| Re: |
I want to suggest something here.
We all know that there is no need for a temple for Christians. You guys have been posting the scripture supporting that from the beginning of this thread. We know that Christ is our sacrifice. We know that He is our High Priest.
The Jews don't know these things. They are still living by the law. At some point, they are likely to rebuild a temple--they are probably going to use Ezekiel's temple as a template (that's a guess). Many of them are Messianic Jews. And this will set the stage for the fulfillment of the prophecy which states "Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to Him: We ask you, brothers, not to be easily upset in mind or troubled, either by a spirit or by a message or by a letter as if from us, alleging that the Day of the Lord has come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way. For that day will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction. He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he sits in God’s sanctuary, publicizing that he himself is God."
Now I understand about Ephiphanes and I understand about Titus; however, those were not the fulfillment of this prophecy. Why? Because no one believed those men. It was not the end. And as clearly shown throughout scriptures (but it is not a hard and fast rule) there is an immediate, symbolic/foreshadowing fulfillment of prophecy and a much later true fulfillment of prophecy. Look at the prophecies in Isaiah about the birth of the Messiah. The immediate, symbolic fulfillment was the birth of Isaiah's son, but the true fulfillment was the birth of the Messiah. Again, not a hard and fast rule, but it may apply to this.
However, people ARE going to believe this man of sin. They are going to believe him and follow him. Whether the Jews will or not, I do not know. And I don't want you to read my post through the lenses of the Left Behind series, cause most of that, in my opinion, is totally wrong.
I don't know how the end is going to be exactly, but people are going to abandon their various religions to follow this guy. It's in Revelation.
| 2013/9/24 12:50||Profile|
| Re: |
There are two words used for "temple" in the Greek New Testament-- "hieron" and "naos." Both words were used for the temple in Jerusalem until "the veil of the temple (naos) was rent" (Mt. 27.51). After that, the word "naos" was never used for that temple made with hands.
"Naos" was the word used for "the temple of His body (Jn. 2.21)" and, after His ascension, for those who became "the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6.19)" or "the temple of God" (1 Cor. 3.16).
Because of this, it is my conviction that when Paul says the hour would come when the man of sin would sit in the temple of God-- and he uses the word "naos" here-- he is not speaking of any temple made with hands.
It is this "naos" of God he is interested in gaining a reception in. Heads up, everyone.
| 2013/9/24 15:29||Profile|
| Re: |
This is an interesting perspective, havok20x.
It is obvious that the "Holy Place" is no longer found in a building. The veil has been torn and God is not confined to a specific building, section or Ark. Unfulfilled Jews -- those who haven't believed in Jesus -- do not "see" this yet. In fact, there was an article online about the importance placed upon the Temple Mount just today.
When Jesus spoke about seeing the Abomination that causes desolation standing in the "holy place" (Matthew 24:15), there is an added disclaimer ("whoso readeth, let him understand"). At this point, we can only offer opinions about what this all means.
A good question: Is the Ark of the Covenant still "holy?" If the Temple still stood, would it still be "holy?" Since we can know and boldly approach the Lord of the Ark/Temple, why would such things remain holy?
While movies have been made and expeditions undertaken in search of the Ark, the Book of Revelation includes a reference where John saw both the ark of his testament in his temple in Heaven (Revelation 11:19). Now, I don't know if this is the SAME ark that was carried in Jerusalem, but it does represent an interesting perspective about whether something can be "holy" or important in terms of Eternity.
Some things are eternal. On a personal note, I don't think that God's promises to those in the Old Covenant were voided by a New Covenant. In fact, we have a New and better Covenant BECAUSE of the difficulty of fulfilling righteousness under the Old Covenant. Paul touches on this -- and more in regard to the Jews -- throughout the epistle to the Romans.
Something to think about: Our Bible consists of 66 books containing accounts, epistles, prophesies, psalms and proverbs from the OLD and NEW Testaments. We did not throw away the books or scrolls from the Old Covenant because we received the New. The precepts of the Old Covenant are still "holy" even though we have accepted this New Covenant.
Will a rebuilt Jewish Temple be a part of the events during the end times? I don't know for certain. Then again, is this really something that any of us can answer with absolute certainty?
| 2013/9/24 15:40||Profile|
| Re: |
Rebuilding on the Temple Mount
When the temple will stand again, it will appear by every outward reckoning that the testimony of prophecy was completely misinterpreted and misapplied by the apocalyptic ‘doomsayers’. Tragically, it will also be the triumph of humanistic Jewish orthodoxy that exalts the latent powers of the first creation, as it denies original sin, the virgin birth, and the ‘pessimism’ of their own prophets concerning the nature and limits of fallen human nature (Ps 14:2-3; 51:5; Jer 13:23; 17:9).
We will appear to have the egg on our faces. Yet, it will be the prelude to the revelation of the mystery of iniquity, and for that there must be another temple.
Since Christ cannot come until this mystery of iniquity is first revealed in the incarnation of Satan in the Man of Sin, I hold that it is a church come to term, in intercessory travail for Israel and the glory of God in the earth that will receive Michael’s help to the final dislodging of that which holds back the coming in of the kingdom (Rev 12:10). All things necessary to constrain that kind of prevailing prayer, despite the awful cost of what the break through will mean for the population of the earth (Rev 12:12), should be a principal focus of our corporate prayer, even prayer for such prayer as characterized Daniel’s strong intercessions that received the angelic assistance recorded in Dan 10. That’s what I’m talking about.
Read the full article by Art Katz here
| 2013/9/25 6:14||Profile|
| Re: |
Am I mistaken Colin or is this article by Reggie Kelly and not Art Katz? I don't suppose it matters but it seems that way!
The link in the opening paragraph to the page linked to the url you posted which reads "I have to say, this [statement from the article Phil sent] really struck me:" comment, is the article from which I took the "conversation between the Jewish man and the Christian Man. It can be found in the blog comments section underneath the article itself.
It is difficult to tell where Reggie is really coming from in his comments. I suspect it is a swing in part to those believers who always portray end times as a time of destruction. His "doomsayers" comment appears to infer that. This too is linked to his detestation of any pre-trib prophetic claims and so on. Anyway disregarding the obvious prejudice Reggie is of course saying that the first 42 months of the 70th week of Daniel will be characterised by peace and prosperity. I think this is his "egg on the face" comment, after which it is primarily Israel which will suffer. Anyway the whole point I suppose for this OP is that Reggie sees a temple as essential to the man of sin being revealed and so clearly he sees a temple as inevitable.
I am curious about two points really. The one is alluded to by Chris and has to do with whether the temple itself could in any sense be called a holy place even if it was rebuilt? The article by Reggie covers that a little but not very convincingly for me. The second point has to do with the two greek words used for temple. The one being always and only used for the Holy of Holies inside the temple and the other being only used for the temple in terms of bricks and mortar.
As Allan shared……..
There are two words used for "temple" in the Greek New Testament-- "heron" and "naps." Both words were used for the temple in Jerusalem until "the veil of the temple (naos) was rent" (Mt. 27.51). After that, the word "naos" was never used for that temple made with hands.
"Naos" was the word used for "the temple of His body (Jn. 2.21)" and, after His ascension, for those who became "the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6.19)" or "the temple of God" (1 Cor. 3.16). Allan
What is the significance in this distinction really? I cannot see how it can be precisely as Allan shared in his ongoing explanation because that would of necessity be the same as saying that the man of sin is revealed in the apostate or else at least a significant part of the church itself. This itself would be easy enough to believe but it does sort of make ruin the idea that the man of sin is a man after all. A man cannot possess another man. It is impossible. Even Jesus Himself does not possess men. We never read of "Jesus in you" it is always "Christ in you". On the other hand perhaps thats is precisely the point of the comments Allan made. Perhaps the man of sin is capable of possessing other men by reason of being a spirit as well as a man! Perhaps he is a man who comes up out of the Abyss and therefore has overcome death, as it were, by reason of resuscitation. Does that make him the same for wickedness that Christ is for good? Christ being a life giving Spirit…..The man of sin being a pseudo life giving spirit?
There are a number of comments in this OP which subtly point to the idea that the man of sin is not a man per se but a condition of apostasy. Then it would be foolish to focus on a man at all. The same idea is also present in the idea that the temple is not a physical stone temple but is in fact those who believe in Christ. Therefore to connect the two ideas one might say that the temple therefore of the man of sin is not a temple of stone but apostate believers themselves. If so where does this leave those Jews who believe in the man of sin? Seeing that they would inevitably have to believe that he is the Messiah of Israel at least. Is Israel going to believe the church at the end of the age and thereby secure their sovereignty and dominion by reason of finally embracing the faith of the nations? Will this be in defiance of Islam as the provocation and the threat?
Just curious where the thoughts have gone! Of course if no one is willing to actually read then whats to say! God help us!
| 2013/9/25 18:03|
Hunter Valley, Australia
| Re: |
I am aware that this can be a polarising subject and I only want to share a few things worthy of consideration regaring this issue:
When Jesus gave his end time explanation to his disciples in Matthew 24 the most frequent warning was regarding deception. That deception by no means appears to be limited to the world but also the professing church. So we need to be careful in stating that we have it all worked out, on the one side, and on the other side, dispise prophecy and anything escatalogical.
When discussing the signs of his coming and the end of the age Jesus purposley points the disciples (matthew 24 v 15) very clearly to the book of Daniel(chapters 9, 11 & 12 where the abomination is revealed).
Jesus points to a FUTURE abomination of desolation, contrary to the popular belief of His day. Jesus states that directly after this abominable event unfolds a series of remarkable signs that result in his swift return.
29“Immediately after the distress of those days
“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’[b]
30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.[d] 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other".
Because Jesus points to His swift return after the event, and there are many passages that speak of a this time as one of an UNPRECEDENTED/UNPARALLELED horror and destruction upon the whole earth, I don't believe he could be talking about the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
Towards the end of Daniel ch 9 he talks about the "ruler who will come"
"he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him".
"The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed".
It appears that the temple will be in place and sacrafices will be a daily routine. We know as Christians that these sacrafices have NO Salvific purpose but is a sign of what is soon to come. We will be able to speak prophetically to the Jew and the Gentile alike as God's word unfolds.
As we come closer to the events, I beleive we will receive greater clarity on many issues, that is the promise in Daniel 12 v9 & 10
9 He replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.
I beleive this above statement implies that there is a "seal-ing" of the understanding of these prophetic writtings until we get closer to the time.
There is much I would like to say but lack the time and ability.
The peice that was attributed to Art Katz in an earlier post is actually from Reggie Kelly, who was Art's theological companion. Reggie seems to have a great all round understanding of these issues, however, he sometimes struggles to articulate his understanding clear to others, which he admits.
I have found Dalton Lifsey also has a good understanding and speaks with some clarity on these issues. You can find a series of messages he spoke on Israel and end times stuff here (with study notes):
Have a great day!
| 2013/9/25 21:14||Profile|
| Re: |
Seems to me that there are differences of opinions as to what the "Abomination of Desolation" will look (how it will be manifested).
What was the "holy place", then?
What is it, today?
The first question is easy and others have been coming forth with their understand of what the "holy place" is, today.
| 2013/9/26 13:34|
| Re: the holy place|
The woman saith to him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshiped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. Jesus saith to her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:19-24
Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD the Temple was standing as we read the record of such in the Holy Scripture by John the Apostle:
Revelation 11:1 And there was given me a reed like a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship in it. But the court which is without the temple, leave out, and measure it not; for it is given to the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
Again,I say to you all, expect no temple re-building to fulfill any Biblical prophecy or to make way for any Biblical prophecy to be fulfilled.
Revelation 21:10,14,15,22 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God... And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. And he that talked with me, had a golden reed to measure the city, and its gates, and its wall. And I saw no temple in it: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
May God's Spirit give understanding to the reader.
| 2013/9/26 15:47||Profile|