Third temple being build in Jerusalem right now

[Jamdoc]

There was a record in history. The temple was destroyed.

No records of people seeing Jesus in the clouds, no gathering of the elect.
Instead, scattering, like the opposite of what Jesus was talking about.

 

[Hammster]

No records of people seeing Jesus in the clouds, no gathering of the elect.
Instead, scattering, like the opposite of what Jesus was talking about.

Is it possible that He was using language that called back to the OT?

 

[Jamdoc]

Is it possible that He was using language that called back to the OT?

He's talking about the rapture (if you're not so dogmatic that the rapture has to be pretrib so that you discard Matthew 24 as a Rapture passage)

 

[Hammster]

He's talking about the rapture (if you're not so dogmatic that the rapture has to be pretrib so that you discard Matthew 24 as a Rapture passage)

One, you didn’t answer my question. And two, there’s no mention of a rapture.

 

[Jamdoc]

One, you didn’t answer my question. And two, there’s no mention of a rapture.

Gathering the elect, Paul evokes it in 2 Thessalonians 2:1
and your question didn't make sense because it's irrelevant. Jesus said He'd be gathering His elect when He appeared in the clouds.
Not scattering them to the nations. 70AD was not a gathering it was the beginning of the Jewish diaspora.

 

[Jamdoc]

Either way
Preterism and Historicism absolutely falls flat.

 

[Hammster]

Gathering the elect, Paul evokes it in 2 Thessalonians 2:1
and your question didn't make sense because it's irrelevant. Jesus said He'd be gathering His elect when He appeared in the clouds.
Not scattering them to the nations. 70AD was not a gathering it was the beginning of the Jewish diaspora.

My question does make sense. Most NT prophecies have references in the OT. So it’s a yes or no question. Is it possible that He was using language that called back to the OT?

 

[Jamdoc]

My question does make sense. Most NT prophecies have references in the OT. So it’s a yes or no question. Is it possible that He was using language that called back to the OT?

Yeah, He did, like the celestial disturbances is a common sign for the Day of the Lord, IE the second coming of Jesus.
So again, He's referring to His second coming, and to the book of Daniel, which has the Temple being made desolate and then being restored in 2300 days

Not destroyed and... just left destroyed and a Muslim mosque built on top of it.

 

[Hammster]

Yeah, He did, like the celestial disturbances is a common sign for the Day of the Lord, IE the second coming of Jesus.
So again, He's referring to His second coming, and to the book of Daniel, which has the Temple being made desolate and then being restored in 2300 days

Not destroyed and... just left destroyed and a Muslim mosque built on top of it.

Okay. I’m not sure why all of the vitriol, but have a blessed day.

 

[Berean Tim]

Why should we take what Paul says to be the same thing Jesus was talking about?

-CryptoLutheran

It's an obvious teaching on Matthew 24. Paul is explaining to the Thessalonians the AoD (Matt 24:15) will occur before Jesus gathers his Elect (Matt 24:31)

 

[Jamdoc]

Okay. I’m not sure why all of the vitriol, but have a blessed day.

It's not vitriol, but a little frustration. It seems like I don't communicate my point very well and I get frustrated at myself when I feel like I'm not understood.

 

[Berean Tim]

Which is it, standing or seated?

Jerusalem is surrounded by armies and the Jews are fleeing to the mountains. What use is fleeing to the mountains if it's the end of the world?

Do the armies intend to invade Jerusalem and desolate the temple, why else is Jerusalem surrounded?

Obviously it's both. Jesus told them to flee as the "great tribulation" would start when they see the AoD.
My post was about a person (man of sin) performing the AOD, not just destruction. This was your point that it wasn't a person in Matthew 24. Paul clears up the Thessalonians and your confusion concerning the timing of his return

 

[ViaCrucis]

It's an obvious teaching on Matthew 24. Paul is explaining to the Thessalonians the AoD (Matt 24:15) will occur before Jesus gathers his Elect (Matt 24:31)

1) How is it obvious that St. Paul is referring to the abomination?

2) The Apostle doesn't make any mention of a gathering of the elect here, he speaks of a falling away.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Obviously it's both. Jesus told them to flee as the "great tribulation" would start when they see the AoD.
My post was about a person (man of sin) performing the AOD, not just destruction. This was your point that it wasn't a person in Matthew 24. Paul clears up the Thessalonians and your confusion concerning the timing of his return

The abomination isn't the destruction of the Temple, but the desecration of the Temple. The Zealots laid siege to the Temple, slaughtered the priests in the Temple (including the high priest), and desecrated the Sanctuary. The desecration of the Temple was the sign of the Temple's (and Jerusalem's) destruction. Hence why Jesus says that when they see these things happen to flee to the mountains.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

He's talking about the rapture (if you're not so dogmatic that the rapture has to be pretrib so that you discard Matthew 24 as a Rapture passage)

There's no such thing as "the rapture". St. Paul talks about the resurrection of the dead at Christ's coming, and the joining together of the living with them up to meet the Lord in the air as He returns, descending down here. But the idea of people being "raptured" into heaven is wholesale poppycock.

If by "rapture" all is meant is the catching up to meet the returning Lord, that's one thing. But "rapture" is almost always used by proponents who argue that Jesus is going to beam people directly into heaven, a thing Scripture never mentions, and which the Christian Church has never believed.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hammster]

It's not vitriol, but a little frustration. It seems like I don't communicate my point very well and I get frustrated at myself when I feel like I'm not understood.

I understand. And I get your point. I just think it’s the wrong view.

 

[Victor in Christ]

How do you know it's the third temple? It could just be anything being built. The video is suspect to me.

could be drilling for black gold (oil)

 

[Berean Tim]

1) How is it obvious that St. Paul is referring to the abomination?

2) The Apostle doesn't make any mention of a gathering of the elect here, he speaks of a falling away.

-CryptoLutheran

What ! Answer to # 2
2nd Thessalonians 2:1-3
1Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers,a 2not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessnessb is revealed, the son of destruction,

That's exactly what he's talking about ! The "gathering" won't happen until the "falling away" happens first.

Answer #1
It's obvious because of Vs 1. The coming of the Lord and our gathering unto him. This is exactly the timeline Jesus gave in the Olivet Discourse.

Question for you : What did the Jews have to "fall away" from ? They had already rejected Jesus. The gathering of the Elect didn't happen in 70 AD. No one sat in the Temple declaring himself God, they burnt the Temple, then pushed the stones down to retrieve the melted gold.

 

[Victor in Christ]

Unparalleled Falling Away

The Revelation and Operation of the Man of Sin

The Exaltation of the Man of Sin

The Identification and Damnation of the Man of Sin

Secure In The World's Most Evil Day

Persevering In The World's Most Evil Day

Encouragement In Facing The World's Most Evil Day

 

[ViaCrucis]

What ! Answer to # 2
2nd Thessalonians 2:1-3
1Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers,a 2not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessnessb is revealed, the son of destruction,

That's exactly what he's talking about ! The "gathering" won't happen until the "falling away" happens first.

Answer #1
It's obvious because of Vs 1. The coming of the Lord and our gathering unto him. This is exactly the timeline Jesus gave in the Olivet Discourse.

Question for you : What did the Jews have to "fall away" from ? They had already rejected Jesus. The gathering of the Elect didn't happen in 70 AD. No one sat in the Temple declaring himself God, they burnt the Temple, then pushed the stones down to retrieve the melted gold.

Ah, fair enough. Then yes the Apostle does speak of the resurrection of the dead here. And on this I have erred.

But this doesn't address the matter of the abomination that causes desolation, which the Apostle does not mention.

I never claimed that the apostasy he mentions refers to "the Jews". Nor did I identify what the Apostle has said here with the events of the Jewish-Roman War.

What the Apostle means has always been a matter of much speculation. What temple does he mean? Does he mean the Temple that was soon destroyed not many years after he suffered martyrdom in Rome? Or does he mean the Temple of the Church? Not a few of the fathers understood this figure spoken about as a tyrant who would seek to overturn the Church from within. For this reason many of the Reformers identified the papacy of their day as what had been said before, and they do not say this by their own invention, but even the ancient fathers had said that one who comes claiming to be the universal pastor of the Church would be as Antichrist,

"I have however taken care to admonish earnestly the same my brother and fellow bishop that, if he desires to have peace and concord with all, he must refrain from the appellation of a foolish title. As to this, the piety of my lords has charged me in their orders, saying that offense ought not to be engendered among us for the appellation of a frivolous name. But I beseech your imperial Piety to consider that some frivolous things are very harmless, and others exceedingly harmful. Is it not the case that, when Antichrist comes and calls himself God, it will be very frivolous, and yet exceedingly pernicious? If we regard the quantity of the language used, there are but a few syllables; but if the weight of the wrong, there is universal disaster. Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others. Nor is it by dissimilar pride that he is led into error; for, as that perverse one wishes to appear as above all men, so whosoever this one is who covets being called sole priest, he extols himself above all other priests. But, since the Truth says, Every one that exalts himself shall be humbled, I know that every kind of elation is the sooner burst as it is the more inflated. Let then your Piety charge those who have fallen into an example of pride not to generate any offense by the appellation of a frivolous name. For I, a sinner, who by the help of God retain humility, need not to be admonished to humility. Now may Almighty God long guard the life of our most serene Lord for the peace of holy Church and the advantage of the Roman republic. For we are sure, that if you live who fear the Lord of heaven, you will allow no proud doings to prevail against the truth." - St. Gregory the Great, To Mauricius Augustus (Registry of Epistles, Book VII, Epistle 33)

Do I believe the modern pope is the Antichrist? Well no. But it's important to understand what has been said in the past and why.

-CryptoLutheran