John 11:48 "....shall come the Romans and take away of us, place and nation"

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Luke 21:24
TribulationSigns said:
Christ came to the City of Jerusalem (which was His people), and they rejected him as their foundation stone of the city and sanctuary. As a result, by their rejection, they themselves did destroy both city and sanctuary. Nevertheless, Christ has become the headstone of another building. The kingdom representation was taken from Jews and given to another.
In Matthew 21:40-45, Jesus tells a strikingly different tale than you do about WHO did the destroying at the taking of the Kingdom from the Jews and giving to another.
Not only that but He also tells a different tale than you do about what event that was. Namely, “The coming of the lord of the vineyard”.
When faced with which of these opposite tales to believe, yours, or that of Christ Jesus, my money is on The Son of God.
Please let be rational here. If you believe Christ was talking about someone who physically took "kingdom" from the Jews, then who did the destroyer gave the kingdom to? Humm?
Really, you think so? But now you have to explain how something that you go to great lengths to theorize must be taken very literally, is now mysteriously not very literally when it comes to God's very specific qualification of the prophecy as not one stone would be left standing one upon another.
Agreed! My money is on the Lord is the one who righteously Judges and I am comfortable with that! Good luck with your 70AD theory at the feet of the Lord of the Vineyard on Judgment Day!
TribulationSigns said:
Contrary to some people who posted here, Luke 21:24 is not talking about the physical city of Jerusalem in the Middle East in 70AD
Then how do YOU interpret Matthew 21:40-45?
I just want to clarify: it wasn't the Jews, in general (we wouldn't have the early church at all, if it weren't for faithful Jewish followers of Jesus). It was the religious leaders and their power/control of the Temple as they are recorded as having here (and concerned about losing):

John 11:47-48 ~ Then the leading priests and Pharisees called the high council together. “What are we going to do?” they asked each other. “This man certainly performs many miraculous signs. If we allow him to go on like this, soon everyone will believe in him. Then the Roman army will come and destroy both our Temple and our nation.”
The above posts were quoted on another thread and I thought the verse mentioned in John 11 should be looked at more closely, especially since the word "Roman/s" is used in only this 1 verse of the Gospels, John 11:48.
Discuss.................

The greek word used is #g142, which is a taking away, such as captive or "rapture".

Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon

142. airo a primary root;
to lift up; by implication, to take up or away; figuratively, to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind), specially, to sail away (i.e. weigh anchor); by Hebraism (compare 5375) to expiate sin:--away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, take (away, up).
==================================
Matthew 21:43
Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of the God shall be being taken away<142> from Ye, and it shall be being given to a Nation doing the Fruits of it.

This became fulfilled in 70ad.........

John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away<142> of Us, and the Place and the Nation."


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

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

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

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

Luk 17:31

“In that day, he who is on the housetop, and his goods are in the house, let him not come down to take them away.
And likewise the one who is in the field, let him not turn back.

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

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD


The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover.
and it is deserving of the very particular attention of the reader, that this was the anniversary of that memorable period in which the Jews crucified their Messiah........!
Nevertheless, the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers, and foreigners from all parts, so that the whole nation may be considered as having been shut up in one prison, preparatory to the execution of the Divine vengeance ;

...................................
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: mkgal1

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
The word "denari" is used in Revelation 6:6 in conjunction with the measures of wheat and barley.

John 11:48

"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away<142> of Us, and the Place and the Nation."

Revelation 6:5- 6 mentions "yoke" and the Roman currency "denari".

The SEVEN SEALS of Revelation study

Joe 1:11
Be ashamed, you farmers, Wail, you vinedressers, For the wheat and the barley;
Because the harvest of the field has perished.

Revelation 6:6
5 And when it open up the third Seal , I hear of the third living one saying: "Be coming"!
And I am looking and I see and behold! A black horse and the one-sitting-down upon it having a Yoke<2218> in his hand. [Deuteronomy 28:18/Acts 15:10]
6 And I hear a voice in midst of the four living-ones saying: "a measure of grain/wheat a denari and three measures of barley a denari, and the oil and the wine no you should be injuring"."

Rev 18:13
“and cinnamon and incense, fragrant oil and frankincense, wine and oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and bodies and souls of men.
====================================
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
(c) The balances: "and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand." The original word rendered here as "a pair of balances," is ζυγὸν zugon. This word properly means a yoke, serving to couple anything together, as a yoke for cattle. Hence it is used to denote the beam of a balance, or of a pair of scales - and is evidently so used here. The idea is, that something was to be weighed, in order to ascertain either its quantity or its value. Scales or balances are the emblems of justice or equity (compare Job 31:6; Psalm 62:9; Proverbs 11:1; Proverbs 16:11); and when joined with symbols that denote the sale of grain and fruit by weight, become the symbol of scarcity. Thus, "bread by weight" Leviticus 26:26 denotes scarcity. So in Ezekiel 4:16, "And they shall eat bread by weight." The use of balances here as a symbol would signify that something was to be accurately and carefully weighed out.
=================================================
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
6. I heard a voice] One of the many voices heard throughout this book without anyone being defined as the speaker.
A measure of wheat] The object of the voice is rather to define the extent of the scarcity than, as some say, to mitigate it. A quart (or somewhat less) of corn is to be bought for a silver penny (about 8½d.); the former was the estimated ration for an able-bodied man’s daily fare, the latter the daily pay of a soldier, apparently a liberal daily pay (see Matthew 20:2) for a labourer. So there is not such a famine that the poor must starve, and the rich “give their pleasant things for meat to relieve the soul:” the working man can, if he pleases, earn the ordinary necessaries of life for himself: he may even procure a bare comfortless subsistence (for barley, an ordinary article of human food down to the time of the kings of Israel, was now considered as fodder for cattle) for a family, if not too numerous. Meanwhile, nothing is said about the fish and vegetables, which the plain-living man of the Mediterranean ate with his bread, as the plain-living Englishman eats bacon or cheese: but the comparatively superfluous luxuries of wine and oil are carefully protected. In short, we have a picture of “bad times,” when no one need be absolutely without bare necessaries, and those who can afford it need not go without luxuries. All that we know of the age of the decline of the Roman Empire points to this prophecy having been eminently fulfilled then; but we need not go so far for fulfilments of it any more than of the two former: indeed this is much nearer to us than the grand army and the barricades, or Waterloo and Peterloo.

Pulpit Commentary
Verse 6. - And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say; I heard as it were a voice in the midst of the four living creatures, saying (Revised Version). The speaker is not perceived by St. John; the words proceed from somewhere near the throne (but the exact situation is left doubtful), which is surrounded by the four living creatures (see on Revelation 4:6 for the consideration both of the position and of the nature of the four living creatures). Alford points out the appropriateness of the voice proceeding from the midst of the representatives of creation, when the intent of the words is to mitigate the woes denounced against creation. Those who consider the living creatures to be symbolical of the Gospels, and who interpret this vision as a prophecy of heresy (see on ver. 5), also see an appropriateness in the fact of the voice issuing from amidst the living creatures, since by the power and influence of the Gospels heresy is dispelled. Wordsworth recalls the custom of placing the Gospels in the midst of the Synod in the ancient Councils of the Church.

A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; a choenix of wheat for a denarius, and three choenixes of barley for a denarius. The choenix appears to have been the food allotted to one man for a day; while the denarius was the pay of a soldier or of a common labourer for one day (Matthew 20:2, "He agreed with the labourers for a penny a day," and Tacitus, 'Ann.,' 1:17, 26, "Ut denarius diurnum stipendium foret." Cf. Tobit 5:14, where drachma is equivalent to denarius). The choenix was the eighth part of the modius, and a denarius would usually purchase a modius of wheat. The price given, therefore, denotes great scarcity, though not an entire absence of food, since a man's wages would barely suffice to obtain him food. Barley, which was the coarser food, was obtainable at one third of the price, which would allow a man to feed a family, though with difficulty. A season of great scarcity is therefore predicted, though in his wrath God remembers mercy (cf. the judgments threatened in Leviticus 26:23-26, viz. the sword, pestilence, and famine; also the expression, "They shall deliver you your bread again by weight"). And see thou hurt net the oil and the wine. The corollary to the preceding sentence, with the same signification. It expresses a limit set to the power of the rider on the black horse. These were typical articles of food (cf. Psalm 104:14, 15, "That he may bring forth food out of the earth; and wine that maketh glad the heart of man,

and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart;" and Joel 1:10, "The corn is wasted: the new wine is dried up, the oil languisheth"). Wordsworth interprets, "The prohibition to the rider, 'Hurt not thou the oil and the wine,' is a restraint on the evil design of the rider, who would injure the spiritual oil and wine, that is, the means of grace, which had been typified under those symbols in ancient prophecy (Psalm 23:4, 5), and also by the words and acts of Christ, the good Samaritan, pouring in oil and wine into the wounds of the traveller, representing human nature, lying in the road." 'Αδικήσῃς ἀδικεῖν in the Revelation invariably signifies "to injure," and, except in one case, takes the direct accusative after it (see Revelation 2:11; Revelation 7:2, 3; Revelation 9:4, 10, 19; Revelation 11:5). Nevertheless, Heinrich and Elliott render, "Do not commit injustice in the matter of the oil and wine." Rinek renders, "waste not." The vision is a general prophecy of the future for all time (see on ver. 5); but many writers have striven to identify the fulfilment of the vision with some one particular famine. Grotius and Wetstein refer it to the scarcity in the days of Claudius; Renan, to that in the time of Nero; Bishop Newton, to the end of the second century. Those who interpret the vision as a forewarning of the spread of heresy, especially single out that of Arius.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others

This became fulfilled in 70ad.........

John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away<142> of Us, and the Place and the Nation."

Be careful with taking a verse out of the context:

John 11:45-51 KJV
[45] Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.
[46] But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.
[47] Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.
[48] If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
[49] And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
[50] Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
[51] And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;

It is their assumption among themselves that if more people believe Christ, the Romans would take away their place and nation. It is not a prophecy.

Anyway back to Matthew 21.

Matthew 21:42-45 KJV
[42] Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
[43] Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
[44] And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
[45] And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.

You did not answer my question about your doctrine on Matthew 21 earlier. If you believe that Matthew 21:42-25 and Romans 11:48 were talking about Romans taking away the physical kingdom from the Jews, who did the Romans then give the physical kingdom to that bringing forth the fruits? Humm? Where is the record in your precious writings of Josephus where he said Romans gave the kingdom to?
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Matthew 21:43
Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of the God shall be being taken away<142> from Ye, and it shall be being given to a Nation doing the Fruits of it.

Revelation 12:8 and Revelation 20:11 appear to be the same event [as is Armegeddon [70ad]/Gog Magog].......

John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away of Us, and the Place<5117> and the Nation." [Revelation 12:8 Revelation 20:11
===========================
5117. topos top'-os apparently a primary word;
a spot (general in space, but limited by occupancy; whereas 5561 is a large but participle locality), i.e. location (as a position, home, tract, etc.); figuratively, condition, opportunity; specially, a scabbard:--coast, licence, place, X plain, quarter, + rock, room, where.

Rev 2:5
remember, then, whence thou hast fallen, and reform, and the first works do;
and if not, I come to thee quickly, and will remove thy lamp-stand from its place -- if thou mayest not reform;

Rev 6:14

and heaven departed as a scroll rolled up, and every mountain and island -- out of their places they were moved;

Rev 12:6
6 and the woman did flee to the wilderness, where she hath a place made ready from God, that there they may nourish her -- days a thousand, two hundred, sixty.
8 and they did not prevail, nor was their place found any more in the heaven;
14 and there were given to the woman two wings of the great eagle, that she may fly to the wilderness, to her place, where she is nourished a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent;

Rev 16:16

and they did bring them together to the place that is called in Hebrew Armageddon.

Rev 20:11
And I saw a great white throne, and Him who is sitting upon it, from whose face the earth and the heaven did flee away, and place was not found for them;
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Nige55
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Matthew 21:43
Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of the God shall be being taken away<142> from Ye, and it shall be being given to a Nation doing the Fruits of it.

Again, you did not answer my question about your doctrine on Matthew 21 earlier. If you believe that Matthew 21:42-25 and Romans 11:48 were talking about Romans taking away the physical kingdom from the Jews, who did the Romans then give the physical kingdom to "a nation" that bringing forth the fruits? Humm? Where is the record in your precious writings of Josephus on a nation He said Romans gave the kingdom to? What physical nation is it?

If you can't answer it, then your doctrine isn't biblically accurate.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Again, you did not answer my question about your doctrine on Matthew 21 earlier. If you believe that Matthew 21:42-25 and Romans 11:48 were talking about Romans taking away the physical kingdom from the Jews, who did the Romans then give the physical kingdom to "a nation" that bringing forth the fruits? Humm? Where is the record in your precious writings of Josephus on a nation He said Romans gave the kingdom to? What physical nation is it?

If you can't answer it, then your doctrine isn't biblically accurate.

Aren't you on record here as claiming Matthew 21:40-45 has already been fulfilled?

If so, what are your answers to these questions?

When the questioner likewise has no alternative answer for his own questions, how can he expect others to provide such an answer?
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Matthew 21:43
Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of the God shall be being taken away<142> from Ye, and it shall be being given to a Nation doing the Fruits of it.

This became fulfilled in 70ad.........

John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away<142> of Us, and the Place and the Nation."
==============================
This is also fulfilled at the Cross..........

Eze 37:22
and I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all; they shall no longer be two nations, nor shall they ever be divided into two kingdoms again.


This covenantle parable in Luke 16 explains who the Kingdom[Temple/Priesthood] was taken from, and to whom it was given........

Rich-man and Lazarus True story or Parable

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

When one looks at the history of the Jewish people from the time of Yeshua until today, one theme remains constant — PERSECUTION. With the quashing of the Jewish revolts against Rome (66-70 CE and 132-135 CE), the saga of the Jewish people in the Diaspora has been one of persistent and harsh persecution from virtually all quarters. The Inquisition of the 15th century and the Holocaust of the 20th century are two of the more well-known antisemitic episodes, but many more are recorded on the bloody pages of history. Due to their unbelief and rejection of Yeshua, God has brought the "flame" of suffering and grief down upon the Jews through the centuries. Unfortunately, most of that mistreatment has come at the hands of those who called themselves "Christians."

The Jews pictured by the rich man in this parable are in their present state because of their unbelief, which ultimately manifested itself in the rejection of the Messiah, Yeshua. Unfortunately, this parable shows that the punishment and testing they would undergo would not immediately lead them to Yeshua. Instead of calling on the Messiah, the rich man calls on his ancestor Abraham to help ease his suffering.

ROMANS 9:3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen by race. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; 5 to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen. (RSV)
GALATIANS 3:6 . . . Abraham "believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." 7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, "In you all the nations shall be blessed." 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.
JOHN 5:45 "Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you — Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?"
========================================
While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Yeshua was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who he was referring to with this parable. This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the House of Judah, the Jews!

LUKE 16:30 "And he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' 31 But he said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.' "

======================================
ROMANS 11:25
For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins." 28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. 33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out
=================================
Meyer's NT Commentary
Matthew 21:43. Διὰ τοῦτο] therefore, because, according to the psalm just quoted, the rejected stone is destined to become the corner-stone. What is contained in the following announcement is the necessary consequence of the inversion of the order of things just referred to. The λέγω ὑμῖν, however, like the ἀφʼ ὑμῶν below, implies the obvious intermediate thought: “for it is you who reject this corner-stone.”

ἀρθήσεται ἀφʼ ὑμῶν] for they, along with the whole Ἰσραὴλ κατὰ σάρκα represented by them, were by natural right the owners of the approaching Messianic kingdom, its theocratic heirs; comp. Matthew 13:38.

ἔθνει ποιοῦντι, κ.τ.λ.] Jesus is not here referring to the Gentiles, as, since Eusebius’ time, many, and in particular Schenkel, Hilgenfeld, Keim, Volkmar, have supposed, but, as the use of the singular already plainly indicates, to the whole of the future subjects of the kingdom of the Messiah, conceived of as one people, which will therefore consist of Jews and Gentiles, that new Messianic people of God, which is to constitute the body politic in the kingdom that is about to be established, 1 Peter 2:9. The fruits of the Messiah’s kingdom are those fruits which must be produced as the condition of admission (Matthew 5:3 ff., Matthew 13:8). Hence, likewise, the use of the present ποιοῦντι; for Jesus regards the future subjects of the kingdom as already anticipating its establishment by producing its fruits. The metaphor is to be regarded as an echo of the parable of the vineyard. The fruits themselves are identical with those mentioned in Ephesians 5:9; Galatians 5:22; Romans 6:22.

Expositor's Greek Testament
Matthew 21:43. διὰ τοῦτο, introducing the application of the oracle, and implying that the persons addressed are the builders = therefore.—ἡ βασιλεία τ. θ.: the doom is forfeiture of privilege, the kingdom taken from them and given to others.—ἔθνει, to a nation; previously, as Paul calls it, a no nation (οὐκ ἔθνει, Romans 10:19), the reference being, plainly, to the heathen world.—ποιοῦντι τ. κ. α.: cf. Matthew 3:8; Matthew 3:10; Matthew 7:17, bringing forth the fruits of it (the kingdom). The hope that the new nation will bring forth the fruit is the ground of the transference. God elects with a view to usefulness; a useless elect people has no prescriptive rights.

Bengel's Gnomen
Matthew 21:43. Αὐτῆς, thereof) sc. the kingdom.[949]

[949] Even though thou mayest be a good tree, yet thy fruit is not thine own, but that of the vineyard. Romans 11:17—V. g.Pulpit CommentaryVerse 43. - Therefore I say unto you. Having denounced the sin, Christ now enunciates the punishment thereof, in continuation of his parable. Because ye slay the Son, reject the Cornerstone, the vineyard, i.e. the kingdom of God, shall be taken from you. Ye shall no longer be God's peculiar people; your special privileges shall be taken away. A nation. The Christian Church, the spiritual Israel, formed chiefly from the Gentile peoples (Acts 15:14; 1 Peter 2:9). The fruits thereof (au)th = ); i.e. of the kingdom of God, such faith, life, good works, as become those thus favoured by Divine grace.
Links
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Aren't you on record here as claiming Matthew 21:40-45 has already been fulfilled?

If so, what are your answers to these questions?

When the questioner likewise has no alternative answer for his own questions, how can he expect others to provide such an answer?

Diversionary tactic. If you claim that I have a record about my position on Matthew 21:40-45, you will see my answer explained there.

My question for LittleLamb is still valid as he has not yet answer how the Roman gave the "literal kingdom" to "a nation" after taking it away from Israel literally.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Matthew 21:43
Therefore I am saying to ye, that the Kingdom of the God shall be being taken away<142> from Ye, and it shall be being given to a Nation doing the Fruits of it.

This became fulfilled in 70ad.........

Nope.

John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away<142> of Us, and the Place and the Nation."
==============================
This is also fulfilled at the Cross..........

Are you saying that the Romans took the place and nation at the Cross? Humm...nope!

This covenantle parable in Luke 16 explains who the Kingdom[Temple/Priesthood] was taken from, and to whom it was given........

Rich-man and Lazarus True story or Parable

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary
So this is your answer to "given to a nation doing the fruits of it" question found in the parable of Rich-man and Lazarus?! Nothing in the parables that even support your doctrine nor it actually answers the question. I take that you really can't answer my questions bluntly before throw in some commentary.

Try again, LittleLamb:

"If you believe that Matthew 21:42-25 and Romans 11:48 were talking about Romans taking away the physical kingdom from the Jews, who did the Romans then give the physical kingdom to "a nation" that bringing forth the fruits? Humm? Where is the record in your precious writings of Josephus on a nation He said Romans gave the kingdom to? According to your doctrine, what physical nation is it?"

Listen to me, how did the Romans took the kingdom from Israel and gave to the church, a spiritual kingdom? You got it all wrong. Romans cannot do that. Only God can. It was God who took the SPIRITUAL kingdom representative from national Israel the moment Christ went to the cross, and in three days, He gave it to a nation that will produce fruits (the one that he rebuilt in three days that was FALLEN). Selah. This has NOTHING to do with the physical fallen city in 70AD sometimes some 30 years later! The kingdom representative was ALREADY given to a nation (church) at the Cross, especially when they did GET THE POWER with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, not 70AD! Period!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Diversionary tactic. If you claim that I have a record about my position on Matthew 21:40-45, you will see my answer explained there.

I found it!
What nation did Christ give the kingdom to after took it from Israel? Why, of course, the New Testament Congregation, the Church which is bringing forth the fruits (Saints) since the Cross!

However, this does NOT Harmonize with the Scripture.

You have the Cross as the time when the Kingdom was taken away and given to another... Matthew 21 has it happening AFTER the Cross, at the Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard.

Since you and Matthew are in direct opposition, I'm pretty sure Matthew is correct and you are incorrect on the timing.
 
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

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I found it!

Good job! You should set an example for others to do the same instead of assuming that I have not answered.

However, this does NOT Harmonize with the Scripture.

Says who?

You have the Cross as the time when the Kingdom was taken away and given to another... Matthew 21 has it happening AFTER the Cross, at the Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard.

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

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

Luke 19:44
  • "And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation."
Don't you see that Christ is not talking about a physical city, but the Old Testament congregation of Israel, and how it would be brought to ruin or desolation? It's so obvious. And it is also obvious that it was not in 70 A.D. by the Romans, but by Christ's own people who rejected Him. The Holy City and Sanctuary "represent" the Lord's Old Testament congregation, the people of Israel. Moreover, when God fulfills Scripture, it's not halfway, pick and choose or contradictory, it's total harmony with itself.

Daniel 9:26
  • "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."
The people who destroyed the city were not the Romans, it was the people of the Prince, the Messiah. Christ was cut off at the cross, not in 70 A.D., and not for Himself--for His people. Indeed true to his prophecy, the city and the sanctuary were destroyed or brought to desolation by the people of the Prince.. This is what Christ spoke about as He wept over the Holy City Jerusalem concerning its desolation. Not that it would take play over 30 years later in 70 A.D., but them being cut off and blinded when He (whom the city and sanctuary represented) was cut off. It's not talking about physical stones falling, but spiritually stones falling as the kingdom was taken from them and given to another. Not God's building the ruins again by physical stones, but by spiritual stones, with Him (whom they had rejected as Messiah) as the chief cornerstone of that rebuilding. Sure, there are professing Christians running to and fro looking for a physical rebuilding of the Holy Temple and a Physical restoring of the land and city, but this is private rather than God's interpretation of the Prophecy.

Mark 12:9-12
  • "What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.
  • And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:
  • This was the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
  • And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way."
How is it that they knew, unlike Christians today with so much more information choose to think in terms of physical stones and buildings. Even these of Israel perceived that this building Christ spoke about in parables was about them, and the rebuilding with Christ as the corner stone, was spoken about Him. Today we muse about how stone falling and being in rebuilding must be taken in a literal fashion simply because Josephus' testimony of the Romans who laid siege upon and sacked Jerusalem literally? That's all well and Good, but where is the Biblical validation that "this" fulfills the prophecy? Simply because it seems so doesn't cut it. Sorry to disappoint you!

Since you and Matthew are in direct opposition, I'm pretty sure Matthew is correct and you are incorrect on the timing.

Matthew and I had a tea together and agreed with what he wrote about. :)
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But now you have to explain how something that you go to great lengths to theorize must be taken very literally, is now mysteriously not very literally when it comes to God's very specific qualification of the prophecy as not one stone would be left standing one upon another.

ahem...I do not have to explain why YOUR view is in disharmony with Matthew 21:40-45

You do.

You and Matthew/Jesus disagree on the timing.

You say the timing is the same timing as the Killing of the Son, Matthew and Jesus say the timing is AFTER the killing of the Son, AT the "coming of the Lord of the Vineyard".

YOU need to Account for this discrepancy, not me.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
ahem...I do not have to explain why YOUR view is in disharmony with Matthew 21:40-45

Go figure! Why aren't I surprised that you won't explain? :p

You and Matthew/Jesus disagree on the timing.

Scripture, please. :)

You say the timing is the same timing as the Killing of the Son, Matthew and Jesus say the timing is AFTER the killing of the Son, AT the "coming of the Lord of the Vineyard".

I can see that you still don't get it. For for the sake of readers here who would appreciate my testimony:

The Old Testament Jews "WERE" the builders of the Temple, just as we, the New Testament Jews in Christ, are the builders of the Temple. And the Temple was built with stones. Not with physical stones, but stones that represent PEOPLE! Selah! Christ was talking about PEOPLE, not physical city and temple! And didn't you read in Scripture that God says some of the building (stones) we placed in the Temple will actually be wood, hay and stubble (illustrating all were not saved), so there were stones of old that were not actually saved? Get it? These are the Jewish leaders and people with them! In other words, the Apostles were the "saved" stones. The priests and pharisees were "unsaved" stones. So the "unsaved" stones have always had the external covenant Church relationship. So you, as well as LittleLamb, need to "TRY" and be rational and receive what Christ clearly states--for a change! The Jews were the Old Testament builders, not as physical stones, but stones that represent people, just as we are in the New today! So again, consider the parable of the vineyard that you like to rub on it. And no, it's not a literal Vinyard nor the physical temple!

Mark 12:9-10
  • "What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.
  • And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:"
Please, you need a rational reading of this Paul, that's all that is necessary. Tell me... who were these husbandmen and builders and what was the stone they rejected for their building? Come on! Rational following the text, that's all I ask! What was the vineyard, and when did the Lord actually destroy the husbandmen as a representative of God's Kingdom and give it (the vinyard) to others? Was it AD 70 or was it at the death and resurrection of Christ? Humm?!

Your extra-biblical conclusion, based on JOSPEHUS' writing, is that God destroyed Israel in AD 70, while the divinely inspired word of God says it was already destroyed and the vineyard given to another by Christ's death and resurrection and the institution of the New Testament congregation started at Pentecost. That was when the church started her kingdom representation! Exactly what Scripture declared!

HELLO?!

Moreover, who are these "BUILDERS" that Christ talks about that rejects Him as the Head Stone, and just what were they building and what materials were they using? Literal woods and stones? Why did they reject Christ as the cornerstone for their building? Literal building? Seriously? Come on--stop!

By the way, do you claim God never speaks of His people as stones of the Temple? Who were those stones referring to? You see, again, you never answer any questions because the answers contradict your secular-based conclusions that these stones of the sanctuary are a New Testament Phenomenon of 70AD. In the "typical" fashion of those who turn to the right hand and to the left in order to avoid receiving God's word right in front of them, you simply ignore the countless contradictions to your AD 70 theory.

Sorry to see this happening to you.

YOU need to Account for this discrepancy, not me.

As I said, the Lord judges and I am COMFORTABLE with that.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Scripture, please. :)

I can see that you still don't get it.

Again, Jesus/Matthew says the Kingdom gets taken from one then redistributed to others at "THE COMING OF THE LORD OF THE VINEYARD" and not before.

I get that this is a very troubling passage for you.

You simply CAN'T have that event be "THE COMING OF THE LORD OF THE VINEYARD", so you are going through great pains to obfuscate and redirect everyone away from the obvious contradiction between your view and Jesus' view in Matt 21:40-45

I'll stick with Matthew and Jesus, no matter how hard you try to get me to join you in rejecting their view.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I get that this is a very troubling passage for you.

Actually, it is a very troubling passage for YOU to reconcile with. Why? Read on.

You simply CAN'T have that event be "THE COMING OF THE LORD OF THE VINEYARD", so you are going through great pains to obfuscate and redirect everyone away from the obvious contradiction between your view and Jesus' view in Matt 21:40-45

I think you got "the coming of the Lord of the Vineyard" seriously misunderstood. The "coming of the Lord of the Vineyard" is NOT the "second coming" in 70AD or the physical destruction of the temple itself. Not at all. It is the FIRST coming of Christ. Did the Jews know the visitation of Jesus Christ as their Lord of their vineyard, when they deal with him?

Luke 19:41-44 KJV
[41] And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
[42] Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
[43] For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
[44] And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

Why stop here? Let continue...

Luke 19:45-48 KJV
[45] And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought;
[46] Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.
[47] And he taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him,
[48] And could not find what they might do: for all the people were very attentive to hear him.

Does that sound like the Lord never referred to these perimeter buildings of the city in His Discourse? On the contrary. Does that sound like Christ is talking about a physical city, all the houses, bricks, mortar? Or does it sound like Christ is talking about a city of people who would be laid even with the ground because they didn't know the time of His visitation? The very people whom Christ has cast out of the temple as an example of their desolate? Can a building or stones know anything? He's not talking to a physical city any more than you or I would be talking to a wall of the city. He's using the city Jerusalem as a figure of his covenant people that would symbolically be ground to powder, laid even with the ground. Just as He always has spoken this way about them. ..it's "not" something new as some people would have you believe that it is.

Come on...in all seriousness, it seems that you are contradicting God's Word if you insist on this being a prophecy of a consistent literal fulfillment. ...your words, not mine!

But the truth is, in that verse, Christ is not talking to or about a literal city building with literal stones, but literal people and their children. Do you not realize that cities don't give birth to children. Selah.


I'll stick with Matthew and Jesus, no matter how hard you try to get me to join you in rejecting their view.

Not my job to convince you. That is the job of the Holy Spirit. I only testify what Scripture says. There is also another story about the Lord of the Vineyard in Scripture that you need to read carefully:

Luke 20:9-18 KJV
[9] Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
[10] And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
[11] And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
[12] And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
[13] Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
[14] But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
[15] So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
[16] He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
[17] And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
[18] Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

A certain man is obviously God Himself. He left the vineyard with husbandmen, the Jews of His Old Testament congregation. God checks with the Jews over time to see if they produce fruits by sending them judges and prophets. They will not listen to them and treated them badly. Then Lord of the vineyard decided to send His Son to the husbandmen, the Jews. Jesus Christ is actually the Lord of the vineyard Himself because He is God. He visited the Jews and they knew him not. Do you know what the Jews did to the Son of God? They rejected him and put him to death, thinking they do God's favor.

What do you think God (and Jesus as God Himself too) response to this? He will destroy Jews by taking the kingdom (vineyard) away from them and given to Gentiles Christians. The Jews protested saying, "God forbid" but Jesus prophesied that it is them (the Jews) who have rejected the stone (Christ) which is why the judgment has come upon them as a congregation. This has nothing to do with physical building and stones of Jerusalem but the blindness in part has come upon Israel. In other words, only a few Jews will be allowed to be returned to a vineyard in the New Testament by the blood of Jesus Christ and the testimony of the Gentiles. The rest of the Jews will remain in blindness.

If you deny that the Church has already started her representation of God's Kingdom on Earth at Pentecost when God empowered her to go into the world to preach Gospel. They do not need to wait until 70AD for it! The 70AD is not a sign of the "coming of the Lord of the vineyard." That is your theory. Not the Word of God. All because you got wrong timing, wrong Jerusalem, and wrong stones.

So There!
 
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

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The "coming of the Lord of the Vineyard" is NOT the "second coming" in 70AD or the physical destruction of the temple itself. Not at all. It is the FIRST coming of Christ.

Matthew and Jesus have it happening AFTER the Son is Killed.

You have it at the Birth of the Son. The 1st Advent.

I'll stick with Matt & Jesus.

Luke 20:9-18 KJV
[9] Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
[10] And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
[11] And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
[12] And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
[13] Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
[14] But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
[15] So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
[16] He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
[17] And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
[18] Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.[/quote]
A certain man is obviously God Himself.

Correct.
He left the vineyard with husbandmen, the Jews of His Old Testament congregation.

Correct

God checks with the Jews over time to see if they produce fruits by sending them judges and prophets. They will not listen to them and treated them badly.

Correct

Then Lord of the vineyard decided to send His Son to the husbandmen, the Jews. Jesus Christ is actually the Lord of the vineyard Himself because He is God. He visited the Jews and they knew him not. Do you know what the Jews did to the Son of God? They rejected him and put him to death.

Yes.

What do you think God (and Jesus as God Himself too) response to this?

You ask what I think God/Jesus (Lord of the Vineyard/Chief Conerstone) would do In RESPONSE to the Killing on the Son?

In RESPONSE?

Are you sure?

"In response" would be chronologically AFTER the Killing... Yes... AFTER the Killing. You have the response taking place BEFORE, DURING the 1st Advent.
Matt and Jesus place the response AFTER the 1st Coming/Advent had COMPLETED. Not Before and not DURING the first advent, as you claim.

Strange you fail to comprehend the order of events that you have just spelled out.
 
Upvote 0

TribulationSigns

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 19, 2017
3,485
1,045
Colorado
✟414,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Matthew and Jesus have it happening AFTER the Son is Killed.

You have it at the Birth of the Son. The 1st Advent.

John 1:6-13 KJV
[6] There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
[7] The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
[8] He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
[9] That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
[10] He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
[11] He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
[12] But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
[13] Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Compare with...

Luke 20:9-18 KJV
[9] Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
[10] And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
[11] And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
[12] And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
[13] Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
[14] But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
[15] So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
[16] He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
[17] And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
[18] Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

You ask what I think God/Jesus (Lord of the Vineyard/Chief Conerstone) would do In RESPONSE to the Killing on the Son?

In RESPONSE?

Are you sure?

Yes. Actually, Jesus Christ gave them a sign to do it!

"In response" would be chronologically AFTER the Killing... Yes... AFTER the Killing. You have the response taking place BEFORE, DURING the 1st Advent.
Matt and Jesus place the response AFTER the 1st Coming/Advent had COMPLETED. Not Before and not DURING the first advent, as you claim.

Observe This:

Daniel 9:26-27 KJV
[26] And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
[27] And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Who is the people of the prince spoke of here? Is it not the Jews, Messiah the prince's people per context? God did NOT talk about Titus and His Romans. The Jews went against the Messiah to have Him cut off. This is "HOW" they lost the kingdom representative this way! By cutting off their Messiah, they have effectively destroyed the city and the sanctuary which is actually Christ himself because the Jews are His Body - the body of the temple that Christ told the Jews to destroy! Selah! Observe the next verse:

John 2:18-21 KJV
[18] Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?
[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.

This is the sign Messiah the Prince gave to the JEWS, His People! He told them to DESTROY THIS TEMPLE, and in THREE DAYS he will raise it up. What temple was that? It was NOT a physical temple. It was His congregation that the temple represented! It is about the fall of Old Testament Congregation where Jews were the builders of that temple! Why? Because the kingdom representative was taken away from them and the blindness in part has happened to Israel! But in three days, Christ rebuilt it where Gentiles are now the builders of this temple. Didn't you read the Scripture? Christ spoke about the Gentiles:

Ephesians 2:19-22 KJV
[19] Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
[20] And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
[21] In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
[22] In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Selah! This is the temple being rebuilt but with what? Physical stones? NO! It is PEOPLE through the Spirit! Likewise with the Jews of Old! The Jews were part of a spiritual temple in the Old Testament that their physical temple, altar, animals were a type of because they did not have the revelation of Jesus Christ in the Bible like we do. I think the problem with some Preterists is that they believe that a physical temple must be destroyed in order a spiritual temple could be built. That was not what Jesus had in mind.

Amos 9:11 KJV
[11] In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:

Acts 15:15-17 KJV

[15] And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
[16] After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
[17] That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

Wrong View:

Physical temple
destroyed because the Jews rejected the stone ---> In Three Days ---> Christ rebuilt it as Spiritual Temple where he is a chief Cornerstone of the building.

Right View:
Spiritual temple
destroyed because the Jews rejected the stone ---> In Three Days ---> Christ rebuilt it as Spiritual Temple "like the days of Old" with Christ as chief Cornerstone. Same building method!

Christ will rebuild the temple in the New Testament exactly the same way He built with His People of Old, the Jews! Selah! Now, exactly when that happens, right when Christ said it! In Three Days after they destroyed Him. Not some 30 years later in 70AD! Read the context below!

Matthew 21:37-45 KJV
[37] But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
[38] But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
[39] And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
[40] When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
[41] They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
[42] Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
[43] Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
[44] And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
[45] And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
John 11:48
"If ever we may be letting Him thus, all shall be believing into Him, and shall be coming the Romans<4514> and they shall be taking away<142> of Us, and the Place and the Nation."
========================

Jeremiah 15:2
“And it shall be, if they say to you, ‘Where should we go?' then you shall tell them, ‘Thus says the LORD:
“Such as are for death, to death;
And such as are for the sword, to the sword;
And such as are for the famine, to the famine;
And such as are for the captivity, to the captivity.” '

Luke 21:24
And they shall be falling to mouth of sword and they shall be being led captive into all the nations.
And Jerusalem shall be being trodden by nations until which may be being filled times of nations.
[Deuteronomy 28:68/Revelation 11:2/13:10]

Captivity and sword Luke 21:24 Revelation 13:10


Revelation 13:10
If any to-captivity into captivity is going away.
If any in sword to be killed, is binding him in sword to be killed.
Here is the endurance and the faith of the saints

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD
The Destruction of Jerusalem


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

Of the Jews destroyed during the siege, Josephus reckons not less than ONE MILLION AND ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND, .................Of the captives the whole was about NINETY-SEVEN THOUSAND.

........the tallest and most beautiful youths, together with several of the Jewish nobles were reserved by Titus to grace his triumphal entry into Rome.
After this selection, all above the age of seventeen were sent in chains into Egypt, to be employed there as slaves,
or distributed throughout the empire to be sacrificed as gladiators in the amphitheatres ;
whilst those who were under this age, were exposed to sale.[Deuteronomy 28:68]

================================
Deuteronomy 28:
15 If, however, you do not obey Yahweh thy Elohim by carefully following all His commandments and statutes I am giving you today, all these curses will come upon you and overtake you:
67
In the morning you will say, ‘If only it were evening!’ and in the evening you will say, ‘If only it were morning!’—because of the dread in your hearts of the terrifying sights you will see.
68
“And Yahweh will take you back to Egypt in ships, by the way of which I said to you, ‘You shall never see it again.'
And there you shall be offered for sale to your enemies as male and female slaves, but no one will buy you
.”

Menorah arch of titus.jpg


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

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
You see, again, you never answer any questions because the answers contradict your secular-based conclusions that these stones of the sanctuary are a New Testament Phenomenon of 70AD
The conclusion that these passages are referring to the destruction of Herod's Temple/Levitical priesthood isn't "secular" - it's what most theologically orthodox churches recognize (including THE Orthodox Church).

CHRIST, ISRAEL AND THE FALL OF JERUSALEM
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0