So says every student of the Bible. "I take the scriptures seriously. Listen to me!" But if I'm to take what you say seriously, I cannot even take *your words* too seriously. I have to judge what you claim is true by the Scriptures?
I provided Scripture. Were you serious with these? Doubtfully.
1st, you say we should take the Scriptures seriously, as our rule. And then you turn what is said into symbolism that *you* interpret for others. That makes *you* the rule--not the Scriptures. No, the Scriptures indicate Christ wept over a literal Jerusalem over a literal destruction that was to take place in a literal generation.
No. You need to read the Scripture carefully:
Luk 19:38-44
(38) Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
(39) And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him,
Master, rebuke thy disciples.
(40) And he answered and said unto them,
I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
(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.
When Christ beheld the city, did he weep over the physical stones of the city? Didn't you compare Scripture with Scripture that God has compared the stones with people of the congregation? If Christ told disciples to hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out. The stones are people who are praising Christ. The people of the Old Testament congregation. Verses 43 and 44 however was talking about the FALL of Old Testament congregation. Not the physical city, but judgment or vengeance upon the unfaithful people of the congregation for their rejection that took place shortly after. This is what not leaving in one stone upon another signifies. For example:
Luk 21:5-6
(5) And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,
(6) As for these things which ye behold, the days will come,
in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Like the Jews, you may think Christ was talking about the physical city and temple here. But He was talking about His people of the congregation which temple REPRESENTS. Spoke to the Jews, Christ said:
Joh 2:18-21
(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.
The Jews thought Christ was talking about a physical temple that they need to tear down so He will rebuild it in three days. They have carnal thoughts and do not understand what Christ talked about. The temple of his body is the "CONGREGATION" - - His people, that will destroy (for their rejection of Messiah the Prince). This is why the kingdom was taken from them and given to the Church... in three days!
If you can't see this truth, nothing I can do to help. It is up to the Lord to reveal the truth to you. Hey, I provided the Scripture. It is a serious matter.
I would argue that there was a literal generation of Hebrews who went through the Wilderness of Sinai. Though this was a literal 40 year genration we may then characterize that generation as an "disobedient" generation," presenting the word "generation" in an additional sense, indicating that that generation failed to obey God. That does not discount the fact the character of that generation was derived from the display of a single, literal generation of 40 years!
Sorry, you do not make any sense. You do not even provide a Scripture. But please allow me...
The number forty in scripture often illustrates
a time of trial or testing. For example, as the Lord tried/tested Israel in the wilderness.
Deu 8:2
(2) And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these
forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee,
to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.
The Lord tried (proved) them forty years in the wilderness. The word proved means to
TEST, not "disobedience"! It was God's testing program to see if they would keep His commandments and be faithful. The number forty signified this, whether days, years or months depending on context. We see the same testing as Jesus Christ was tried of Satan forty days in the Wilderness.
Mar 1:13
(13) And
he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.
Does that mean Jesus was disobedient? No, that word translated tempted is the word tried or tested, not tempted as we might use the word in our day. Christ was never tempted to Sin, he was TRIED by Sin. Or in other words, by sin He was proved or tested.
Likewise, after Christ was killed, He proved Himself forty days.
Act 1:3
(3) To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs,
being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
Again, Moses was in the mount forty days and the Children of Israel were tried, and they failed the test making themselves an idol. Again, many scriptures show this spiritual significance of 40! So your claim that 40 years generation means disobedience has been proved wrong.
Who said I made reference to Josephus? I didn't do that at all? If your interpretation is as bad as your presumption I have real problems with your post! The Church Fathers understood that Jesus indicated Jerusalem would fall to the Romans imminently. That doesn't take a brilliant mind--it was plain to see, both in contemporary history and in the words Jesus used.
I was writing to a general audience as well whether you made any reference to Josephus or not to save my time!
I do not care what "Church Fathers," early or later think. I go by Scripture. They can claim Jersualem physically fall to Romans all they want, but I can prove them wrong with Scripture.
The fall of Jerusalem was not some kind of carnal, literal rendering of Scriptures. That was precisely what Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel had prophesied before him. They spoke of the literal fall of Israel to the Babylonians. There is every reason to ignore a "spiritualization" of prophecy to turn it from something literal and historical to some "moral lesson" devised by the human imagination. As you said, let's let Scripture be the rule, and not our own thoughts alone.
(Patting on your back)... okay...
See the "literal fall" of Old Testament Israel was only an example for the New Testament congregation, the church. As God spoke through Paul, it is spiritual discerned.