Should the apocalyptic language style of the old testament be taken at face value or symbolic?

[jgr]

O good grief!

The Greek word 'naos' (Strong's no. 3485) is also translated as "temple" about the literal physical temple in Jerusalem in Christ's day and before, in many Scriptures, too many for me to take time to list here.

Matt 27:5
5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple (naos), and departed, and went and hanged himself.
KJV

Good grief indeed.

In what supporting instances did Paul refer to a physical temple?

 

[keras]

Neither passage mentions a 'rebuilding' of a future temple. When 2 thessalonians 2:4 was written, there was already a temple building standing in Jerusalem.

Revelation 11:1 clearly refers to the olivet discourse, which is about the 1st century standing temple that was to be destroyed.

Do you believe in 2 different times of the gentiles, where Jerusalem is trampled down?

Luke 21:24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations. And Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Revelation 11:2 But exclude the courtyard outside the temple. Do not measure it, because it has been given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for 42 months.

But what 2 Thess 2 and Rev 11 say, do not relate to the 2nd Temple.

Luke 21:24 is a prophecy about the Roman conquest and how Jerusalem will be inhabited by ungodly people and still is today.

Revelation 11:3 refers to the period of the Great Tribulation; the final 43 months before Jesus Returns.

Your rash and unsupported preterist assumptions, lead you discount the information and warnings that God has given us. We who face dramatic and earth shaking times, as the climax of the ages comes upon us all.
Your attitude is just as 2 Peter 3:1-6 tells us. A flat out denial that you personally will have to experience trials and testing.
We Christians should not be taken by surprise by what the Lord will do when an attempt is made to fire nuke missiles into the holy Land. Zechariah 5:1-4, Psalms 7:12-16, Psalms 83

 

[summerville]

But what 2 Thess 2 and Rev 11 say, do not relate to the 2nd Temple.

Luke 21:24 is a prophecy about the Roman conquest and how Jerusalem will be inhabited by ungodly people and still is today.

Revelation 11:3 refers to the period of the Great Tribulation; the final 43 months before Jesus Returns.

Your rash and unsupported preterist assumptions, lead you discount the information and warnings that God has given us. We who face dramatic and earth shaking times, as the climax of the ages comes upon us all.
Your attitude is just as 2 Peter 3:1-6 tells us. A flat out denial that you personally will have to experience trials and testing.
We Christians should not be taken by surprise by what the Lord will do when an attempt is made to fire nuke missiles into the holy Land. Zechariah 5:1-4, Psalms 7:12-16, Psalms 83

42 months refers to the period from 66 AD to 70 AD...

The judgment was upon the apostate Israel (Matt. 19:28; Luke 21:22-23, 32; Luke 22:30) during AD 66-70 which last for 42 months (3 and half years).

 

[keras]

Jesus never went to the second temple?? Or, Jesus is NOW the temple? I doubt Jewish people will return to animal sacrifice.

The building of the third Temple under Emperor Julian was destroyed by fire and earthquake.

None of this precludes the building of a new Temple.
As Zechariah 6:15 says: Men from far away will come to work on the building of the Temple of the Lord....

The Jewish people, those who call themselves Jews; will be gone on the Day the Lord sends His fiery wrath. Zephaniah 1:14-18, Amos 2:4-5, Jeremiah 10:18, +
It will be all the Lords faithful peple who will live in all of the holy Land and will worship in the Temple. Isaiah 56:1-8, Romans 9:24-26

 

[keras]

42 months refers to the period from 66 AD to 70 AD...

The judgment was upon the apostate Israel (Matt. 19:28; Luke 21:22-23, 32; Luke 22:30) during AD 66-70 which last for 42 months (3 and half years).

Many prophesies have a partial fulfilment, then a later final fulfilment.
But in this case, I don't see it, as the 42 months of Rev 11:2 , also relates to the 1260 days of Rev 12:6, which will be the Great Tribulation; the final 3 1/2 years before Jesus Returns.

Do you have accurate historical proof of the Roman conquest lasting for exactly 1260 days?

 

[summerville]

Many prophesies have a partial fulfilment, then a later final fulfilment.
But in this case, I don't see it, as the 42 months of Rev 11:2 , also relates to the 1260 days of Rev 12:6, which will be the Great Tribulation; the final 3 1/2 years before Jesus Returns.

Do you have accurate historical proof of the Roman conquest lasting for exactly 1260 days?

From the time Daniel wrote about the persecutions of Antiochus IV through the terrible Maccabean Revolt, thru the second Jewish war and the destruction of the Temple right on thru the time of Emperor Hadrian was all about terror and persecution and deprivation.

Study the whole panorama of that history and you don't need to nit pick.

 

[summerville]

Hadrian wouldn't let the Jews bury their dead. The bodies lay in the street.

The 2nd century Roman historian Cassius Dio wrote that the Jews revolted when Hadrian visited Jerusalem in 130 CE and renamed the city Aelia Capitolina after himself. This led to a Jewish uprising of “no slight importance nor of brief duration.” Roman soldiers, with extra legions sent from abroad, spent four years suppressing the revolt.

Emperor Hadrian 'conquers' Jerusalem again - Archaeology ...
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.premium...
Dec 22, 2015 · Publius Aelius Hadrianus Augustus, as he was known, was emperor from 117 to 138 C.E., and is best remembered in Israel for crushing the Bar Kochba revolt against the Romans and for the ensuing holocaust, including destruction of the Jewish community in Judea and the razing of Jerusalem, upon whose ruins he built a pagan city named Aelia Capitolina.

 

[keras]

Hadrian wouldn't let the Jews bury their dead. The bodies lay in the street.

So now your saying that Hadrians conquest in 135 AD, was the fulfilment of Rev 11:2?

 

[summerville]

So now your saying that Hadrians conquest in 135 AD, was the fulfilment of Rev 11:2?

No.. I said:

From the time Daniel wrote about the persecutions of Antiochus IV through the terrible Maccabean Revolt, thru the second Jewish war and the destruction of the Temple right on thru the time of Emperor Hadrian was all about terror and persecution and deprivation.

Revelation 11:2 2But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.

They (the gentiles) did trample Jerusalem for 42 months.. They being the zealots, Idumeans and Galileans.

 

[keras]

No.. I said:

From the time Daniel wrote about the persecutions of Antiochus IV through the terrible Maccabean Revolt, thru the second Jewish war and the destruction of the Temple right on thru the time of Emperor Hadrian was all about terror and persecution and deprivation.

Revelation 11:2 2But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.

They (the gentiles) did trample Jerusalem for 42 months.. They being the zealots, Idumeans and Galileans.

No proof of the 1260 days then?
Note; that the Zealots and Galileans were Jews.

Your claim that Rev 11 was fulfilled just doesn't wash. That there was terror, etc, in the early BC/AD period, in no way precludes it happening again, as the prophesies tell us.

 

[summerville]

No proof of the 1260 days then?
Note; that the Zealots and Galileans were Jews.

Your claim that Rev 11 was fulfilled just doesn't wash. That there was terror, etc, in the early BC/AD period, in no way precludes it happening again, as the prophesies tell us.

Yes.. We call them Jews, but the Jews called them gentiles and savage beasts. They burned the food stores to try and force the Jews to fight the Romans with them.. All they did was make the tribulation of death, disease and famine much, much worse..

excerpt:

Though the locusts themselves are no doubt a portrayal of armies of demons that afflicted the whole society of the Jews during their conflicts with the Romans, the description is perhaps mingled with some features of the demonized zealots who made life so miserable for their fellow Jews during the siege.

That they have hair like women’s hair [v. 8] may actually be a reference to their transvestitism, as Josephus describes:

“With their insatiable hunger for loot, they ransacked the houses of the wealthy, murdered men and violated women for sport; they drank their spoils with blood, and from mere satiety and shamelessness gave themselves up to effeminate practices, plaiting their hair and putting on women’s clothes, drenched themselves with perfumes and painting their eyelids to make themselves attractive.

They copied not merely the dress, but also the passions of women, devising in their excess of licentiousness unlawful pleasures in which they wallowed as in a brothel. Thus they entirely polluted the city with their foul practices.

Yet though they wore women’s faces, their hands were murderous. They would approach with mincing steps, then suddenly become fighting men, and, whipping out their swords from under their dyed cloaks, they would run through every passerby” (Wars, IV:9:10).

Israel’s 5-Month Locust Invasion In 70 AD (Revelation 9:1-11)

 

[keras]

Yes.. We call them Jews, but the Jews called them gentiles and savage beasts

But they were still ethnic Jews.
How are the ethnic Jews of today any different? And why should God redeem them?
Jesus calls them: members of the synagogue of Satan. Rev 3:9

 

[summerville]

But they were still ethnic Jews.
How are the ethnic Jews of today any different? And why should God redeem them?
Jesus calls them: members of the synagogue of Satan. Rev 3:9

Part of the problem in those days and part of the reason the Pharisees were out to get Jesus is because Judea hated Israel. They considered Israel to be Hellenized half breeds and bad Jews.

The people of Israel were also more prosperous so there was jealousy as well. Many Jews were OK with the status quo and didn't want to eject the Romans.

 

[summerville]

@keras

The Romans did not trample the city of Jerusalem for 42 months.

They only trampled Jerusalem during the 5-month siege of Titus in 70 AD. The Jews successfully kicked the Romans out of Jerusalem in August 66 AD, and they only managed to return to Jerusalem for a few days in November 66 AD when Cestius Gallus unsuccessfully attacked the city. For the next 3.5 years the Romans did not enter Jerusalem.

During the 42 months before the Romans came, Jerusalem was indeed trampled, but it was by a different group of people. In early 68 AD Jesus ben Gamala, one of the former high priests, gave a speech in which he described what was happening to Jerusalem because of the Zealots:

“And this place, which is adored by the habitable world, and honored by such as only know it by report, as far as the ends of the earth, is trampled upon by these wild beasts born among ourselves” (Wars 4.4.3).

So, according to this testimony, it was the Zealots who trampled Jerusalem, and they had a reputation for behaving like wild beasts. In what sense were they “Gentiles,” though? Consider what [1] The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia and [2] The Jewish Encyclopedia say about the use of the word “goy” in Scripture:

1. “The Hebrew word goy (plural goyim) means ‘nation.’ In Biblical usage it is applied also to Israel: ‘Ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation’ (goy kadosh; Ex. 19:6).”

Source: “Gentiles,” The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (New York, NY: The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Inc., 1941); Volume 4, p. 533.

1. “In the Hebrew of the Bible ‘goi’ and its plural ‘goyyim’ originally meant ‘nation,’ and were applied both to Israelites and to non-Israelites (Gen. xii. 2, xvii. 20; Ex. xiii. 3, xxxii. 10; Deut. iv. 7; viii. 9, 14; Num. xiv. 12; Isa. i. 4, ix. 22; Jer. vii. 28).”

 

[claninja]

But what 2 Thess 2 and Rev 11 say, do not relate to the 2nd Temple.

Why though? This doesn't make sense. IF the temple in these passages is in regards to literal temple building, logic dictates it would be about the one standing when the scriptures were written. If it wasn't scripture should say so. However, there is not even one passage in the NT that mentions the rebuilding of a literal future temple building, thus countering your argument.

If as you say, there is to be a literal physical temple building "rebuilt" you should be able to easily provide scripture that mention this. So far you have not. The only scripture provided by your are your personal interpretations of debatable scripture that do not even mention a rebuilding of a temple.

Luke 21:24 is a prophecy about the Roman conquest and how Jerusalem will be inhabited by ungodly people and still is today.

Revelation 11:3 refers to the period of the Great Tribulation; the final 43 months before Jesus Returns.

Both passages are about the same event. If we can make these passages about 2 separate events by drawing an imaginary line, we can do this with any scripture and interpretation because pointless and merely speculative.

Luke 21:24 And Jerusalem will be trampled by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Revelation 11:2 Do not measure it, because it has been given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for 42 months.

Your rash and unsupported preterist assumptions, lead you discount the information and warnings that God has given us.

I could say the same subjective thing about your arguments. Let's avoid this and stick with objective arguments.

Your attitude is just as 2 Peter 3:1-6 tells us. A flat out denial that you personally will have to experience trials and testing.

What?........ Keras, let's avoid personal accusations, which is against forum rules, and focus on the content of our posts please.

We Christians should not be taken by surprise by what the Lord will do when an attempt is made to fire nuke missiles into the holy Land. Zechariah 5:1-4, Psalms 7:12-16, Psalms 83

Pure speculation

 

[summerville]

But what 2 Thess 2 and Rev 11 say, do not relate to the 2nd Temple.

Luke 21:24 is a prophecy about the Roman conquest and how Jerusalem will be inhabited by ungodly people and still is today.

Revelation 11:3 refers to the period of the Great Tribulation; the final 43 months before Jesus Returns.

Your rash and unsupported preterist assumptions, lead you discount the information and warnings that God has given us. We who face dramatic and earth shaking times, as the climax of the ages comes upon us all.
Your attitude is just as 2 Peter 3:1-6 tells us. A flat out denial that you personally will have to experience trials and testing.
We Christians should not be taken by surprise by what the Lord will do when an attempt is made to fire nuke missiles into the holy Land. Zechariah 5:1-4, Psalms 7:12-16, Psalms 83

Forget preterism..

The Gentiles Trampled Jerusalem for 42 Months (Revelation 11:1-2)

In Revelation 11:1-2 John was told about a 3.5 year period of tragedy that was about to come upon:

“Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, ‘Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles, and they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.’”

The Greek word used here for “Gentiles” is “ethnos,” the counterpart of the Hebrew word “goy” in the Old Testament.

In the past, I simply assumed that this must be a reference to the Romans who helped destroy Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. I marked out 3.5 years from the time that Nero dispatched Vespasian as his war general (early 67 AD) until Vespasian’s son, Titus, oversaw the burning of the temple in August 70 AD.

However, the Romans did not trample the city of Jerusalem for 42 months. They only trampled Jerusalem during the 5-month siege of Titus in 70 AD. The Jews successfully kicked the Romans out of Jerusalem in August 66 AD, and they only managed to return to Jerusalem for a few days in November 66 AD when Cestius Gallus unsuccessfully attacked the city. For the next 3.5 years the Romans did not enter Jerusalem.

During the 42 months before the Romans came, Jerusalem was indeed trampled, but it was by a different group of people. In early 68 AD Jesus ben Gamala, one of the former high priests, gave a speech in which he described what was happening to Jerusalem because of the Zealots:

“And this place, which is adored by the habitable world, and honored by such as only know it by report, as far as the ends of the earth, is trampled upon by these wild beasts born among ourselves” (Wars 4.4.3).

 

[Davy]

Eschatological bias drives one's interpretation of scripture. I'll stick with the apostles teaching of OT scripture over modern day personal interpretations of revelation .

I prefer to cover both Old and New Testament Books, letting God's Word interpret God's Word (Matthew 13:51-52).

You didn't "correct" me on anything, so I'm not sure what you are "correcting" me on. My argument was that Zechariah 12:10, only the part of "they shall look on him whom they have pierced, found literal and not symbolic fulfillment, during Jesus' crucifixion, as stated in John 19:37.

Yes, I corrected you on that Zech.12 interpretation, for that prophecy is for AFTER Jesus has returned, which is still future to us. You tried to place that in the past, which is wrong. Those who pierced Him on the cross is pointing to unbelieving Jews at His 1st coming indeed, but their mourning Him is about His 2nd coming which is still future, and that is the actual timing context of that Zech.12:10 verse. So yes, I corrected you, because your interpretation placed that future event in the past. I'd say that's a habit one can fall into with following doctrines of men like Preterism; after a while you don't realize you're applying their doctrine to just about everything.

 

[Davy]

Good grief indeed.

In what supporting instances did Paul refer to a physical temple?

You cannot isolate Greek 'naos' to your own liking, which is an attempt to change the context of Scripture.

And your suggestion is to wrongly infer Greek naos being a word that doesn't mean the historical traditional physical temple in Jerusalem. However it is also used to point to the literal physical temple in Jerusalem.

 

[jgr]

You cannot isolate Greek 'naos' to your own liking, which is an attempt to change the context of Scripture.

And your suggestion is to wrongly infer Greek naos being a word that doesn't mean the historical traditional physical temple in Jerusalem. However it is also used to point to the literal physical temple in Jerusalem.

You didn't answer the question, so here it is again:

In what supporting instances did Paul refer to a physical temple?

 

[claninja]

I prefer to cover both Old and New Testament Books, letting God's Word interpret God's Word (Matthew 13:51-52).

Using the NT to interpret the OT is "letting God's word interpret God's word".

Considering that the likes of the Pharisees, Saducees, scribes, and teachers of the law of the 1st century, who rejected Jesus, incorrectly interpreted the OT, AND the disciples had to have their minds opened to understand the OT scriptures, I will stick with the teachings of the epistles and gospels for the correct interpretation of the old testament. As soon as people start to teach "futuristic" OT interpretations that are not found in the NT, it should be a red herring.

Yes, I corrected you on that Zech.12 interpretation, for that prophecy is for AFTER Jesus has returned, which is still future to us. You tried to place that in the past, which is wrong. Those who pierced Him on the cross is pointing to unbelieving Jews at His 1st coming indeed, but their mourning Him is about His 2nd coming which is still future, and that is the actual timing context of that Zech.12:10 verse. So yes, I corrected you, because your interpretation placed that future event in the past. I'd say that's a habit one can fall into with following doctrines of men like Preterism; after a while you don't realize you're applying their doctrine to just about everything.

Incorrect. You appear to be attempting to correct an argument I didn't even make.

I am in agreement that "their mourning Him" is in regards to the 2nd coming. Jesus clearly quotes this fulfillment in the olivet discourse

Matthew 24:30 At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the land will mourn.

Zechariah 12:10b-13 They will mourn for Him as one mourns an only child, and weep bitterly for Him as one grieves a firstborn son. On that day the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning of Hadad-rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. The land will mourn, each clan on its own: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, and all the remaining clans and their wives.”

As stated multiple times now, I am only specifically talking about zechariah 12:10 in the context of John 19, where John literally quotes it as being fulfilled when they looked on Jesus after literally piercing him with a literal spear.

John 19:36-37 Now these things happened so that the Scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of His bones will be broken.”g And, as another Scripture says: “They will look on the One they have pierced.

Zechariah 12:10a Then I will pour out on the house of David and on the people of Jerusalem a spiritb of grace and prayer, and they will look on Me, the One they have pierced

So if you disagree that this specific part is fulfilled in the past, then you disagree with Scripture.

Again my point being only that the OT prophets can be interpreted literally and symbolically depending on how the NT tells us to interpret them.