hieron” cannot include the central sanctuary.

When Jesus stated that not one stone would stand upon another in regards to the “Hieron”, does that mean only the outer courts, and NOT the sanctuary, was destroyed? NO, of course not, the sanctuary was included in the destruction of the “Hieron”.

you are free not to respond, but I believe it’s important for the readers to have the correct definition of the word “Hieron”.

Zao is life · Jan 4, 2022

claninja said:
this is not about a “doctrine” or “theology”, this is just about the definition of a word, which you are clearly in error on.

For the benefit of the readers, let’s take a look at multiple definitions of “Hieron”

Strongs concordance states “Hieron” may refer to the WHOLE building OR the outer courts. It does not say it cannot refer to the central sanctuary: “a temple, either the whole building, or specifically the outer courts, open to worshippers.”

Helps Word-studies states “Hieron” can refer to the entire complex INCLUDING the central sanctuary. it does not say it cannot refer to the sanctuary : (from 2413 /hierós, "sacred") – the entire Temple complex, i.e. all its enclosures (precincts, courtyards) and the central sanctuary.

Thayer Greek lexicon states “Hieron” can refer to the entire complex INCLUDING the sanctuary. It does not say it cannot refer to the sanctuary: of the temple at Jerusalem twice in the Sept., Ezekiel 45:19; 1 Chronicles 29:4; more frequent in the O. T. Apocrypha; in the N. T. often in the Gospels and Acts; once elsewhere, viz. 1 Corinthians 9:13. τό ἱερόν and ὁ ναόςdiffer, in that the former designates the whole compass of the sacred enclosure, embracing the entire aggregate of buildings, balconies, porticos, courts (viz., that of the men or Israelites, that of the women, that of the priests), belonging to the temple; the latter designates the sacred edifice properly so called, consisting of two parts, the 'sanctuary' or 'Holy place'

strongs exhaustive concordance states “Hieron” refers to the entire precincts (plural). It does not say it does not include the sanctuary. It only concludes that “naos” is used to refer only to the sanctuary:
temple. Neuter of hieros; a sacred place, i.e. The entire precincts (whereas naos denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere) -- temple.

NOT one definition states “Hieron” cannot include the central sanctuary.

When Jesus stated that not one stone would stand upon another in regards to the “Hieron”, does that mean only the outer courts, and NOT the sanctuary, was destroyed? NO, of course not, the sanctuary was included in the destruction of the “Hieron”.

you are free not to respond, but I believe it’s important for the readers to have the correct definition of the word “Hieron”.

The temple buildings and precincts were referred to as hieron. The discussion about the beautiful buildings of the temple or the temple structure would not have used the word naos because naos always only referred to the holy court and holy of holies.

JUST READ EACH VERSE IN THE GOSPELS USING THE WORD TEMPLE AND CHECK WHICH WORD IS USED.

FOR EXAMPLE

Zechariah the priest went into the naos to perform his duties.
Jesus never entered the naos. He was not a priest so He was not allowed in the naos. EVERY VERSE talking about Jesus entering the temple in Jerusalem uses the word hieron. But when Jeus referred to His own body as the temple, the word naos is used. ("Destroy this temple [naos] and I will raise it up in three days)".

@claninja It's so easy to check each and every verse where the word naos is used and where the word hieron is used. I gave the links much earlier in this thread in one of those posts of mine which you obviously never bothered to read properly because you have a deep need to hold onto the false claim that what I said in this thread is not the case, i.e all your theology that is in error and completely faulty eschatology based on your theology which is in error.

And I only found that Christian resource site years after I had checked each and every New Testament verse using the word temple myself, and which Greek word it uses. My own findings were just confirmed by better Christian resource sites than my painstaking manual searches through the entire New Testament.

You're too lazy to even go to the site I gave the link for because you really don't want the Bible to teach you what it's saying - you want to teach the Bible what it's saying.

DavidPT · Jan 4, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
The temple buildings and precincts were referred to as hieron. The discussion about the beautiful buildings of the temple or the temple structure would not have used the word naos because naos always only referred to the holy court and holy of holies.

JUST READ EACH VERSE IN THE GOSPELS USING THE WORD TEMPLE AND CHECK WHICH WORD IS USED.

FOR EXAMPLE

Zechariah the priest went into the naos to perform his duties.
Jesus never entered the naos. He was not a priest so He was not allowed in the naos. EVERY VERSE talking about Jesus entering the temple in Jerusalem uses the word hieron. But when Jeus referred to His own body as the temple, the word naos is used. ("Destroy this temple [naos] and I will raise it up in three days)".

@claninja It's so easy to check each and every verse where the word naos is used and where the word hieron is used. I gave the links much earlier in this thread in one of those posts of mine which you obviously never bothered to read properly because you have a deep need to hold onto the false claim that what I said in this thread is not the case, i.e all your theology that is in error and completely faulty eschatology based on your theology which is in error.

And I only found that Christian resource site years after I had checked each and every New Testament verse using the word temple myself, and which Greek word it uses. My own findings were just confirmed by better Christian resource sites than my painstaking manual searches through the entire New Testament.

You're too lazy to even go to the site I gave the link for because you really don't want the Bible to teach you what it's saying - you want to teach the Bible what it's saying.

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

Can you explain this passage? In verse 19 Jesus is the speaker and uses the Greek word naos for temple. But in verse 20 the Jews are the speakers, and that they too use the Greek word naos for temple. Why didn't they use the Greek word hieron instead?

Zao is life · Jan 4, 2022

DavidPT said:
John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

Can you explain this passage? In verse 19 Jesus is the speaker and uses the Greek word naos for temple. But in verse 20 the Jews are the speakers, and that they too use the Greek word naos for temple. Why didn't they use the Greek word hieron instead?

If the Greek word in verse 19 is naos then obviously either there was a Hebrew or Aramaic word which referred to the holy place and sanctuary as opposed to the outer court and buildings.

@DavidPT Whatever the method He used, Jesus obviously made sure the Jews understood He was saying, "Destroy this Sanctuary" (i.e the actual sanctuary, and not "destroy this temple structure").

@DavidPT So they answered Him regarding the part of the temple He had made it obvious He was referring to (or the part of the temple they thought He was referring to). They had no idea He was referring to His own body. That much is also obvious.

Douggg · Jan 4, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
The temple buildings and precincts were referred to as hieron. The discussion about the beautiful buildings of the temple or the temple structure would not have used the word naos because naos always only referred to the holy court and holy of holies.

That's the part everyone is telling you are wrong on. The naos the temple scanturary building is made up the holy place (room) and the Holy of Holies (room).

holy place (room), not holy court. The holy court is outside where the burnt sacrifice altar is and the priests conducting the sacrifices.

I realize you are from the United Kingdom, but the holy place (room) is not like King Arthur's court.

@claninja I gave him the same definition as well, but he is twisting it.

Zao is life · Jan 4, 2022

Douggg said:
That's the part everyone is telling you are wrong on. The naos the temple scanturary building is made up the holy place (room) and the Holy of Holies (room).

holy place (room), not holy court. The holy court is outside where the burnt sacrifice altar is and the priests conducting the sacrifices.

I realize you are from the United Kingdom, but the holy place (room) is not like King Arthur's court.

@claninja I gave him the same definition as well, but he is twisting it.

Let me know when you wake up, Douggg. I need to tell you something..

But it's a long story, so if you like, when you wake up from your sleep you can go read the OP in this thread REAL slow.

Spiritual Jew · Jan 4, 2022

Douggg said:
I gave him the same definition as well, but he is twisting it.

Says the guy who blatantly twists Revelation 11:1 to fit his doctrine.

Douggg · Jan 4, 2022

Spiritual Jew said:
Says the guy who blatantly twists Revelation 11:1 to fit his doctrine.

I am not twisting the definition.

claninja · Jan 5, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
The temple buildings and precincts were referred to as hieron.

completely agree. Never disagreed with you here.

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
The discussion about the beautiful buildings of the temple or the temple structure would not have used the word naos because naos always only referred to the holy court and holy of holies.

Correct. Never disagreed with you here, as Jesus didn’t say ONLY the central sanctuary (naos) would be destroyed, but the entire complex (Hieron).

Context helps to determine whether the passage is talking about only the outer courts OR the whole complex. Such is suggested by strongs:

“a temple, either the whole building OR specifically the outer courts, open to worshippers.”

In the context of the temple complex being destroyed, we know it includes the central sanctuary, as it was in fact destroyed. Thus demonstrating that Helps-word studies definition of Hieron is correct:

“hierón (from 2413 /hierós, "sacred") – the entire Temple complex, i.e. all its enclosures (precincts, courtyards) and the central sanctuary.”

While in some contexts, “Hieron” may only refer to the outer courts and not the “naos”, it would be incorrect to say “Hieron” NEVER includes the central Sanctuary.

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
naos always only referred to the holy court and holy of holies.

what is the “holy place” Jesus refers to in regards to the abomination of desolation? Is it the earthly temple or the body of Christ?

Matthew 24:15?So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
because you have a deep need to hold onto the false claim that what I said in this thread is not the case, i.e all your theology that is in error and completely faulty eschatology based on your theology which is in error.

subjective non sequitor. I could easily say the same about you. Please stick to more objective arguments.

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
You're too lazy to even go to the site I gave the link for because you really don't want the Bible to teach you what it's saying - you want to teach the Bible what it's saying.

please avoid ad hominems. It’s against forum rules and is unbecoming.

Zao is life · Jan 6, 2022

claninja said:
this is not about a “doctrine” or “theology”, this is just about the definition of a word, which you are clearly in error on.

For the benefit of the readers, let’s take a look at multiple definitions of “Hieron”

Strongs concordance states “Hieron” may refer to the WHOLE building OR the outer courts. It does not say it cannot refer to the central sanctuary: “a temple, either the whole building, or specifically the outer courts, open to worshippers.”

Helps Word-studies states “Hieron” can refer to the entire complex INCLUDING the central sanctuary. it does not say it cannot refer to the sanctuary : (from 2413 /hierós, "sacred") – the entire Temple complex, i.e. all its enclosures (precincts, courtyards) and the central sanctuary.

Thayer Greek lexicon states “Hieron” can refer to the entire complex INCLUDING the sanctuary. It does not say it cannot refer to the sanctuary: of the temple at Jerusalem twice in the Sept., Ezekiel 45:19; 1 Chronicles 29:4; more frequent in the O. T. Apocrypha; in the N. T. often in the Gospels and Acts; once elsewhere, viz. 1 Corinthians 9:13. τό ἱερόν and ὁ ναόςdiffer, in that the former designates the whole compass of the sacred enclosure, embracing the entire aggregate of buildings, balconies, porticos, courts (viz., that of the men or Israelites, that of the women, that of the priests), belonging to the temple; the latter designates the sacred edifice properly so called, consisting of two parts, the 'sanctuary' or 'Holy place'

strongs exhaustive concordance states “Hieron” refers to the entire precincts (plural). It does not say it does not include the sanctuary. It only concludes that “naos” is used to refer only to the sanctuary:
temple. Neuter of hieros; a sacred place, i.e. The entire precincts (whereas naos denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere) -- temple.

NOT one definition states “Hieron” cannot include the central sanctuary.

When Jesus stated that not one stone would stand upon another in regards to the “Hieron”, does that mean only the outer courts, and NOT the sanctuary, was destroyed? NO, of course not, the sanctuary was included in the destruction of the “Hieron”.

you are free not to respond, but I believe it’s important for the readers to have the correct definition of the word “Hieron”.

You're wrong about the use of the word hieron before and after the verses talking about the tearing of the veil. This is why I provided the two links in the OP, which I will give you again below this, so that you can see it clearly. I gave the links so that all could see it clearly.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil the word hieron is used in almost every reference to the temple in Jerusalem (multiple times in Acts).
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, there are two words used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron and naos.
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, hieron is never used for the holy place and holy of holies.
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, only the word naos is used for the holy place and holy of holies + once when the Lord spoke of His own body as the temple.
After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.
After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil naos is used only in reference to the church (i.e the body of Christ), and the temple in heaven + twice in Acts where the apostles stated that God does not dwell in temples made with human hands and once in Acts in reference to pagan shrines for Diana, but never again in reference to the temple in Jerusalem - showing the reader of the Bible who read it in Greek that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy or the place where God dwells after Christ died, and this is why only the word hieron is used for the entire temple structure in Jerusalem from that time onward.

The list below also shows that regardless of lexicons, hieron never ever did refer to the holy place or holy of holies (If it did, then naos and hieron would have been used interchangeably in reference to the holy place and holy of holies of the temple before Christ died).

If you don't believe me, then just click on each book under the lexicons below and scroll down through the list of verses in each book, once for each word. It's easy and takes 5 minutes:

I suggest you click the links below and check thoroughly, because the more someone (anyone who does this) argues the point without checking the sites below (where it's easy to check up because every verse containing each Greek word, i.e hieron and naos, is quoted in the same page in a drop-down list which pops up when clicking on each book where the words are found), the more the same person is showing themselves up for arguing the point because though it is indeed the case, they don't want it to be the case.

Here are the links again:

Strong's #3485 - ναός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
Strong's #2411 - ἱερόν - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

claninja · Jan 6, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
You're wrong about the use of the word hieron before and after the verses talking about the tearing of the veil. This is why I provided the two links in the OP, which I will give you again below this, so that you can see it clearly. I gave the links so that all could see it clearly.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil the word hieron is used in almost every reference to the temple in Jerusalem (multiple times in Acts).
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, there are two words used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron and naos.
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, hieron is never used for the holy place and holy of holies.
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, only the word naos is used for the holy place and holy of holies + once when the Lord spoke of His own body as the temple.
After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.
After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil naos is used only in reference to the church (i.e the body of Christ), and the temple in heaven + twice in Acts where the apostles stated that God does not dwell in temples made with human hands and once in Acts in reference to pagan shrines for Diana, but never again in reference to the temple in Jerusalem - showing the reader of the Bible who read it in Greek that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy or the place where God dwells after Christ died, and this is why only the word hieron is used for the entire temple structure in Jerusalem from that time onward.

The list below also shows that regardless of lexicons, hieron never ever did refer to the holy place or holy of holies (If it did, then naos and hieron would have been used interchangeably in reference to the holy place and holy of holies of the temple before Christ died).

If you don't believe me, then just click on each book under the lexicons below and scroll down through the list of verses in each book, once for each word. It's easy and takes 5 minutes:

I suggest you click the links below and check thoroughly, because the more someone (anyone who does this) argues the point without checking the sites below (where it's easy to check up because every verse containing each Greek word, i.e hieron and naos, is quoted in the same page in a drop-down list which pops up when clicking on each book where the words are found), the more the same person is showing themselves up for arguing the point because though it is indeed the case, they don't want it to be the case.

Here are the links again:

Strong's #3485 - ναός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
Strong's #2411 - ἱερόν - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

I think you may be misunderstanding me. I never said “Hieron” and “naos” can be used interchangeably. I simply stated “Hieron” can include the central sanctuary when context permits. It would be incorrect to assert otherwise.

“Naos” is only used for the central sanctuary or dwelling place of God. God present wasn’t in the outer courts or other precincts.

“Hieron” refers to more than just the central sanctuary, and context determines this. It can refer to outer courts where Jesus and the disciples often preached. it can also refer to the entire complex as a whole (outer courts, precincts, and central sanctuary), such as when Jesus predicted its entire destruction. This is confirmed by strongs and helps:

“a temple, either the whole building OR specifically the outer courts, open to worshippers.” - strongs

hierón (from 2413 /hierós, "sacred") – the entire Temple complex, i.e. all its enclosures (precincts, courtyards) and the central sanctuary.” - helps

so when Jesus predicted the destruction of the “Hieron” that didn’t include the destruction of the central sanctuary?

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
showing the reader of the Bible who read it in Greek that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy

what was the “holy” place Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:15?

“So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)”

Douggg · Jan 6, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.

Not to the same Herod's temple sanctuary building, but to an end times sanctuary building in 2Thessalonians2:4 to correspond to the transgression of desolation by the little horn in Daniel 8, a vision for the time of the end.

Zao is life · Jan 7, 2022

claninja said:
so when Jesus predicted the destruction of the “Hieron” that didn’t include the destruction of the central sanctuary?

copy @grafted branch

If you read the facts I'm about to supply below once again carefully, you will begin to understand that by the time the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D 70, and for the previous 40 years since Jesus' death on the cross, it was no longer a temple structure (hieron) which was considered by God to include God's holy sanctuary (naos), because what was previously considered the holy sanctuary was no longer considered God's holy sanctuary after Jesus died on the cross.

Even though the inner part of the hieron in Jerusalem still stood and still contained what was previously considered the naos of God, nevertheless it was only the hieron of the Jews, and nothing more (no longer a holy sanctuary where God dwells), as can be CLEARLY seen to all who want the text of the New Testament to teach them (as opposed to inserting an interpretation into the text):

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

02413
ἱερός hierós, hee-er-os'
of uncertain affinity;
sacred:--holy.

Thayer's definition of 2413
i. sacred, consecrated to the deity, pertaining to God.
ii. Sacred Scriptures, because inspired by God, treating of divine things and therefore to be devoutly revered

The word hieros (2413) is only used twice in the entire New Testament:

1 Corinthians 9
13 Do you not know that those who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? And those attending the altar are partakers with the altar.

2 Timothy 3:15
15 and that from a babe you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

THEREFORE we could correctly translate hieros (2413) into English as "sacred", whereas naos (3485) we could only translate as "holy sanctuary":

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

But as can be CLEARLY seen by the New Testament's CLEAR division of the use of these words into BEFORE and AFTER, the central part of the hieron in Jerusalem was never again considered the holy place after the tearing of the veil:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, there are two words used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron and naos.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, hieron is never used for the holy place and holy of holies. Not even once.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, only the word naos is used for the holy place and holy of holies + once when the Lord spoke of His own body as the temple.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil the word hieron is used in almost every reference to the temple in Jerusalem (multiple times in Acts).

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil naos is used only in reference to the church (i.e the body of Christ), and the temple in heaven + twice in Acts where the apostles stated that God does not dwell in temples made with human hands and once in Acts in reference to pagan shrines for Diana, but never again in reference to the temple in Jerusalem

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Now ask yourself who was it who wrote the New Testament books? Was it us? Or was it the apostles and one other person who lived during the first generation of Christians (i.e Luke)?

The Greek words used (most definitely should) show the reader of the Bible that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy or the place where God dwells after Christ died, and this is why only the word hieron is used for the entire temple structure in Jerusalem from that time onward (but not the word naos).

The lists of all the New Testament verses provided in the links provided below leaves no verses out, and also shows that regardless of lexicons, hieron never ever did refer to the holy place or holy of holies: If it did, then naos and hieron would have been used interchangeably in reference to the holy place and holy of holies of the temple before Christ died:

Here are the links again, with the link for the word hieros (2413) now included:

3485 naos:
Strong's #3485 - ναός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2411 hieron:
Strong's #2411 - ἱερόν - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2413: Strong's #2413 - ἱερός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

claninja said:
what was the “holy” place Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:15?
“So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)”

Yes, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND:

From the death of Christ on the cross, naos is used in reference to the body of Christ, the church, and the temple in heaven. Here again is the list of verses:

1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 7:15; Revelation 11:19; Revelation 14:15 & Revelation 14:17; Revelation 15:5-6 & Revelation 15:8; Revelation 16:1 & Revelation 16:17; Revelation 21:22.

Now, the holy sanctuary (naos) where God dwells is being spoken of in all the above verses, and in Revelation 11:1-2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4, which talks about the temple the man of sin and lawless one will seat himself up in, when the apostasy occurs, and all those who do not love the truth will be brought under strong delusion

Indeed, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND.

Original Happy Camper · Jan 7, 2022

Douggg said:
measure the temple

Jeremiah 30:11 King James Version
11 For I am with thee, saith the Lord, to save thee: though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet I will not make a full end of thee: but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished.

Matthew 7:2 King James Version
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Measure = Judgement by God's Law

James 2:10-12 King James Version
10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 King James Version
13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Rod = God's Word

Psalm 23:4 King James Version
4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. (The staff is a symbol of the Lord's guidance)

Isaiah 8:20 King James Version
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Douggg · Jan 7, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
copy @grafted branch

If you read the facts I'm about to supply below once again carefully, you will begin to understand that by the time the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D 70, and for the previous 40 years since Jesus' death on the cross, it was no longer a temple structure (hieron) which was considered by God to include God's holy sanctuary (naos), because what was previously considered the holy sanctuary was no longer considered God's holy sanctuary after Jesus died on the cross.

Even though the inner part of the hieron in Jerusalem still stood and still contained what was previously considered the naos of God, nevertheless it was only the hieron of the Jews, and nothing more (no longer a holy sanctuary where God dwells), as can be CLEARLY seen to all who want the text of the New Testament to teach them (as opposed to inserting an interpretation into the text):

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

02413
ἱερός hierós, hee-er-os'
of uncertain affinity;
sacred:--holy.

Thayer's definition of 2413
i. sacred, consecrated to the deity, pertaining to God.
ii. Sacred Scriptures, because inspired by God, treating of divine things and therefore to be devoutly revered

The word hieros (2413) is only used twice in the entire New Testament:

1 Corinthians 9
13 Do you not know that those who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? And those attending the altar are partakers with the altar.

2 Timothy 3:15
15 and that from a babe you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

THEREFORE we could correctly translate hieros (2413) into English as "sacred", whereas naos (3485) we could only translate as "holy sanctuary":

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

But as can be CLEARLY seen by the New Testament's CLEAR division of the use of these words into BEFORE and AFTER, the central part of the hieron in Jerusalem was never again considered the holy place after the tearing of the veil:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, there are two words used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron and naos.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, hieron is never used for the holy place and holy of holies. Not even once.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, only the word naos is used for the holy place and holy of holies + once when the Lord spoke of His own body as the temple.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil the word hieron is used in almost every reference to the temple in Jerusalem (multiple times in Acts).

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil naos is used only in reference to the church (i.e the body of Christ), and the temple in heaven + twice in Acts where the apostles stated that God does not dwell in temples made with human hands and once in Acts in reference to pagan shrines for Diana, but never again in reference to the temple in Jerusalem

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Now ask yourself who was it who wrote the New Testament books? Was it us? Or was it the apostles and one other person who lived during the first generation of Christians (i.e Luke)?

The Greek words used (most definitely should) show the reader of the Bible that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy or the place where God dwells after Christ died, and this is why only the word hieron is used for the entire temple structure in Jerusalem from that time onward (but not the word naos).

The lists of all the New Testament verses provided in the links provided below leaves no verses out, and also shows that regardless of lexicons, hieron never ever did refer to the holy place or holy of holies: If it did, then naos and hieron would have been used interchangeably in reference to the holy place and holy of holies of the temple before Christ died:

Here are the links again, with the link for the word hieros (2413) now included:

3485 naos:
Strong's #3485 - ναός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2411 hieron:
Strong's #2411 - ἱερόν - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2413: Strong's #2413 - ἱερός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

Yes, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND:

From the death of Christ on the cross, naos is used in reference to the body of Christ, the church, and the temple in heaven. Here again is the list of verses:

1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 7:15; Revelation 11:19; Revelation 14:15 & Revelation 14:17; Revelation 15:5-6 & Revelation 15:8; Revelation 16:1 & Revelation 16:17; Revelation 21:22.

Now, the holy sanctuary (naos) where God dwells is being spoken of in all the above verses, and in Revelation 11:1-2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4, which talks about the temple the man of sin and lawless one will seat himself up in, when the apostasy occurs, and all those who do not love the truth will be brought under strong delusion

Indeed, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND.

The word naos is used in 2Thessalonians2:4 because that temple in the future will not include an outer court like hieros. Which in Revelation 11:1-2, that temple in the future, the outer court is left out.

claninja · Jan 7, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
copy @grafted branch

If you read the facts I'm about to supply below once again carefully, you will begin to understand that by the time the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D 70, and for the previous 40 years since Jesus' death on the cross, it was no longer a temple structure (hieron) which was considered by God to include God's holy sanctuary (naos), because what was previously considered the holy sanctuary was no longer considered God's holy sanctuary after Jesus died on the cross.

Even though the inner part of the hieron in Jerusalem still stood and still contained what was previously considered the naos of God, nevertheless it was only the hieron of the Jews, and nothing more (no longer a holy sanctuary where God dwells), as can be CLEARLY seen to all who want the text of the New Testament to teach them (as opposed to inserting an interpretation into the text):

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

02413
ἱερός hierós, hee-er-os'
of uncertain affinity;
sacred:--holy.

Thayer's definition of 2413
i. sacred, consecrated to the deity, pertaining to God.
ii. Sacred Scriptures, because inspired by God, treating of divine things and therefore to be devoutly revered

The word hieros (2413) is only used twice in the entire New Testament:

1 Corinthians 9
13 Do you not know that those who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? And those attending the altar are partakers with the altar.

2 Timothy 3:15
15 and that from a babe you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

THEREFORE we could correctly translate hieros (2413) into English as "sacred", whereas naos (3485) we could only translate as "holy sanctuary":

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

But as can be CLEARLY seen by the New Testament's CLEAR division of the use of these words into BEFORE and AFTER, the central part of the hieron in Jerusalem was never again considered the holy place after the tearing of the veil:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, there are two words used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron and naos.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, hieron is never used for the holy place and holy of holies. Not even once.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, only the word naos is used for the holy place and holy of holies + once when the Lord spoke of His own body as the temple.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil the word hieron is used in almost every reference to the temple in Jerusalem (multiple times in Acts).

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil naos is used only in reference to the church (i.e the body of Christ), and the temple in heaven + twice in Acts where the apostles stated that God does not dwell in temples made with human hands and once in Acts in reference to pagan shrines for Diana, but never again in reference to the temple in Jerusalem

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Now ask yourself who was it who wrote the New Testament books? Was it us? Or was it the apostles and one other person who lived during the first generation of Christians (i.e Luke)?

The Greek words used (most definitely should) show the reader of the Bible that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy or the place where God dwells after Christ died, and this is why only the word hieron is used for the entire temple structure in Jerusalem from that time onward (but not the word naos).

The lists of all the New Testament verses provided in the links provided below leaves no verses out, and also shows that regardless of lexicons, hieron never ever did refer to the holy place or holy of holies: If it did, then naos and hieron would have been used interchangeably in reference to the holy place and holy of holies of the temple before Christ died:

Here are the links again, with the link for the word hieros (2413) now included:

3485 naos:
Strong's #3485 - ναός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2411 hieron:
Strong's #2411 - ἱερόν - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2413: Strong's #2413 - ἱερός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

again, you are misunderstanding me. I’m NOT arguing whether the central sanctuary was considered holy or not, or whether it was called “naos” or not. My argument is simply that Hieron can include the central sanctuary, regardless of the status of the central sanctuary as holy or not. The central sanctuary building didn’t dissappear or vanish when Christ was crucified, the literal building still existed within the temple complex (Hieron), until the entire complex (Hieron) was destroyed in 66-70ad.

you said:

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
word hieron does not include the holy court or holy of holies

Again, this is incorrect, the literal central sanctuary building existed within the Hieron (entire temple complex), until the Hieron was destroyed in 66-70ad.

“Hieron” can refer to the outer courts OR the entire temple complex, which can include the central sanctuary, when context dictates. Such is supported by strongs and helps:

“a temple, either the whole building OR
specifically the outer courts, open to worshippers.” - strongs

hierón (from 2413 /hierós, "sacred") – the entire Temple complex, i.e. all its enclosures (precincts, courtyards) and the central sanctuary.” - helps

claninja · Jan 7, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
Now, the holy sanctuary (naos) where God dwells is being spoken of in all the above verses, and in Revelation 11:1-2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4, which talks about the temple the man of sin and lawless one will seat himself up in, when the apostasy occurs, and all those who do not love the truth will be brought under strong delusion

Indeed, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND.

The Greek Septuagint, which was often quoted by the apostles, uses “Hieron” in regards to the abomination of desolation. Thus daniel, and Christ, we’re talking about the literal temple building:

Daniel 9:27 LXX And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple (Hieron) [shall be] the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.

Matthew 24:15 So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation,’adescribed by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand),

DavidPT · Jan 7, 2022

claninja said:
The Greek Septuagint, which was often quoted by the apostles, uses “Hieron” in regards to the abomination of desolation. Thus daniel, and Christ, we’re talking about the literal temple building:

Daniel 9:27 LXX And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple (Hieron) [shall be] the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.

Matthew 24:15 So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation,’adescribed by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand),

What then were the abominations?

Look at the translation you are using. Are you using a translation you disagree with? Look what that translation says in verse 27---and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.

What do you take the end of time to mean? I take it to mean the end of this present age. Verse 27, all of it it pertains to the end of this age, or if not all of it, the latter half of that verse does. Even the translation you provided says so. There is not going to be a literal temple in the end of this age in order to literally fulfill these things. Therefore, some of this needs to be understood in another sense altogether. Can the temple be understood in another sense besides the literal sense? Of course it can. The NT reveals that it can. In the OT things like this would not have been clear at the time, thus one taking some of these texts in the literal sense that might not even be meaning in the literal sense.

grafted branch · Jan 7, 2022

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
copy @grafted branch

If you read the facts I'm about to supply below once again carefully, you will begin to understand that by the time the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D 70, and for the previous 40 years since Jesus' death on the cross, it was no longer a temple structure (hieron) which was considered by God to include God's holy sanctuary (naos), because what was previously considered the holy sanctuary was no longer considered God's holy sanctuary after Jesus died on the cross.

Even though the inner part of the hieron in Jerusalem still stood and still contained what was previously considered the naos of God, nevertheless it was only the hieron of the Jews, and nothing more (no longer a holy sanctuary where God dwells), as can be CLEARLY seen to all who want the text of the New Testament to teach them (as opposed to inserting an interpretation into the text):

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

02413
ἱερός hierós, hee-er-os'
of uncertain affinity;
sacred:--holy.

Thayer's definition of 2413
i. sacred, consecrated to the deity, pertaining to God.
ii. Sacred Scriptures, because inspired by God, treating of divine things and therefore to be devoutly revered

The word hieros (2413) is only used twice in the entire New Testament:

1 Corinthians 9
13 Do you not know that those who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? And those attending the altar are partakers with the altar.

2 Timothy 3:15
15 and that from a babe you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

THEREFORE we could correctly translate hieros (2413) into English as "sacred", whereas naos (3485) we could only translate as "holy sanctuary":

02411
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on'
neuter of 2413;
a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere):--temple.

But as can be CLEARLY seen by the New Testament's CLEAR division of the use of these words into BEFORE and AFTER, the central part of the hieron in Jerusalem was never again considered the holy place after the tearing of the veil:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, there are two words used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem: hieron and naos.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, hieron is never used for the holy place and holy of holies. Not even once.

Before the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, only the word naos is used for the holy place and holy of holies + once when the Lord spoke of His own body as the temple.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil the word hieron is used in almost every reference to the temple in Jerusalem (multiple times in Acts).

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil, naos is never again used in reference to the temple in Jerusalem.

After the verses that talk about the tearing of the veil naos is used only in reference to the church (i.e the body of Christ), and the temple in heaven + twice in Acts where the apostles stated that God does not dwell in temples made with human hands and once in Acts in reference to pagan shrines for Diana, but never again in reference to the temple in Jerusalem

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Now ask yourself who was it who wrote the New Testament books? Was it us? Or was it the apostles and one other person who lived during the first generation of Christians (i.e Luke)?

The Greek words used (most definitely should) show the reader of the Bible that what was the holy place and holy of holies of the temple in Jerusalem, was no longer considered holy or the place where God dwells after Christ died, and this is why only the word hieron is used for the entire temple structure in Jerusalem from that time onward (but not the word naos).

The lists of all the New Testament verses provided in the links provided below leaves no verses out, and also shows that regardless of lexicons, hieron never ever did refer to the holy place or holy of holies: If it did, then naos and hieron would have been used interchangeably in reference to the holy place and holy of holies of the temple before Christ died:

Here are the links again, with the link for the word hieros (2413) now included:

3485 naos:
Strong's #3485 - ναός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2411 hieron:
Strong's #2411 - ἱερόν - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org
2413: Strong's #2413 - ἱερός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

Yes, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND:

From the death of Christ on the cross, naos is used in reference to the body of Christ, the church, and the temple in heaven. Here again is the list of verses:

1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 7:15; Revelation 11:19; Revelation 14:15 & Revelation 14:17; Revelation 15:5-6 & Revelation 15:8; Revelation 16:1 & Revelation 16:17; Revelation 21:22.

Now, the holy sanctuary (naos) where God dwells is being spoken of in all the above verses, and in Revelation 11:1-2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4, which talks about the temple the man of sin and lawless one will seat himself up in, when the apostasy occurs, and all those who do not love the truth will be brought under strong delusion

Indeed, let the reader understand IF THE READER HAS EARS TO HEAR AND WILL UNDERSTAND.

Let’s look at this from the stand point that something prefigures 2 Thessalonians 2:4. If the veil being torn is the moment that God leaves the naos and it is no longer called the naos then according to 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 both God and the son of perdition occupy the naos at the same time prior to the veil being torn.

So prior to the tearing of the veil we should see an example of both the son of perdition and God in the naos. John 8:44 says ye are of your father the devil, this could be shoe horned in as an example but I personally can’t see where both God and Satan could be in the naos at the same time. We cannot sever two masters.

The first part of the verse 1 Corinthians 3:17 says “if any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy”. We have Old Testament examples of people being killed that defiled the naos (Nadab and Abihu).

When I look at all this I would think the naos can be defiled only for a moment before a person is destroyed or God leaves and it’s no longer the naos (veil being torn). 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 clearly has evil in the naos. I would say when the son of perdition sits in the temple and shows himself as God this would be for more than just a single moment in time.

Am I missing something here? Do you see any examples that would prefigure both God and evil in the naos at the same time?

Douggg · Jan 7, 2022

grafted branch said:
So prior to the tearing of the veil we should see an example of both the son of perdition and God in the naos. John 8:44 says ye are of your father the devil, this could be shoe horned in as an example but I personally can’t see where both God and Satan could be in the naos at the same time. We cannot sever two masters.

The act by the son of perdition makes the temple desolate.

New Jerusalem vs Babylon the Great

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Well-Known Member

One of GODS Children I am a historicist

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Similar threads