Whatever Happened to Forever?

[Der Alte]

...
(CLV) Hb 4:11
We should be endeavoring, then, to be entering into that stopping,[κατάπαυσις/katapausis] lest anyone should be falling into the same example of stubbornness....

Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible Hebrew 4:11 Therefore, let us do our utmost to enter into that rest,[κατάπαυσις/katapausis] for fear that anyone should fall according to the same pattern of disobedience.
κατάπαυσις, εως, ἡ (s. next entry; Hdt. et al., but act. ‘stopping, causing to rest’; also Jos., Ant. 17, 43)
① state of cessation of work or activity, rest (2 Macc 15:1 ἡ τῆς καταπαύσεως ἡμέρα of the Sabbath; sim. Orig., C. Cels. 6, 61, 12; esp. of the rest associated with the seventh day of creation Hippol., Ref. 8, 14, 1 and Did., Gen. 154, 23) τόπος τ. καταπαύσεως place of rest, i.e. where one rests and lives Ac 7:49; B 16:2 (both Is 66:1; cp. JosAs 22:9).
② place of rest abstract for concrete (Dt 12:9; Ps 131:14 al.; Did., Gen. 71, 4) εἰσελεύσονται εἰς τὴν κ. μου (Ps 94:11; cp. JosAs 8:11); this OT pass. is typologically interpreted fr. a Christian viewpoint Hb 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3, 5, 10f.—GvRad, Zwischen den Zeiten 11, ’33, 104–11; WHutton, ET 52, ’41, 316f; OHofius, Katapausis ’70.—DELG s.v. παύω. TW.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., pp. 523–524). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.​

 

[HARK!]

My answer was not about "whatever suits our lusts".

My answer was simply to show to you a couple of examples that "forever" and "for ever" do not always mean "never-ending". I actually needed to show just one example in order to prove that your adamant interpretation of "forever" is not always correct.

I was well aware of that.

In this case they do.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I don't understand why anyone would make assertions that he wouldn't be willing to back up with facts.

Well I do understand why someone wants an opponent to present their reasons when they’ve already decided they don’t want to hear them. It isn’t good.

You avoid answering my questions by turning the focus on me. It won’t work, I see through the chaff.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I already stated that Yahshua's example defines obedience. Wouldn't you agree?

We were talking about your obedience.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I asked you what you think obedience looks like.

Following Yahshua's example.

I believe that you are mistaken. Can you show me where I said that?

That was your answer to my question. I’m not mistaken.

 

[HARK!]

That was your answer to my question. I’m not mistaken.

Oh there we go!

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

 

[Strong in Him]

That's not exactly what scripture says.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that after what happened in Galatia, regarding people who want to put the cart before the horse,( in other words, the fruit of faith before the faith) then Paul travels all the way to Jerusalem to settle it. James, brother of Yahshua, and leader of the early believers settles the matter. He says that it is wrong to put this yoke on new believers. After all Abraham came to faith first before he showed the outward sign. He was 99 years cold when he circumcised. It's much like Baptism, thew outward sign means nothing, unless the change has taken place within. So any waste, Paul leaves the meeting aftre James settles it, and then Paul does exactly what he admonished while he was still in Galatia?!?!

Paul argued against false teachers who said that a person needed to be circumcised before they could be saved. These people seemed to have the message; believe in Jesus, BUT you have to be circumcised too.
Paul, and the apostles, were against that and didn't agree. Jesus saves; no one and nothing else, Acts of the Apostles 4:12. Paul said that those who taught circumcision should go all the way and be castrated, Galatians 5:13. He said that if they allowed themselves to be circumcised then Christ died for nothing, Galatians 5:2, and that circumcision means nothing, Galatians 5:6, Galatians 6:15.
That was his teaching and argument; Jesus saves. Not Jesus + circumcision/keeping the law; Jesus alone.

He circumcised Timothy because he wanted Timothy to accompany him on his journeys, and the Jews in the places he was going to would be far more likely to welcome Timothy, and listen to him, if he was circumcised. Circumcision means nothing, Galatians 5:6; therefore there is no harm in having it done, for the sake of others, so that they may be able to hear the Gospel.
This is entirely in line with his statement "I have become all things to all men, so as to be able to win them for Christ", 1 Corinthians 9:20-23. In 1 Corinthians 8:1-15 and Romans 14:13-18 he makes a similar argument about eating meat that has been offered to idols; that an idol is nothing and eating meat offered to it does not make anyone unclean, but if your brother believes it does and will not eat such meat, you don't do it either.

I believe that Timothy was ready to take the next step in his walk with Messiah.

That circumcision is "the next step" in a man's walk with his Messiah, is your idea and completely contrary to what Paul says.
Jesus saves - no one and nothing else. We can walk with God without being circumcised, otherwise women never would be able to.

I don't believe that Paul was a hypocrite.

Neither do I. No hypocrisy involved.
Timothy was circumcised so as to be accepted when preaching the Gospel among Jews.
If I wanted to preach the Gospel amongst Muslims, I might wear a burka and certainly some sort of head covering. When Christians from our circuit went to a synagogue, years ago, the men all wore the head coverings that were given to them. If I believed I had a ministry among a certain group of people, many of whom had tattoos, I might well go and get a tattoo.
God himself took on flesh and was born as a human being, to live among us, and show and tell us what he was like, rather than sitting on a cloud and beaming the Gospel directly from space. He wanted to reach human beings, so he became a human being. Same principal.

 

[Strong in Him]

No more than they need to be Baptized; but even Yahshua was Baptized.

And that's the point I made in my reply, above.
Timothy was circumcised so as to be accepted by the Jews when preaching to them. He wouldn't have been allowed in the temple otherwise.
Jesus was baptised so as to identify with us. He didn't need to submit to it; he wasn't a sinner. But if anyone had said to him, "why weren't you baptised", and he'd replied, "I didn't need to be; I'm perfect", I suspect that would have put people off straight away.

Are you saying that Christian men still need to be circumcised?

 

[visionary]

Actually the Book of Revelation was written in the 60s A.D.

Revelation 11:1-2
Then I (John) was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told: “Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there, 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample over the holy city for forty-two months.

The temple in Jerusalem was still standing when this Book was written. John was told to, "Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there." John could not have measured "the temple and the altar and those who worship there" if the temple had already been destroyed.

The Roman army which was comprised of men from the many nations in the Roman Empire, did indeed "trample over the holy city Jerusalem for 42 months", until it was completely destroyed in 70 A.D.

Wow... make this not of your generation, in your life time, and you will not have to understand the difference between who are in the outer court and who are worshipping in the temple. You do realize that from the time of the creating of temple services to 70 AD , there were only priest allowed in the temple itself. The outer court was broken up into sections where starting at the door are the Jewish men, then the court for women, then the gentile area. This is not what is described in Rev. 11.

 

[Der Alte]

Wow... make this not of your generation, in your life time, and you will not have to understand the difference between who are in the outer court and who are worshipping in the temple. You do realize that from the time of the creating of temple services to 70 AD , there were only priest allowed in the temple itself. The outer court was broken up into sections where starting at the door are the Jewish men, then the court for women, then the gentile area. This is not what is described in Rev. 11.

Here is a picture of a model of the second temple. The holy and most holy place is the higher structure at the far end in the center, in front of that, the near court is the court of Israel, the court of women were small alcoves in the wall of the temple proper. The court of gentiles was the open area between the temple proper and the outer wall. The far end of which still stands as the western or wailing wall. The court of the gentiles was the area where the money changers etc. were.

 

[HARK!]

The far end of which still stands as the western or wailing wall.

(CLV) Mt 24:2
Yet He, answering, said to them, "Are you not observing all these? Verily, I am saying to you, Under no circumstances may a stone here be |left on a stone, which shall not be demolished."

The Temple was in the city of David

The Wailing Wall of Fort Antonia is not the temple.

 

[Der Alte]

(CLV) Mt 24:2
Yet He, answering, said to them, "Are you not observing all these? Verily, I am saying to you, Under no circumstances may a stone here be |left on a stone, which shall not be demolished."
The Temple was in the city of David
The Wailing Wall of Fort Antonia is not the temple.

Wrong! I think the Jews know where their temple was.
Of Course the western/wailing wall is not the temple it is the western part of the wall that surrounded the temple area.
Fort Antonia was north of the temple and is not opposite the mount of olives.

 

[HARK!]

Wrong! I think the Jews know where their temple was.
Of Course the western/wailing wall is not the temple it is the western part of the wall that surrounded the temple area.
Fort Antonia was north of the temple and is not opposite the mount of olives.
View attachment 275813

Thanks for proving my point. Even your map demonstrates that Fort Antonia is not in the City of David.

 

[HARK!]

Wrong! I think the Jews know where their temple was.

Oh really, 2000 years after they we exiled, YOU think...

 

[Der Alte]

Thanks for proving my point. Even your map demonstrates that Fort Antonia is not in the City of David.

Mildly interesting. I was not talking about Fort Antonia. I was talking about the location of the temple which was located opposite the Mount of Olives. Ft Antonia is not opposite the Mount of Olives.

 

[Der Alte]

Oh really, 2000 years after they we exiled, YOU think...

Although you probably have never been to Israel, you supposedly know better than the Jews where the temple was?
Mar 13:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,

 

[HARK!]

Although you probably have never been to Israel, you supposedly know better than the Jews where the temple was?

You have probably never been to the temple.

I've been studying the archaeology, the topograpy, the scripture, the maps, the history (I've taken virtual tours of Fort Antonia. The stones that compose it are a telling clue.) (I've spent 100's of hours studying this subject)(I've even taken some close looks of key points with google earth.); and I don't buy into their anti-messiah folklore. Remember the Jews don't believe in Yahshua. You can follow the Jews who worship a Roman fort; or you can follow Yahshua. Your choice. I'll trust the words of Yahshua over those who reject him.

Here is a video that I just found today. I it gives a fairly nice overview of some of the evidence. It also presents some evidence that I hadn't seen in my 100s of hours of study. The evidence is overwhelming; of you want to break from the myth to review it.

 

[Der Alte]

You have probably never been to the temple.
I've been studying the archaeology, the topograpy, the scripture, the maps, the history (I've taken virtual tours of Fort Antonia. The stones that compose it are a telling clue.) (I've spent 100's of hours studying this subject)(I've even taken some close looks of key points with google earth.); and I don't buy into their anti-messiah folklore. Remember the Jews don't believe in Yahshua. You can follow the Jews who worship a Roman fort; or you can follow Yahshua. Your choice. I'll trust the words of Yahshua over those who reject him.
Here is a video that I just found today. I it gives a fairly nice overview of some of the evidence. It also presents some evidence that I hadn't seen in my 100s of hours of study. The evidence is overwhelming; of you want to break from the myth to review it.

Yeah right! Like I'm going to believe what one anonymous person on line says about himself or another anonymous person. Especially since unknown person #1 can't even get the name of the savior right.
Now if you could show me something by a lettered archaeologist, then I might be interested.

 

[HARK!]

Yeah right! Like I'm going to believe what one anonymous person on line says about himself or another anonymous person. Especially since unknown person #1 can't even get the name of the savior right.
Now if you could show me something by a lettered archaeologist, then I might be interested.

I suspected that you weren't interested; but thanks for sharing. I'm sure that these posts will spark interest in others.

P.S. I've seen pictures of the seals that archaeologists have dug up out of the city of David; but I'll leave it to you to worship at a Pagan's military base.

 

[Der Alte]

You have probably never been to the temple.
I've been studying the archaeology, the topograpy, the scripture, the maps, the history (I've taken virtual tours of Fort Antonia. The stones that compose it are a telling clue.) (I've spent 100's of hours studying this subject)(I've even taken some close looks of key points with google earth.); and I don't buy into their anti-messiah folklore. Remember the Jews don't believe in Yahshua. You can follow the Jews who worship a Roman fort; or you can follow Yahshua. Your choice. I'll trust the words of Yahshua over those who reject him.
Here is a video that I just found today. I it gives a fairly nice overview of some of the evidence. It also presents some evidence that I hadn't seen in my 100s of hours of study. The evidence is overwhelming; of you want to break from the myth to review it.

I think your guy says the temple was south east of where current studies place it on temple mount.
The only thing southeast of the current location is the Kidron valley not a mountain.

ETA: After every forced dispersion some Jews always remained in Israel.