Would You Help To Rebuild The Jewish Temple?

[GodsWatchman]

Mr 14:58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.

Joh 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

2Co 6:16 And what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? for we are a temple of the living God; even as God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

2Th 2:4 he that opposeth and exalteth himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sitteth in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God.

So - this spirit of anti-Christ would "sit in the temple of God". That would be the deceived hearts of Christians who did not overcome. Get out of the flesh - circumsize your hearts and hear that "the Letter kills, but the Spirit gives life".

 

[Big Mouth Nana]

well...now that you've brought Luke in the equation....two flees...stressed for two events...

No. It's the same event talked about in two different places of the bible. There are some same events mentioned all through the bible on different things, like Matt, Mark & Luke for instance...just different accounts .

 

[parousia70]

I don’t care to post details, but as I see his work sitting on the South wall of my study, I can honestly say that I have no problem whatsoever believing that those sufferings were worse than anything before or that Jesus knew would happen after that time. Of course, it is possible that Jesus was using idiom (which I am not inclined to do at that point). But even read literally, my take is that this judgment still stands.

Jesus was indeed utalizing a common Old Testament figure of speech in Matthew 24:21: "ever was/nor ever shall be." Scripture tells us in 1 Kings 3:12 that there was "no king like Solomon before or after him." Such statements are then repeated in 2 Kings 18:5-6 of Hezekiah and in 2 Kings 23:25 of Josiah. Obviously, they can't all be the greatest King there ever was nor ever shall be. (And, of course, Jesus Christ surpasses even Solomon -- Matt. 12:42). Furthermore, this same Old Testament idea of "never will be again" is employed of various judgments that have already been fulfilled such as locusts in Egypt (Ex. 10:12-15; cf. Joel 1:1-4), a cry in Egypt (Ex. 11:6), and judgment upon O.T. Israel (Ez. 5:9; Joel 2:2). The Ezekiel 5:9 passage is especially instructive to us, for it states that the Babylonian conquest of Israel (sixth-century BC) would be the greatest judgment God had ever brought upon a nation, past or future. Therefore, we recognize that the expression "ever was/nor ever shall be" is a common Hebraic idiom meaning "very great" or "very much." Our Lord was simply saying in Matthew 24:21 that there would be very great tribulation. St. Luke's account of this great tribulation reads as follows:

These are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. (Luke 21:22-23)​

Without question, Jesus promised his apostles that they would live to see Israel's great tribulation ("great distress in the land and wrath upon this people") and all those things come to pass in their generation (Matt 24:33-34; Luke 21:31-32).

 

[parousia70]

well...now that you've brought Luke in the equation....two flees...stressed for two events...

If this is true, How were the disciples to distinguish between the two?

They are both spoken of using the same language in the exact same discourse by Christ.

How would the disciples know which one was coming to pass when they witnessed it?

 

[Trish1947]

70 AD, etc., etc., etc.

Trish: You say that the events of AD 70 were not extraordinary in Jewish history

Covenant Heart, another scripture that leads me to believe that this is a future event is Matthew 24.. v.32 "Now learn a parable of the fig tree, When HIS branch is yet tender, (Regathered Isreal) and putteth forth leaves (established Isreal) ye know that summer is nigh. v33..So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, (what things?, verses 14 thru 31) know that it is near even at the doors. V.34 "Varily I say unto you."This generation (the one that saw Isreal become a nation) sall not pass till all these things be fulfilled.

 

[ikester]

No. It's the same event talked about in two different places of the bible. There are some same events mentioned all through the bible on different things, like Matt, Mark & Luke for instance...just different accounts

well then..Luke 21...speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70ad...verses...20-24...and take notice in verse 24......the jews will be scattered into all nations....Jerusalem will be trodden down of the Gentiles..until the times of the of the Gentiles be fulfilled.....then...verses 25 - 36 go on to refer to the second coming....do you agree....now give me your version of Matt.24....when the abomination of desolation stands in the holy place....

 

[ikester]

If this is true, How were the disciples to distinguish between the two?

They are both spoken of using the same language in the exact same discourse by Christ.

How would the disciples know which one was coming to pass when they witnessed it?

in Matt..Jesus was speaking of the signs of his second coming... he used the prophecy of Daniel...with reference to the abomination of desolation...the warning here..is to flee immediately....had this been fulfilled in 70ad...why the urgent need to flee....Jerusalem's siege took around three years....

 

[Uzziah]

Jesus was indeed utalizing a common Old Testament figure of speech in Matthew 24:21: "ever was/nor ever shall be." Scripture tells us in 1 Kings 3:12 that there was "no king like Solomon before or after him." Such statements are then repeated in 2 Kings 18:5-6 of Hezekiah and in 2 Kings 23:25 of Josiah.

Statement such as the above are typical of authers such as Gentry.

Ok, lets have a look at those three Kings.

Solomon

1Ki 3:12 Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee.

The above states that there would be none as wise as Solomon, he was given "a wise and an understanding heart"

Hezekiah

2Ki 18:5 He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him.

Hezekiah was different to Solomon and Josiah in that he trusted in the LORD God of Israel" in a far deeper way than any other King of Judah.

Josiah

2Ki 23:25 And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.

Josiah was different again he "turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses" all three of these Kings were different to the others in there own unique way.

They were all tyes of Christ and showed the different aspects of Christs wisdom, trusting and dedication. But Christ was unique as well in that he wasn't just a man he was God. Obviously the comparison of the Kings has mere men in view.

The other passages that were put up don't stand up to scruteny either e.g. There was not a cry of mouning in Egypt like the cry after all the first born were killed.

Exo 12:30 And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.

Again, what happened in Egypt was unique and nothing like it happened before and won't happen again.

The Ezekiel 5:9 passage is especially instructive to us, for it states that the Babylonian conquest of Israel (sixth-century BC) would be the greatest judgment God had ever brought upon a nation, past or future.

Nowhere does it say "the Babylonian conquest of Israel would be the greatest jugment God ever brought upon a nation, past or future".

Here is what is says.....

Eze 5:9 And I will do in thee that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all thine abominations.

The judgements on Israel at that time were again unique and here is how.....

Eze 5:12 A third part of thee shall die with the pestilence, and with famine shall they be consumed in the midst of thee: and a third part shall fall by the sword round about thee; and I will scatter a third part into all the winds, and I will draw out a sword after them.

a third died by pestilence and famine, a third fell by the sword and a third scattered into all the winds. This did not happen in 70 AD and it won't happen like it during the great tribulation. AD 70 was unique for it's own reasons and so will be the great tribulation.

Uz

 

[Covenant Heart]

Here are a few reflects from several posts which I combine into one:

First, to Parousia70 and Uzziah: When I use the word "inclined," it means that I’m reluctant to be dogmatic on a point. (This admission may come back to haunt me The reason for my hesitancy in reading Mat 24:21 idiomatically lies in the severity of that suffering. I have no idea how one could put tragedies in a line and rate them according to severity. That makes no sense to me. It’s just that what happened there was really, really gruesome. In that sense, I can understand one concluding that Jesus’ words may well be true literally–(even if vs. 21 is read idiomatically). An idiomatic reading is very viable. If it was not, I would not have mentioned it as I did. It’s good that this point be raised. Certainly, the passage uses other figures of speech. Vs. 27–as lightning comes (simile), the fig tree analogy of vs. 32, etc. But whether one reads vs 21 literally (again--how would you know???) or idiomatically, that doesn't change my understanding of the text. There is no question in my mind that this refers to a first century event.

Years ago, I was at a supper honoring Morton Smith where Ken Gentry was also a guest. Ken is a fine man and a good writer. Like Dr. Smith, he has my respect.

Second, to God’sWatchman: Thank-you for those Scriptures. Did you find my "Temple Building Word Studies" (post 118, page 12 on my screen)?

Third: Trish–vs 34 strikes me as a strong case for a first century fulfillment. In the first place, I don’t see how the fig tree can be spiritualized to stand for the modern nation of Israel. I think that Jesus was using metaphor. The fig tree sprouting new growth was an annual occurrence. This stands on its own. Jesus is saying, "when you see this–you know it is hear." We do exactly the same thing in our day. When you see that first, scrawny robin, you know that spring is coming. So to–when you see these things..."

The key here is the time text. "This generation will not pass away until..." (vs. 34). This is often projected into the future. But that doesn’t fit Jesus’ language. We use the pronoun "this" to refer to what is close at hand. We use "that" to refer to what is removed. The issue is proximity–how close to or far from us something is. This is true in Greek as it is in English. Jesus’ word was "outos" (meaning close at hand–right before us). If he were discussing a generation some 2,000+ years into the future, he would have said "ekeinos," meaning "that" generation yet to come (as he does in vs. 50 when referring to Jesus’ coming again).

Blessings All!

Covenant Heart

 

[Trish1947]

Third: Trish–vs 34 strikes me as a strong case for a first century fulfillment. In the first place, I don’t see how the fig tree can be spiritualized to stand for the modern nation of Israel

I was caught by Jesus statement referring to the fig tree in the male vinacular.
He said "When HIS branch is yet tender. This was a parable.. Does he refer to trees as him? Is the use of the word "His" referring to Himself. His church, Isreal. I dont think he was really speaking of an actual fig tree. Your thoughts...

 

[Dad Ernie]

Greetings All,

Have you looked carefully at Zechariah 12 - 14?

My estimation is that Ch. 12 takes us to 70 A.D, Ch. 13 takes us from then until the "latter days". And Ch. 14 is the 2nd Advent.

Your thoughts?

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

 

[parousia70]

Jesus was indeed utalizing a common Old Testament figure of speech in Matthew 24:21: "ever was/nor ever shall be." Scripture tells us in 1 Kings 3:12 that there was "no king like Solomon before or after him." Such statements are then repeated in 2 Kings 18:5-6 of Hezekiah and in 2 Kings 23:25 of Josiah.

Statement such as the above are typical of authers such as Gentry.

Ok, lets have a look at those three Kings.

Solomon

1Ki 3:12 Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee.

The above states that there would be none as wise as Solomon, he was given "a wise and an understanding heart"

Hezekiah

2Ki 18:5 He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him.

Hezekiah was different to Solomon and Josiah in that he trusted in the LORD God of Israel" in a far deeper way than any other King of Judah.

Josiah

2Ki 23:25 And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.

Josiah was different again he "turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses" all three of these Kings were different to the others in there own unique way.

They were all tyes of Christ and showed the different aspects of Christs wisdom, trusting and dedication. But Christ was unique as well in that he wasn't just a man he was God. Obviously the comparison of the Kings has mere men in view.

UZ, It's amazing, for Christ's own words in Matt 12:41-42 show a human comparison is being made. Christ himself is violating your implied "creator/creature" distinction in Matt 12:41-24 by comparing himself with both Jonah and Solomon! If the "creator/creature" distinction is so plain and absolute as you claim, Jesus sure doesn' t honor it--he compares himself to Solomon and Jonah. The comparision cannot then be said to be a fair comparision, for what man should be compared with God? Yet Jesus clearly is making a comparison.

Your "creator/creature" musing simply doesn't apply in the way you wish to this situation. You need to show an explicit reference. The fact is, Jesus is making an unfair comparision between himself and Solomon and Jonah in Matthew 12 if what you claim is to be applied there. Jesus is making a comparision, and an unfair one at that when looked at through the "creator/creature" lens you say should be applied.

Let's see...Jesus GREW in wisdom according to scripture. Jesus fully relied on the Holy Spirit to perform miracles, and in many instances couldn't even perform them due to circumstances beyond his control. Hebrews 4:15 also says well that the main distinction between Jesus and us was that he was sinless before the Law. The incarnation is God playing by "human rules" and human potentials that could be followed and lived out by disciples who were to be fully like the master in every way intended by God (Luke 6:40/Matt 5:48). Jesus became the "firstborn among many [HUMAN] brethren." Jesus did not come to bring separation between himself and his disciples, but congruity:

John 15:15
"No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you.

AND AGAIN...

John 16:13-16
"But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you.

AND AGAIN...

John 17:20-21
"I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; EVEN AS YOU , FATHER, ARE IN ME AN I IN YOU, THA THEY ALSO MAY BE IN US

AND AGAIN...

John 14:20
"In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you


So, the whole argument of the N.T.--and the purpose of the incarnation--was to bring the Elect back into saving grace and to be transformed into complete one-ness with Jesus. There is no question that the purpose of the incarnation was make us like Jesus in every way through God's graces, the Holy Spirit, and the Church. IN fact, the incarnation never stopped, for the Church IS CHRIST'S VERY OWN BODY. The Church is Jesus, and Jesus is the Church. This is a great mystery of the Christian faith.


UZ, you need to cite scripture to support your view that Jesus is above humans and is to be regarded in such a different manner. Is Jesus not the King of Israel? Don't just assert that idea presuppositionally--prove from explicit scriptures that such a divide is to be applied as you intend. The burden of proof is on you, and you won't be able to demonstrate this point clearly from scriputure. (As I mentioned, the N.T. argues that we are all expected to be transformed into the very image and nature of Jesus through sanctification by the Spirit. The divide is not so great as you would like to think.) You need to show scriptural evidence that Jesus isn't a human King of Israel, and thus is to be exempt from the kings we are discussing (Solomon, Jesus, Hezekiah, Josiah). There is no evidence to support this radical distinction. None at all.

 

[Trish1947]

I am in agreement with you on this Dad Ernie, If Matthew 24 as a whole is only about the time of Ad 70 and the persecution of the New church as some perpose, then wouldn't the rest of the that chapter say that the Lord had already gathered his Saints? Which we know has not been fulfilled. There is nothing stated that there will be only one persecution of the church, and has been fulfilled already. Also when you read Revelation, then having that view, they must say that all the persecution being revealed in Revelation was back before AD 70 also, therefore was fulfilled.

 

[Uzziah]

UZ, It's amazing, for Christ's own words in Matt 12:41-42 show a human comparison is being made. Christ himself is violating your implied "creator/creature" distinction in Matt 12:41-24 by comparing himself with both Jonah and Solomon! If the "creator/creature" distinction is so plain and absolute as you claim, Jesus sure doesn' t honor it--he compares himself to Solomon and Jonah. The comparision cannot then be said to be a fair comparision, for what man should be compared with God? Yet Jesus clearly is making a comparison

Thats a straw man argument, nowhere did I say that Christ didn't compare himself to Solomon. What I did say was this.....They were all types of Christ and showed the different aspects of Christs wisdom, trusting and dedication. But Christ was unique as well in that he wasn't just a man he was God. Obviously the comparison of the Kings has mere men in view.

1Ki 4:29 And God gave Solomon wisdom and very great understanding and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea-shore.
1Ki 4:30 And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the sons of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt.
1Ki 4:31 For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Calcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol; and his fame was in all the nations round about.

The above goes to show that the comparison that Solomons wisdom was in comparison to other men. Christ said he was "greater than solomon". Of course he was greater that Solomon because he was God. Speaking of firstborn...

Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

As a Man Christ was the "First born of all creation". Why? "for by him were all things created". Because he was the creater.

Isa 40:18 To whom then will ye liken *God? and what likeness will ye compare unto him?

Isa 46:5 To whom will ye liken me and make me equal, or compare me, that we may be like?

Isa 46:5 To whom will ye liken me and make me equal, or compare me, that we may be like?

The fact is Solomon was unique in his own way, there was none quite like him before or since. The word of God is not Hyperbol or simply figure of speach.

Barnes Commentary...
"Neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee - i. e. in the knowledge of what was in man, and in the wisdom to direct men’s goings, he was to be the wisest of “all” mere men. In such wisdom the world would know one only “greater than Solomon” Mat_12:42; Luk_11:31."


I also noticed you didn't even bother going back and addressing the other points you brought up such as....

"ever was/nor ever shall be." Scripture tells us in 1 Kings 3:12 that there was "no king like Solomon before or after him." Such statements are then repeated in 2 Kings 18:5-6 of Hezekiah and in 2 Kings 23:25 of Josiah. Obviously, they can't all be the greatest King there ever was nor ever shall be

Your arguments re the comparison between the three Kings were completely blown out of the water, as well as the death of the first born of egypt and Ez 5:9. It's not supprising that you are clinging to this last point for dear life.

The whole point being is that Christ was greater than Solomon. If the reason Christ was greater that Solomon is not because he was God, among other things, then in what way was he greater than Solomon?

Your arguments are sounding hollow. It's typical of Preterist to argue like this, they have to, to justify their AD 70 interpetation of Matt 24.

Uz

 

[parousia70]

Thats a straw man argument, nowhere did I say that Christ didn't compare himself to Solomon. What I did say was this.....They were all types of Christ and showed the different aspects of Christs wisdom, trusting and dedication. But Christ was unique as well in that he wasn't just a man he was God. Obviously the comparison of the Kings has mere men in view.

As I said Before:
You need to show scriptural evidence that Jesus isn't a human King of Israel, and thus is to be exempt from the kings we are discussing (Solomon, Jesus, Hezekiah, Josiah). There is no evidence to support this radical distinction. None at all.

 

[Uzziah]

As I said Before:
You need to show scriptural evidence that Jesus isn't a human King of Israel, and thus is to be exempt from the kings we are discussing (Solomon, Jesus, Hezekiah, Josiah). There is no evidence to support this radical distinction. None at all.

No, you were the one that compared the 1 kings 3:12 with Christ, it's you that needs to prove the verse includes a comparison with Christ. There is no evidence to prove the verse includes Christ none at all. Another example of trying to find a contradiction in scripture.

1Ki 3:12 Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee.

I believe the above verse is absolutely correct.

Now if your saying that the verse is a comparison with Christ and that Solomon was not the wises man among men in the capacity stated in the verse; then you are saying that the verse is wrong. There is no way you can get around it. If you say it's just a figure of speach then you are saying it's wrong.

Is the verse correct or isn't it?

 

[Achichem]

I would just like to put my name out as one of it seems very few who said "yes".

Why,
"Showdows are the vails to the object"

 

[parousia70]

If you say it's just a figure of speach then you are saying it's wrong.

How do you figure that?
Lets take your logic to it's logical conclusion:

John 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Was Christ an actual Lamb or was He a human?

If you say Him as a Lamb is a figure of speech, you are saying that John 1:29 is wrong.

Revelation 5:5
And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.

Whas Christ an actual Lion, or a Human?

If you say Him as a Lion is a figure of speech, you are saying Revelation 5:5 is wrong.

Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

Is Christ an actual Branch or a Human?

If you say Him as a Branch is a figure of speech, you are saying Isaiah 11:1 is wrong.

 

[parousia70]

I would just like to put my name out as one of it seems very few who said "yes".

Why,
"Showdows are the vails to the object"

The only problem with that is, the O.T. foreshadowing finds its final fulfillment in the Messianic generation and does not continue to repeat over and over and over again (for Jesus Christ is no "shadow," but is the OBJECT itself - Col 1:17).

The O.T. prophets did not believe the Messianic advent itself would serve as a TYPE for greater fulfillments beyond it. Is calvary a mere TYPE for some greater redemption in our future from sin? Of course not. The O.T. things foreshadowed N.T. COMPLETIONS. The N.T. things do NOT in turn forshadow some future priesthood, sacrifice for sin, etc. The shadows provided by the O.T. religion and history point to the real object of Christ and the heavenly covenant (Col 1:17; Heb 8:1-5; Heb 9:23-24).

 

[parousia70]

I am in agreement with you on this Dad Ernie, If Matthew 24 as a whole is only about the time of Ad 70 and the persecution of the New church as some perpose, then wouldn't the rest of the that chapter say that the Lord had already gathered his Saints?

Since Matthew was written prior to AD70, why would it mention any event that was to take place at AD70 as past? Clearly AD70 was still future when Matthew was written, so of course any event that would be tied to AD70 would be spoken of as a future event.