Temple of God - The Hieron and Naos Confusion

[TribulationSigns]

Recently some Preterism has relied on Strongs to define whether the temple is physical or the body of Christ, the church. They are attempting to use this to defend their flawed doctrine, believing that the temple AND the city in Matthew 24:1-2, Luke 19, Luke 21, Mark 13, etc. are literal so that it should fall in 70AD.

Well, the problem is the Greek term used there is NOT relevant to identifying the Spiritual nature of what Christ was speaking about. It simply means "Holy or Sacred place" and can include the entire precincts (Remember Jesus spoke about leveling even with the ground, not only the Temple Sanctuary but the entire city). It would be akin to us saying that we are a member of the assembly, church, and congregation. The terms are synonymous and speak of every congregation everywhere. As I have demonstrated in John chapter 2 where both those Greek terms are used.

Besides, I have no problem with them saying the disciples spoke of the literal temple (G2411 - hieron). In fact, we can see it's quite OBVIOUS! Keep in mind that the disciples were not greatly enlightened as yet so were still thinking in terms of the Old Testament dispensation, as the Holy Spirit of "revealing" had not been poured out at Pentecost yet.

John 16:12

• "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
• Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
• He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you."

John 14:26

• "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."

Revelation is NOT instant, as many things were revealed to the Disciples progressively. We can see remnants of this "even" after Pentecost as Peter was talking about requiring circumcision in the church, and his poor understanding of the lawfulness of eating unclean meats. We're talking about progressive Revelation here people! Like the Jews, the chosen Disciples were STILL thinking in terms of Old Testament Temple, when Christ was revealing the mystery of new and Spiritual things that the temporal merely "represented." Christ is illuminating (to them, and by extention, us, the True Church) the fall of the Old Testament Temple as a type of the Old Testament congregation, and the coming restoration/rebuilding of the Temple and Holy City in the New Testament type of the New Testament body of Christ--which is the church (Acts 15:14-17).

Now, note the language as Christ "went out of the Temple," and He "departed from it." Granted, it may seem coincidental language that this is when they pointed out the SAME physical temple buildings. But it has a Spiritual meaning. The Disciples are illustrating the great pride they (of course, they were being Jews) had in this glorious building, and such reverence for the greatness of it as the pride of Israel. They put so much stock in their bloodline and Jewish traditions, when without Christ their Messiah, this was all meaningless. The truth is what it represented would be thrown down. Many of the Jews (and their cousins the Premillennialists, Dispensationalists, Preterists, and even some amillennialists today) had put all their trust in the natural/physical/temporal, and God was prophesying in the Spiritual--which isn't an anomaly since this is what Christ did throughout His ministry. Just like when the disciple's brethren, the Jews, asked Jesus for a sign. And He gave them one, even though they didn't even realize it or its significance. They missed it because they were thinking like many in the church and on this forum today, in terms of a literal Temple being destroyed, and Christ was responding to their question by prophesying in spiritual terms. Not one stone left standing one upon another is very specific illustrating that it is completely vanished, totally 100% GONE! It no longer represented the Holy One of Israel. The Disciples in that episode were glorying over a physical building, and Christ is saying what it represents will be taken away completely in God's economy. His words are not ever coincidental, they are deliberate. Again, as is His promise of the sign to the Jews (which they asked for) was fulfilled, and all they could think about was a literal building--just like the congregation and people here on this forum today. But whether or not men ever understand what Temple Christ was speaking of, doesn't mean that he spoke of a physical, literal, brick Temple. Because the Holy Spirit being poured out at Pentecost would eventually reveal the "real" deeper Spiritual truth of His words--to His people. For example, when Christ threw the buyers and sellers out of the Temple (G2411 - hieron)

John 2:18-21

• "Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?
• Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
• Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
• But he spake of the temple of his body."

See that word Temple Christ used there is a different word (G3485 - naos), but it is obvious that the words are interchangeable in the context as the Jews spoke of the physical building, declaring it took 46 years to build. No question about that. And note Christ NEVER told them that He spoke of the Temple of His body, because it remained a MYSTERY to them and to some of you, too! But it is written by the Apostle John for us, who would come after and receive the deeper Spiritual truth of His words. True to His words, the Jews did destroy the Temple, and Christ did raise THAT TEMPLE up in three days, and it was the sign that Jesus had the power/authority to do these things--as they had asked. A sign that many are blinded to from that day to this very day.

The truth is many Jews looked upon the Gentiles as Dogs and Swine and gloried in the fact that they were the chosen seed of Abraham that could never fall from that (in their minds). Even as many in the premillennial/Dispensational church today think the New Testament church can never fall. But the fact is, the old testament congregation DID fall and the New Testament congregation today is no better than the congregation was then! Why? Because their eyes were on the temporal rather than the Spiritual, even as the Disciples were admiring the great buildings of the Jewish nation in Matthew 24:1-2. The Premillennial and Dispensational church, as well as the Pretersits today feel the very same way about the nation of Israel's position because their hermeneutic is almost identical in its looking at God's word only literally (John 3:4) and to some degree having great disdain for God authored Spiritual truths. It's simply the other side of that "exact same" coin of methodology. Many people forgot that the stones represent the people--BOTH those who fell and those BUILDERS who would be raised up/ built again, when we understand the builder and maker is God. I can see that many of you does not realize that Christ specifically said about the stones. For example:

Matthew 3:9-10

• "And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
• And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire."

Yes, God was able of those stones to raise up children unto Abraham, And He Did! Not literal stones as you thought, but SPIRITUAL ONES! The ones that build the spiritual temple!

Galatians 3:29

• "And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."

Nothing coincidental about the language of God raising up stones as the children of Abraham, though it may seem so to many who seem antithetical to the Spirit of truth. Nothing coincidental about stones being the building of the New Testament church, or the stones being made of wood hay and stubble, or of gold silver and precious gems "when we gracefully receive God authored Spiritual truths!" The word temple (G2411 - hieron) used by the Disciples does NOT preclude Christ from talking about a spiritual Temple any more than the word temple (G3485 - naos) that the Jews used in saying it took 46 years to build it precluded Christ from speaking of His body and not whatever building the Jews spoke of. Interchangeable! See... the Disciples were Jews also and because of their carnal minds, they were talking about the physical temple building there. But Christ was NOT! Just as the Jews were talking about the physical temple in another passage saying it took them 46 years to build, but again, Obviously, Christ was not. Selah.

In close, with the truth of the deeper spiritual meaning of Scriptures--Not that it will matter most times. There are not many Berean-like Christians today who will do anything but ignore the Spiritual facts and argue the Hebrew, Greek, and Strongs nuances, neglecting the most crucial part of interpretations--which is that it belongs to God. No one is privately interpreting stones of the Temple to represent God's people because Christ Himself did! The idea is not what the Jews or the Disciples thought at the time, but what Christ says all throughout Scripture. Christ is the only prophet who is never wrong, and He said not one stone would be left standing one upon another in both the city and the Holy Temple. You might ask them (if these things were to be understood literally) how come there are stones left standing one upon another in the city and of the Temple foundations today.

Not that this truth will matter much to those who turn to the right hand and to the left to avoid the truth of that matter.

As I said, there are not many Berean-like Christians who will do anything but ignore the facts, and argue the Hebrew, Greek, and Strongs nuances with me, and neglect the most important part of interpretations--which is they belong to God.

Isaiah 8:14

• "And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem."

It is written, the Stone the builders rejected, is become the head of the corner--of a new building after the fall. Christ is THE cornerstone, and we are the STONES that were built again. Selah! So were the remnant Jews of Israel. But for those who are not part of that restoration, not one of them was left standing one upon another in that Old Testament Temple. 70 A.D. notwithstanding!

 

[TribulationSigns]

I have some people coming to me, "Okay TribulationSigns, where does Christ said the stones would be thrown down IN THE CITY"
If you have spiritual eyes and ears, in Luke chapter 19. Speaking of the Holy City Jerusalem, Christ says:

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."

The city is made level with the ground illustrating that there cannot be any stones piled up one upon another (it's been leveled). And the reason is that they rejected the Christ who came to deliver them, as their Messiah. You can't level a city without throwing all the stones down. Now, if Christ "were" speaking about the literal/physical city made with stones by the hands of men, then that prophecy has not been fulfilled yet since the city has never been laid level with the ground. But if He spoke of the city in spiritual terms, that city Jerusalem is no more standing as the Holy City of God, but is left without buildings and in spiritual bondage, and those children inside her remain in captivity. ...Spiritually.

Galatians 4:25-8

• "For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
• But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
• For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
• Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."

Selah. The carnal city on earth versus the Spiritual city from above. The physical city made with hands versus the glorious city from above made without hands. The city in the middle east which is still in bondage, versus the Spiritual city that has been set free from captivity. The city that worships God in spirit and truth versus the city that worships a god in the spirit of carnality and error.

Jeremiah 10:15

• " They are vanity, and the work of errors: in the time of their visitation they shall perish."

I'm well aware that many Christians, even here, spend an inordinate amount of time attempting to debunk the undeniable truth that there "were" stones left standing one upon another of the Temple after a.d. 70 (usuccessfully), and completely neglect that the prophecy was also concerning the entire city, and not just that one temple building. This also debunks the idea that He couldn't have referred to (G2411 - hieron) because they say "that" includes more than just the Temple building. You see, God knows what He is doing even when they do not. Selah. But here's your proof, in context--if you will receive it.

Luke 19:40-44

• "And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
• And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
• 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.
• 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,
• 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."

Does that satisfy your objection? ...or, because you cannot gainsay or resist the testimony, will you hypothesize and imagine that Christ was simply speaking in a hyperbole? What say ye? Christ the authority over not one stone left standing, or man?

Numbers 22:26

• And the angel of the LORD went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left."

There are but two paths. The broad way, and the narrow way where we turn not to the right hand or the left to avoid God's truth standing right in front of us.

 

[Zao is life]

Recently some Preterism has relied on Strongs to define whether the temple is physical or the body of Christ, the church. They are attempting to use this to defend their flawed doctrine, believing that the temple AND the city in Matthew 24:1-2, Luke 19, Luke 21, Mark 13, etc. are literal so that it should fall in 70AD.


It is written, the Stone the builders rejected, is become the head of the corner--of a new building after the fall. Christ is THE cornerstone, and we are the STONES that were built again. Selah! So were the remnant Jews of Israel. But for those who are not part of that restoration, not one of them was left standing one upon another in that Old Testament Temple. 70 A.D. notwithstanding!

Unfortunately you are making the same error as the Preterists, conflating the made-with-human-hands G2411-hieron- with the G3485-naos (holy place and most holy place inside the temple).

[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple)
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on' neuter of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts, whereas 3485 [naós] denotes the central sanctuary itself (of the Temple in Jerusalem, or elsewhere).

Without exception, whenever you read of Jesus entering the temple in Jerusalem, the Greek word employed for "temple", is G2411 hierón - because Jesus was not a priest in terms of Moses' law and was not allowed into the G3485-naós (the holy places, where only the priests were allowed).

It would be very strange if any verse in the gospels telling about Jesus in the temple in Jerusalem, used the word G3485-noas. However, the Greek never does.

Likewise it would be very strange if, where we read that Jesus told the Jews that His body is the G3485-naos Temple of God, The Greek word used was G2411-hieron, which refers to the made-with-human-hands temple complex in Jerusalem .

However, the Greek does not use the word G2411-hieron in those verses where Jesus tells the Jews that His body is the Temple of God.

You are conflating the made-with-human-hands G2411-hieron- temple complex in Jerusalem with the G3485-naos-holy place and holy of holies that was inside the temple complex, by conflating the two words, and you are doing this despite the fact that the Greek is 100% consistent in the distinction it makes between the two. This is also why you are attempting to discredit the Strongs definition of the two words.

If you are going to point out the error in what they assert to Preterists and Partial Preterists, then you need to have your ducks in a row with regard to the meaning of the words G2411-hieron and G3485-naos in the New Testament, and the consistent distinction that the Greek makes between the two,

because G2411-hieron always refers to the made-with-human-hands temple complex in Jerusalem,

and G3485-naos always refers either to (a) the holy place/most holy place that was inside the temple complex (i.e the place where the presence of God dwelt), or (b) to the body of Christ (the place where the presence of God dwells), or (c) to the bodies of individual saints (the place where the presence of God dwells), or (d) to the congregations of the saints (the place where the presence of God dwells), or (e) to the temple in heaven (in the Revelation).

None of the verses referring to the temple of God found in (a), (b), ( c ), (d) and (e) use the word G2411-hieron. Not even once.

When Paul wrote his letters to the churches at Corinth, Ephesus and Thessaloniki, he used the word G2411-hierón in reference to the temple in Jerusalem (which was still standing) in 1 Corinthians 9:13.

However Paul consistently used the word G3485-naós when speaking about the bodies of individual Christians, and the congregations of Christians as the tabernacle (temple) of God (1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; and Ephesians 2:21-22).

So IF he was referring to a physical, man-made structure in Jerusalem in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 when talking about the man of sin seating himself up in the sanctuary of God, there is no reason why Paul would not use the word G-2411-hierón. But Paul used the word G3485 naós in 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

After His resurrection Jesus entered into the real and only G3485-naós in heaven, of which the earthly temple was the pattern. This is why the word G3485-naos ceased being used in reference to the Jerusalem temple after the verses talking about the tearing of the veil in the G3485-naós.

The word G3485-naos is used in Revelation 11:1-2, and Revelation 11:2 is talking about the holy city.

There are no verses in the Revelation where "Babylon the Great", or the city "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt", or "the cities of the nations" that fell when the 7th bowl of wrath was poured out, are called "the holy city", but the Revelation calls New Jerusalem "the holy city" three times:

Revelation 21:2; Revelation 21:10; and Revelation 22:19.

Revelation 11:2 is talking about the holy city. The temple that Revelation 11:1 is referring to is the naós - it uses the word naós for "temple".

The other city referred to in Revelation chapter 11, is referred to as a city that is "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." (Revelation 11:8).

The are no verses in the New Testament that use the word G2411-hieron in reference to the place where the presence of God dwelt until the tearing of the veil / place where the presence of God dwells. The verses referring to the place where the presence of God dwelt until the tearing of the veil / place where the presence of God dwells all use the Greek word G3485-naos.

You are finding "spiritual meanings" in your OP where there are none.

 

[DavidPT]

The idea is not what the Jews or the Disciples thought at the time, but what Christ says all throughout Scripture. Christ is the only prophet who is never wrong, and He said not one stone would be left standing one upon another in both the city and the Holy Temple. You might ask them (if these things were to be understood literally) how come there are stones left standing one upon another in the city and of the Temple foundations today.

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't it be both in this case? As in the spiritual aspect is embedded in this, yet it involves the literal as well. I don't disagree that under the surface, so to speak, there is an even deeper meaning, involving spiritual, yet on the surface, He was still applying these things literally. Therefore, there are times when both the literal and spiritual apply to something, and that the spiritual meaning is embedded, not discernable by some since some are only looking at the surface, the literal in this case.

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.


In verse 1, the literal buildings of the literal temple are being pointed out by His disciples. Obviously then, when Jesus says in verse 2---See ye not all these things--He is referring to what the disciples are pointing out in verse 1. Which then means when Jesus goes on to then say this--There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down---He is referring to what they are pointing out in verse 1.

And what happened some 40 years later? Did not the things they were admiring in verse 1 find a literal end? The fact most of the disciples didn't even live to see 70 AD, and even though the 2nd temple remained standing during their lifetime, they moved on from that to the third temple. And they did that before the 2nd temple was even destroyed, proving that the third temple already destroyed the 2nd temple before it was literally destroyed in 70 AD. Therefore, any interpretation that insists the holy place per Matthew 24:15 is involving the 2nd temple, it must be rejected. You of course are not interpreting the holy place per Matthew 24:15 to be involving the 2nd temple, so not meaning you here. Only meaning those that interpret that in that manner.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't it be both in this case? As in the spiritual aspect is embedded in this, yet it involves the literal as well. I don't disagree that under the surface, so to speak, there is an even deeper meaning, involving spiritual, yet on the surface, He was still applying these things literally. Therefore, there are times when both the literal and spiritual apply to something, and that the spiritual meaning is embedded, not discernable by some since some are only looking at the surface, the literal in this case.

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.


In verse 1, the literal buildings of the literal temple are being pointed out by His disciples. Obviously then, when Jesus says in verse 2---See ye not all these things--He is referring to what the disciples are pointing out in verse 1. Which then means when Jesus goes on to then say this--There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down---He is referring to what they are pointing out in verse 1.

This is very obvious. Some people like TribulationSigns try too hard to be spiritual. Being a spiritual person doesn't involve seeing all text in scripture as having a spiritual rather than physical meaning. It involves being able to discern whether text is meant to be understood in a figurative/symbolic, literal spiritual (literal things in the heavenly or spiritual realm) or literal physical context (earthly things or events).

And what happened some 40 years later? Did not the things they were admiring in verse 1 find a literal end? The fact most of the disciples didn't even live to see 70 AD, and even though the 2nd temple remained standing during their lifetime, they moved on from that to the third temple. And they did that before the 2nd temple was even destroyed, proving that the third temple already destroyed the 2nd temple before it was literally destroyed in 70 AD. Therefore, any interpretation that insists the holy place per Matthew 24:15 is involving the 2nd temple, it must be rejected.

You continue to say this even though it's clearly not true. If you refer to something by what it is currently known by and prophesy that something will happen in that place some time in the future, is it a requirement for that place to be known by the same name as it was known by when the prophecy was originally given? No, of course not. Jesus talked about what was considered the holy place at the time He was speaking, but it was not a requirement that it still be considered the holy place once the event occurred that He said would occur in that place. Why can you not understand this?

Another thing to consider is that one of the questions that the disciples asked Jesus was when the temple buildings would be destroyed. Even you acknowledge this, but then you try to say that His answer to the question is only recorded in Luke 21:20-24a. So, you think His answer wasn't recorded anywhere in Matthew 24 or Mark 13, which I can't take seriously. You talk about something that must be rejected. THAT must be rejected.