05 Jul 16
I recently watched a talk on Mathew 24 as it relates to the end times. In the video the speaker talks about the events to come as described in this Gospel as having already happened vs. something that is to happen in the future (2,000 years+)… perhaps in our lifetime as many Christians believe. I am interested in the point of view from other Christians on this forum as to what belief you adhere to and why... if any.
Do you believe the destruction of the temple and all that is foretold in Matthew 24 has happened or do you believe that it is for the future when a third temple is to be built? We already know that the second temple was destroyed with Jerusalem in 70AD, is this what Matthew 24 is talking about? Please provide reasons for your belief and understanding.
The talk is nearly 2 hours but very interesting if you like such things.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 16
2 edits
Originally posted by yoctobyteIf in when that Temple is re-built upon the Dome of the Rock or nearby vicinity in Jerusalem, the final Antichrist will utilize it. He will sit there in his ploy to put out of business ALL religions and objects of worship.
I recently watched a talk on Mathew 24 as it relates to the end times. In the video the speaker talks about the events to come as described in this Gospel as having already happened vs. something that is to happen in the future (2,000 years+)… perhaps in our lifetime as many Christians believe. I am interested in the point of view from other Christians o ...[text shortened]... urs but very interesting if you like such things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T1dawjOsKg
' ... the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth, saying that he is God." ( See 2 Thess. 2:3c,4)
There has to be a temple of God for him to be able to sit in. It will be in Jerusalem.
We know that preview or partial fulfillments of prophecies like this have taken place in the past. But I am not a Preterist.
I am sorry that I probably will not watch the 2 hour video at this time.
05 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonshipI appreciate the comments and respect your belief. I have read/watched much in the past several months on the temple and things to come as it relates to end days. I do not believe the temple was on the temple mount as is the generally accepted notion. Josephus an eyewitness to the destruction in 70AD for one, puts the temple south of the mount on Mt. Zion. Also, Jesus had said in Matthew 24 that there will not be one stone left upon another, this certainly is not the case with the temple mount as original stones are in place from 2,000 years ago.
If in when that Temple is re-built upon the Dome of the Rock or nearby vicinity in Jerusalem, the final Antichrist will utilize it. He will sit there in his ploy to put out of business ALL religions and objects of worship.
[quote] [b] ' ... the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called G ...[text shortened]... m not a Preterist.
I am sorry that I probably will not watch the 2 hour video at this time.
Can you provide scripture that there must be a third temple and and antichrist? I don't know that the bible really speaks of a third temple. Thanks
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 16
2 edits
Originally posted by yoctobyteInto a knock down drag out over this I don't think I'll launch.
I appreciate the comments and respect your belief. I have read/watched much in the past several months on the temple and things to come as it relates to end days. I do not believe the temple was on the temple mount as is the generally accepted notion. Josephus an eyewitness to the destruction in 70AD for one, puts the temple south of the mount on Mt. Zi ...[text shortened]... temple and and antichrist? I don't know that the bible really speaks of a third temple. Thanks
Tell me how you feel about this. Jesus said to the disciples that of the things they SAW there would not be one stone left upon another. Suppose the part of the temple left standing was not a part that they saw ?
Then His words would still be true. Right ? Is it a possibility ?
" And Jesus came out from the temple and was going away, and His disciples came to Him to show Him the buildings of the temple.
But He answered and said to them, Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, There shall by no means be left here a stone upon a stone, which shall not be thrown down." (Matt. 24:1,2)
Your other fellowship will have to wait for a bit.
05 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonshipNo knock down drag out at all, just a discussion. Of all the folks in this forum I thought you would be one of those at the top of the list that would be interested in the conversation... apparently I am wrong. Perhaps this is not the place for such things.
Into a knock down drag out over this I don't think I'll launch.
Tell me how you feel about this. Jesus said to the disciples that of the things they SAW there would not be one stone left upon another. Suppose the part of the temple left standing was not a part that they saw ?
Then His words would still be true. Right ? Is it a possibility ?
[quo ...[text shortened]... thrown down." (Matt. 24:1,2) [/quote]
Your other fellowship will have to wait for a bit.[/b]
To answer your question,...
Tell me how you feel about this. Jesus said to the disciples that of the things they SAW there would not be one stone left upon another. Suppose the part of the temple left standing was not a part that they saw ?
For a part of the temple to be left standing would mean Jesus was wrong, wouldn't it?
Matthew 24:2 English Standard Version (ESV)
2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
There was no part of the temple left standing.
One of the things discussed in the video was that the destruction of the temple was not just about the building but the ending of the Mosaic Covenant... wholly and completely.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 16
2 edits
Originally posted by yoctobyteNo knock down drag out at all, just a discussion. Of all the folks in this forum I thought you would be one of those at the top of the list that would be interested in the conversation... apparently I am wrong. Perhaps this is not the place for such things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't take that comment too seriously. I'm opened to discuss Matthew 24.
To answer your question,...
me:
Tell me how you feel about this. Jesus said to the disciples that of the things they SAW there would not be one stone left upon another. Suppose the part of the temple left standing was not a part that they saw ?
For a part of the temple to be left standing would mean Jesus was wrong, wouldn't it?
Matthew 24:2 English Standard Version (ESV)
2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
There was no part of the temple left standing.
One of the things discussed in the video was that the destruction of the temple was not just about the building but the ending of the Mosaic Covenant... wholly and completely.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
I thought that the Wailing Wall was a "left standing" portion of the temple.
That is why I specified that Christ's prophecy says that the things they SAW would be totally thrown down, stone by stone. If that was a part of the temple that they did not SEE then perhaps that is how some stones of it were left standing.
I am rusty on the archaeology.
What is the Wailing Wall a remainder of from 1rst century CE ?
06 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonship
[b] No knock down drag out at all, just a discussion. Of all the folks in this forum I thought you would be one of those at the top of the list that would be interested in the conversation... apparently I am wrong. Perhaps this is not the place for such things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ...[text shortened]... y on the archaeology.
What is the Wailing Wall a remainder of from 1rst century CE ?[/b]
I thought that the Wailing Wall was a "left standing" portion of the temple.
That is why I specified that Christ's prophecy says that the things they SAW would be totally thrown down, stone by stone. If that was a part of the temple that they did not SEE then perhaps that is how some stones of it were left standing.
I am rusty on the archaeology.
What is the Wailing Wall a remainder of from 1rst century CE ?[/b]
Ok, I sense some sarcasm in your response, so be it.
Let's call the thread an investigation and a search for the truth, there is no doubt that it will go into all different directions as threads frequently do. I will present some information that I have come across, take a look at it and lets talk about it and you can decide. If your interest is piqued, great it's what I am trying to do... in the least we will gain some additional knowledge we didn't have prior and maybe spark curiosity.
Michael Avi-Yonah Israeli Archeologist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Avi-Yonah
Avi-Yonah was a well respect archeologist in Israel and one of his more notable achievements was the construction of the model of what Jerusalem looked like some 2,000 years ago... which BTW is in Jerusalem. I have seen it myself and it is quiet spectacular, but is it accurate?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holyland_Model_of_Jerusalem
Wikipedia asserts that the information that went into the design of the Jerusalem model was taken from the writings of Flavius Josephus and other sources (which are not given). I think we all know by now that Wikipedia is not 100% accurate but it is for the purpose of this argument. There is no doubt that the model is well thought out and much went into it's design. Measurements, colors, heights, period structures are all a part of what make up the model and contribute to it's beauty. Speaking to the Western Wall... while it is true that there is a Western Wall, is it equally true that the Western Wall was a part of the 2nd Jewish Temple? I have read many books over the years that support this theory but there are few that agree with the configuration and it's placement on what is called the temple mount. The jury is still out.
Matthew 24:1-2 English Standard Version (ESV)
Jesus Foretells Destruction of the Temple
24 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
I don't not believe that when Jesus was asking the disciples "You see all these" that he was referring to what the eye could physically see (as you would suggest) at the moment, but was talking about all of it and what made it all (the temple and all of it's buildings, even those obstructed to the eye) Jesus was talking about the temple.
So, at this point you have to be fair and ask, what was Jesus saying with regards to the temple and buildings and " there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down"? Is it some of it or all of it? Flavius Josephus was an eye witness and historian to this event, the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and he records in his writings 'The War of the Jews'.
If Flavius Josephus is correct then the Western Wall most likely was not a part of the Jewish temple that was destroyed in 70AD as come to be the common belief. I do realize that statement alone will mess with a lot of peoples beliefs but it shouldn't if your looking for the truth.
Question: Why is it believed that the Western Wall is a part of the destroyed Jewish Temple? I think the answer has a lot to do with Avi-Yonah's model of 2,000 year old Jerusalem. Remember that I said (Wikipedia) his model was based on Josephus' writings and other unnamed sources? The problem is Josephus' eyewitness account and dimensions of the temple and where it was positioned do not match Avi-Yonah's dimensions and how he placed it in his model. Imagine, if Josephus is correct, the Western Wall as a part of the destroyed Jewish temple has got to be one of the biggest deceptions in human kind. According to Josephus measurements, the temple is clearly not a part of the temple mount and Western Wall.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/history/flavius-josephus/war-of-the-jews/book-5/chapter-5.html
If you are interested, you can watch this documentary on the temple and its location which is very compelling and talks in depth about Avi-Yonah. I did have a thread on this awhile back and there was not much interest, perhaps that changed.
The video in it's entirety can be found on Amazon and Netflix, when I watched it there was no cost.
Let's see where this takes us.
06 Jul 16
Originally posted by yoctobyteI have looked for this documentary on Amazon and on Netflix the first time we talked about it, and when I looked for it, I could not find it. Granted this was maybe a couple months or more ago, so it might be there again now.
If you are interested, you can watch this documentary on the temple and its location which is very compelling and talks in depth about Avi-Yonah. I did have a thread on this awhile back and there was not much interest, perhaps that changed.
[b]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwsGkNkaiUk
The video in it's entirety can be found on Amazon and Netflix, when I watched it there was no cost.
Let's see where this takes us.[/b]
06 Jul 16
2 edits
Originally posted by yoctobyteSpecifically, the ones about the Tribulation and the rapture and when he mentions the coming of the Son of Man. I guess this would be 24:4 through 24:44.
Which ones in particular? I am interested.
Especially 24:15 which speaks of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place. This is the segue from 'the beginning of sorrows' into the Tribulation. "The holy place" has been long believed to be the third Temple.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
06 Jul 16
1 edit
Originally posted by yoctobyte
Ok, I sense some sarcasm in your response, so be it.
No. there was no sarcasm there. Really. No puns intended either.
Michael Avi-Yonah Israeli Archeologist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Avi-Yonah
Avi-Yonah was a well respect archeologist in Israel and one of his more notable achievements was the construction of the model of what Jerusalem looked like some 2,000 years ago... which BTW is in Jerusalem. I have seen it myself and it is quiet spectacular, but is it accurate?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holyland_Model_of_Jerusalem
Wikipedia asserts that the information that went into the design of the Jerusalem model was taken from the writings of Flavius Josephus and other sources (which are not given). I think we all know by now that Wikipedia is not 100% accurate but it is for the purpose of this argument. There is no doubt that the model is well thought out and much went into it's design. Measurements, colors, heights, period structures are all a part of what make up the model and contribute to it's beauty. Speaking to the Western Wall... while it is true that there is a Western Wall, is it equally true that the Western Wall was a part of the 2nd Jewish Temple? I have read many books over the years that support this theory but there are few that agree with the configuration and it's placement on what is called the temple mount. The jury is still out.
Matthew 24:1-2 English Standard Version (ESV)
Jesus Foretells Destruction of the Temple
24 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
I don't not believe that when Jesus was asking the disciples "You see all these" that he was referring to what the eye could physically see (as you would suggest) at the moment, but was talking about all of it and what made it all (the temple and all of it's buildings, even those obstructed to the eye) Jesus was talking about the temple.
Okay. That's possible. He was speaking generally about the things seen perhaps.
So, at this point you have to be fair and ask, what was Jesus saying with regards to the temple and buildings and " there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down"? Is it some of it or all of it? Flavius Josephus was an eye witness and historian to this event, the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and he records in his writings 'The War of the Jews'.
If Flavius Josephus is correct then the Western Wall most likely was not a part of the Jewish temple that was destroyed in 70AD as come to be the common belief. I do realize that statement alone will mess with a lot of peoples beliefs but it shouldn't if your looking for the truth.
Question: Why is it believed that the Western Wall is a part of the destroyed Jewish Temple? I think the answer has a lot to do with Avi-Yonah's model of 2,000 year old Jerusalem. Remember that I said (Wikipedia) his model was based on Josephus' writings and other unnamed sources? The problem is Josephus' eyewitness account and dimensions of the temple and where it was positioned do not match Avi-Yonah's dimensions and how he placed it in his model. Imagine, if Josephus is correct, the Western Wall as a part of the destroyed Jewish temple has got to be one of the biggest deceptions in human kind. According to Josephus measurements, the temple is clearly not a part of the temple mount and Western Wall.
I think worst mistakes could be made.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/history/flavius-josephus/war-of-the-jews/book-5/chapter-5.html
If you are interested, you can watch this documentary on the temple and its location which is very compelling and talks in depth about Avi-Yonah. I did have a thread on this awhile back and there was not much interest, perhaps that changed.
The video in it's entirety can be found on Amazon and Netflix, when I watched it there was no cost.
Let's see where this takes us.
Thanks for you labors there. I have no comment yet though.