A rebuilt Jewish Temple is necessary for the end times

[Interplanner]

I assumed he meant "in" a third temple.

 

[riverrat]

Several presumptions there.

Jesus in Mt24A and Paul in 2 Thess 2 are speaking of things at hand. The standing temple of their time. There is nothing distant future in Mt 24 until "B" or v29.

The presumption that the Rev is our future needs to be explained. I understand it to be a description of the conflagration of their times, as ch 1 says, at hand, quickly, very soon.

The future starts in Mt 24:3 to the end of the chapter and concerns the tribulation. All of 2 Thess 2 is future.

 

[Interplanner]

The normal meaning of Mt 24A as lead-up to by ch 21-23's references to the future of the city is the near future, that generation. When you say "future" and there's 2000 years of it to choose from, you are not being clear. Those answers were direct and practical and urgent for that generation. The so-called "tribulation" was the chaos into which Israel fell in that generation, murderous, dangerous, needless.

2 th 2 is also near future. It was due to Jesus saying the end of the whole world (beyond Judea) would come right after (Mt 24B) what happened in the time of unequalled distress. But the Father alone would decide that, and he decided not to end the world.

Can you see that with 2000 years coming, it is vastly different to refer to year 12 vs year 1998? But you could say they were both "future"?

 

[riverrat]

The normal meaning of Mt 24A as lead-up to by ch 21-23's references to the future of the city is the near future, that generation. When you say "future" and there's 2000 years of it to choose from, you are not being clear. Those answers were direct and practical and urgent for that generation. The so-called "tribulation" was the chaos into which Israel fell in that generation, murderous, dangerous, needless.

2 th 2 is also near future. It was due to Jesus saying the end of the whole world (beyond Judea) would come right after (Mt 24B) what happened in the time of unequalled distress. But the Father alone would decide that, and he decided not to end the world.

Can you see that with 2000 years coming, it is vastly different to refer to year 12 vs year 1998? But you could say they were both "future"?

Mt. 24:1-2 was fulfilled in AD 70. The rest of the chapter is tribulation which is still in the future. You can do the math if you think it is necessary.

 

[Codger]

After the crucifixion - God gave Israel 40 years to repent (Passover 30AD to Passover 70AD - up to the 136 day siege of Titus) and to come into the New Covenant; but they did not. And so they were severely punished during the destruction of Israel in 66-70AD. And so they continued with the Old Covenant mentality as before. Except that God is now operating in the New Covenant. They made three attempts through history to rebuild the Temple, but were frustrated in every attempt.

The first attempt was during the Bar Kochba revolt in 135AD. This attempt was put down by the Emperor Hadrian. Had this revolt been successful - they would have restored Jerusalem, rebuilt the Temple, the cities, and continued on as before.

The second attempt was in 324AD under Constantine. He gave permission to rebuild the temple and then later withdrew it by cutting off the ears of the priests and craftsmen. No maimed person could work on the Temple. So the work stopped and fell to ruin.
The third attempt was under the emperor Julian the Apostate. This was frustrated yet again by subterranean fires, which destroyed the works early in its construction.

The Christians in general had been nagging the Jews to return to their ancient home land as far back as the time of Oliver Cromwell, who lived in the early 1600's. The present day Israel was established by political intrigue, manipulation, corruption and violence. Not by Prophesy.

How about a new temple in our times? It will never happen because as I stated before - God is continually frustrating any movement in that direction. There is not one shred of an indication anywhere that this will happen. There is no longer any need for the old animal sacrifice system because the once and for all sacrifice of Jesus has been made. God is trying to direct, steer, herd, the Jews into the New Covenant and to the foot of the cross. Hebrews indicates that it is Sin to go from the NT back to the old.

Consider that even today God has already frustrated all the present day Orthodox plans for a new Temple because the place where they think it should go is under the control of the Muslims. This is the forth frustrated attempt to rebuild the Temple – is there a pattern here? Today they are calling the Fortress Antonia “The Temple Mount” – not true. The real Temple Mount was located about 600 feet from the south wall of the Fortress and it was totally destroyed - just like Jesus said it would be! The SE wall was a staggering height of 450 feet high according to Josephus. They want "Antonia" to be the Temple Mount for political reasons. The fact is they could start building a new temple tomorrow with very little effort had they not believed this lie that Antonia is the Temple Mount.

The only temple that remains today, and forever will be, is the spiritual Temple that Jesus built when he arose from the dead – like he said he would do. This is Ezekiel's temple – you know the Temple that only has ONE Tamid (lamb) sacrifice a day - a single lamb. A single "Prince", no court of women, no court of Israel, no court of gentiles – all sacrifices would be provided, whatever could this mean?

 

[ebedmelech]

Mt. 24:1-2 was fulfilled in AD 70. The rest of the chapter is tribulation which is still in the future. You can do the math if you think it is necessary.

No math required. Jesus said not one stone would be left upon another. That happened in 70 AD riverat.

People like to point to the "Wailing Wall"...that is a wall that surrounded the temple...it was NOT part of the temple itself.

So whatever math you're doing doesn't add up!

 

[Jipsah]

A third temple will be built by the Jewish people.

I'm sure you think that, many do. There's no Scriptural warrant for it, though.

 

[Jipsah]

The image of the beast that will be set up is a 3rd temple.

Interesting idea, but unsupported by Scripture. The desecration of the Temple that our Lord spoke of occurred in the lifetimes of His hearers, just as He said it would.

The lamb-like beast calls fire down from heaven which is similar to what Solomon did at the dedication ceremony for the 1st temple.

That's simply made up.

Also Jesus and Paul speak of the abomination of desolation that will occur in a rebuilt temple.

No, they spoke of the one that was standing there when they were saying it.

 

[Jipsah]

The sacrifice already stopped because Titus destroyed the temple, as predicted in Daniel 9:26.

See, you're becoming more preterist already!

If the temple was destroyed at 9:26, then how can the sacrifices be stopped in the midst of the week at 9:27?

They can't if you arbitrarily insert an X thousand year pause. But if 70 follows 69 as it commonly does, it ended right on schedule. And the fact that - yeah buddy - it ended militates in favor of that common sense observation. Sacrifice ended when it was supposed to.

 

[riverrat]

No math required. Jesus said not one stone would be left upon another. That happened in 70 AD riverat.

People like to point to the "Wailing Wall"...that is a wall that surrounded the temple...it was NOT part of the temple itself.

So whatever math you're doing doesn't add up!

You don't read very well. I said it happened in AD 70.

 

[ebedmelech]

You don't read very well. I said it happened in AD 70.

No...you don't read what you write very well...or at least think about it. You said it was in the first two verses...but it is also the culmination of the prophecy at verse 15. in fact Matthew 24 is about 70 AD.

So your idea that the tribulation is still future is simply error! Jesus tells them the temple will be destroyed in Matthew 24:1, 2. He gives them the things that will occur leading up to that in verses 3-14.

Jesus then moves to the events that occur in the temple destruction which INCLUDE great tribulation.

The Christian life includes tribulation...Romans 5:3-5.

 

[riverrat]

No...you don't read what you write very well...or at least think about it. You said it was in the first two verses...but it is also the culmination of the prophecy at verse 15. in fact Matthew 24 is about 70 AD.

So your idea that the tribulation is still future is simply error! Jesus tells them the temple will be destroyed in Matthew 24:1, 2. He gives them the things that will occur leading up to that in verses 3-14.

Jesus then moves to the events that occur in the temple destruction which INCLUDE great tribulation.

The Christian life includes tribulation...Romans 5:3-5.

Mt 24:3-51 is about the tribulation which is in the future.

 

[Old Timer]

Mt 24:3-51 is about the tribulation which is in the future.

And of course Daniel 12 makes this perfectly clear..

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

 

[Interplanner]

No one in their right mind speaks so forcefully and practically and urgently about things that are going affect the lives of their listeners but "in reality" is speaking about things X000 years away! Nor do audiences listen to things like this without saying "oh, but you mean X000 years from now." Nonsense!

They were warned of the temple being decimated and he explained further and it happened in that generation. clear as the sun.

And Yes the believers were delivered from the chaos of the DofJ!

 

[Jipsah]

And of course Daniel 12 makes this perfectly clear..

If you kind of ignore what it says, and when it said it.

 

[Old Timer]

If you kind of ignore what it says, and when it said it.

It says the time of the end..

I understand if the time of the end was AD70 for you.. it's a regular obsession around here.

 

[Old Timer]

No one in their right mind speaks so forcefully and practically and urgently about things that are going affect the lives of their listeners but "in reality" is speaking about things X000 years away! Nor do audiences listen to things like this without saying "oh, but you mean X000 years from now." Nonsense!

They were warned of the temple being decimated and he explained further and it happened in that generation. clear as the sun.

And Yes the believers were delivered from the chaos of the DofJ!

Right and then the LORD came with thousands and thousands of His saints and the man of sin was destroyed.. the resurrection of the dead.. all that amazing stuff happened in the cloud formations of AD70.. or the Roaring Fire.. or the Voices from the Temple..

I forget which..

 

[Dunbar]

The first problem is that beasts are empires, based on Daniel 7. and also the head of the empire is a beast, as he rules the empire...like Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Artaxerses, and the emperors of Rome. Secondly nothing speaks of a temple being built...absolutely NOTHING.

How you even figure Solomon deicating a temple that God ordained to be built, relates to this...is mind boggling!

The first problem is you don't know Daniel. The metals and beasts of Daniel do not represent kingdoms or nations. The biggest fairy tale of them all. In Dan. chap. 10 Gabriel is in a battle with someone called the prince of Persia. This battle lasts for 21 days and is so bad that Michael the chief prince has to come and help. This prince of Persia is not Cyrus! If an angel fought against a human it would last 2 seconds and the angel would win. The prince of Persia and the prince of Grecia are two fallen angels. Michael is also referred to as a prince and he is not a kingdom or nation so neither are the other two.

Satan is the king of Babylon (Isa. 14) the prince of Persia and Grecia are two of his subordinates. The 4th kingdom will be another fallen angel and the ten horns will be the earthly rulers that he controls. Jesus said that false Christs and false prophets would arise at the end and show great signs and wonders. Satan is the false Christ and his other angels are the false prophets. Gabriel also said he had come to show Daniel what would happen to his people in the latter days. Another reason the beasts are not ancient kingdoms.

 

[Interplanner]

OT, given the fact that it is an unconverted priest recording the shapes he saw in the sky, we "look through a glass darkly." But the evil character of Daniel was there, claiming to be messianic, and the believers were signaled to leave and did. And there was the revolution and war and desolation as declared by both Daniel and Christ. It was acknowledged by both Josephus and by Caiaphas in Jn 11 and 18, with Caiaphas trying to 'save' Israel if at all possible.

Instead of balking at it all, you might calm down and notice the improbability of any other event in Judea in that generation filling the bill. Nothing does.

It was a 'visitation.' The OT often uses the phrase "I will visit (these curses) upon you." that's where this term originates.

 

[Achilles6129]

See, you're becoming more preterist already!

Haha! Not really.

They can't if you arbitrarily insert an X thousand year pause. But if 70 follows 69 as it commonly does, it ended right on schedule. And the fact that - yeah buddy - it ended militates in favor of that common sense observation. Sacrifice ended when it was supposed to.

I'm not following what you're saying here:

• the temple was destroyed after week 69
  • therefore, the sacrifices obviously ceased
    • this was before week 70
• in the midst of week 70 the sacrifices cease
  • this means the temple must be standing in the midst of week 70

The above line of reasoning seems to show that the temple was destroyed after the 69th week but was rebuilt sometime later and is in operation in the midst of the 70th week. Can you explain to me why this is incorrect?