What Jerusalem?

reply to post by jmdewey60


You know, jmdewey, sometimes it just doesn't appear to be worth the effort to some people. I hate to say it, but that's generally why I skip over all of your posts unless I think you're directing an entire conversation in the wrong direction.

reply to post by Deetermined


no i don't. There are some that have not been fulfilled and some that have repeated giving the impression to some that it's all been done and we both know that is not the case. just like the temple being rebuilt over and over. soon all will be done and it will all this be hindsight. Our choices today seriously effect our future place in or outside the kingdom.

I think it would be hell to be born into a world where the majority of the world is living in harmony and i found myself to be an outsider to the bounty and happiness of the world.

reply to post by Deetermined

Jmdewey, your faith must be dwindling.

From the point of view of a cult member, yes.
I don't have faith in theories people devise to predict the future.

Considering that you've always felt that the New Testament was the only thing that was relevant about Jesus today, you must have changed your mind now that you find Paul irrelevant too.

Here is my NT canon: Matthew, Mark, John, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Revelation.

That only leaves you one handful of books of the New Testament to base your entire faith on.

I think there are plenty there, 16 out of 27. Those are the ones that I believe were written at least while the Apostles were still alive.

I guess there wasn't much faith there to begin with.

I would suggest that you might want to question how much of what you believe in is inventions of men, and what truly is inspired by God. I would rather have quality over quantity in that regard.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Here is my NT canon: Matthew, Mark, John, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Revelation.

Yes, and eight of those books you listed were written by Paul.

You don't even know what you are or are not following at this point.

*sigh*

reply to post by Deetermined

Yes, and eight of those books you listed were written by Paul.

You don't seem to be getting something here. When it was decided to make a New Testament canon in the fourth century, there were books written probably by "clergy" that were ascribed to Paul, since it said so in the text of these writings. But what we know now, is that they weren't actually written by Paul, mainly because of the situation that was being described in them not existing in the early church that Paul would have been involved in, for example, bishops, and who should be qualified for such positions.

You don't even know what you are or are not following at this point.

I give credibility to Paul as being someone close to Jesus, even if only in a spiritual way, at a time when Jesus was inspiring people to do what was necessary to spread the Gospel and the Christian way of life. But what I don't give special authority to are the writings that only were thought at one time to be authentic Paul writings. I am sure there are some bits that date back to a time close to Paul, especially in Colossians. Those things are useful to see what people believed in the second century.

reply to post by deadeyedick

no i don't. There are some that have not been fulfilled and some that have repeated giving the impression to some that it's all been done and we both know that is not the case. just like the temple being rebuilt over and over. soon all will be done and it will all this be hindsight.

If the time for hindsight is after the third temple is destroyed, then wouldn't it be of interest if that had already happened?

The claim that is made to support the idea that Herod's temple is still the second, is that the daily offerings were continuously offered even though the 2nd temple was completely dismantled.

If there were no god in the temple or vicinity to accept such daily offerings then it would be an empty exercise to begin with. So endorsing the claim is to endorse the validity of those daily offerings.

I have yet to see a date or time or incident in which the OT god ever entered either the 2nd temple or the third temple. Must the world go through an infinite number of stone temples awaiting the one the is entered by the OT god? Or when do we say, "That's it 3 strikes, you're out?"

I assure you Herod's temple was the third temple.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Why do you continue to be off topic?

My thread has exceeded 4 pages. I'm done.

reply to post by pthena

Why do you continue to be off topic?

Probably because I imagine that somehow I am on topic.
The rationale would be something like:
Someone is a preacher and to do that, sets up shop in a building and its called a church, and it is set up as a corporation with a board of elders and bylaws, and there is a congregation.
The preacher decides that what he wants to preach about is "Last Days" and the last day temple and Israel being 'restored'.
If you were a member of the congregation and you questioned what the preacher said, then a deacon could tell you that you can't have your own "opinion", otherwise that makes you a heretic, and could back up what he is saying by quoting pseudo-Paul.
Those verses would match up exactly with what washmorefeet was quoting. According to them, you were a sinner for being "contentious" and after two attempts at suppressing your opinion, you were to be "rejected".
I know how this sort of thing feels like since I went through that sort of thing recently and am still traumatized by it, that if I quote a scripture that contradicts what the teacher is claiming, he would get all upset and start screaming and then say that I was disrupting things by "arguing".
So apparently three of the members of the class, two teachers and someone who was married to a now deceased teacher, had a meeting and decided that they had to "rebuke" me I suppose thinking that I was possesed by an evil spirit or something.
So, the point is, that if someone read your thread and believed what you were saying, they may have a big personal problem looming on the horizon that they are going to have to deal with.

reply to post by jmdewey60


*yawn*
Whatever makes you feel better.

The only virtue I, ahem, 'extolled' was that I could present a valid rebuttal to any argument you presented on the validity of scripture.

I didn't answer your questions because
1. I already told you that I refuse to engage in such pointless circular arguments
2. the OP has already pointed out deviation from the thread topic
3. Answering any of your questions would be an utter waste of time, as any effort would simply serve for you posit an endless infinity of "buts"
4. substantial engagement of such an effort would place me in direct violation of the scriptures I'm defending in this thread.

I prefer not to willfully make myself out to be a total jackass. I'm quite capable of doing so day-to-day without intention.

reply to post by Deetermined


" SIGH " I know what you mean . He tries to be slippery . He has an agenda ,I do believe .

reply to post by jmdewey60


Then that means your teacher was an A-hole, not that the scriptures are flawed. We are not to put our faith in men, in so doing, you will always set yourself up to be disappointed. Men are flawed and ignorant, we are all works in progress and will be so until the day we die.

Don't allow your anger at someone who is doing more to work against God's kingdom, than for it, distract you from the Truth and cause you to do the same. The Enemy seeks to divide us, Brother. Jesus seeks to bring us together in One Body. None of us are above reproach.

reply to post by jmdewey60

So, the point is, that if someone read your thread and believed what you were saying, they may have a big personal problem looming on the horizon that they are going to have to deal with.

Sorry to hear that, I've gone through that a couple of times. I guess not being in a group to get kicked out of anymore makes me a bit less concerned.

It just seemed to me that you had fallen for a classic derailment perpetrated by someone with no intention of addressing the actual verses in the OP.

reply to post by pthena


I for sure now see your agenda . You were trying to bash the bible and it backfired .

reply to post by pthena


I do get your point. Your three strikes and your out statement makes it sound like we are choosing him as our creator. It is the other way around he created us and over the years he has been patiently raising us. If it takes more temples then that will happen. So often we get caught up in the contradictions we think we find that we start to loose hope and faith. There are pitfalls all around us and the path is narrow. I am certain that if you will pray for more understanding on this and reflect on it for a spell you will get a fresh perspective on our spiritual needs vs a personal view of how the world should operate or what life should be like. I think the trick is too keep studying and you just fit more and more pieces together.

reply to post by deadeyedick

If it takes more temples then that will happen.

Even the author of Acts would have a problem with that.

Acts 17:22Then Paul stood in the middle of Mars' hill, and said, You men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. 23For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore you ignorantly worship, him declare I to you. 24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands; …

So when exactly do you think you'll be ready to give up on temples?
And new Messiahs to build them.

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by deadeyedick

If it takes more temples then that will happen.

Even the author of Acts would have a problem with that.

Acts 17:22Then Paul stood in the middle of Mars' hill, and said, You men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. 23For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore you ignorantly worship, him declare I to you. 24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands; …

So when exactly do you think you'll be ready to give up on temples?

edit on 3-6-2013 by pthena because: (no reason given)

Every person that has ever lived could have a problem with that and not have a damn thing they could do about it. Do you do what ever you want to do in your own home? Your lucky that i have enough faith for both of us.

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by ntech

Greetings ntech,

You at least have some understanding of Malachi so you may be able to see what I'm getting at.

According to Jewish lore (I think), no entity entered Zerubbabel's temple, unlike Solomon's. Some of Malachi is actually addressing that issue. That they're still looking forward to the angel of the covenant to enter the temple.

Which means, it's an empty heap of stones. Daniel the prophet in Babylon and later Susa(?) never went back to Judea or Jerusalem. And he's the one who mentions abomination of desolation.

In both biblical and rabbinic Hebrew, the word "abomination" is a familiar term for an idol, and therefore may well have the same application in Daniel, which should accordingly be rendered, in agreement with Ezra 9:1-4 "motionless abomination" or, also, "appalling abomination".[citation needed] The suggestion of many scholars—Hoffmann, Nestle, Bevan, and others—that, as a designation for Jupiter it is simply an intentional perversion of his usual appellation "Baal Shamem" ("lord of heaven"), is quite plausible,[citation needed] as is attested by the perversion of Beelzebub into "Βεελζεβούλ" (Greek version) in Mark 3:22, as well as the express injunction found in Tosef., 'Ab. Zarah, vi. (vii) and Babli 'Ab. Zarah, 46a that the names of idols may be pronounced only in a distorted or abbreviated form.
Abomination of desolation

So what I'm getting at is that the city and the temple were just dumb idols aka Abominations of Desolation. No god.

Ok, I see what you are trying to get at so let me tell you my "theory" on what happened in the first century AD.

There was an apocalypse happening back then. They were in the 69th week of Daniel's 70 weeks. The Lord and Elijah the prophet were walking the Earth. Then something unexpected happened. The first century Jews broke the first century apocalypse.

This is what was supposed to happen.

Malachi 3
1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:
3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.
4 Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.

So yes you have a point. The Jews were correct in expecting a warrior king that was to expel the Romans and restore the country back to the days of Solomon. The Lord and the messengers were to appear at the temple and fulfill the prophesies.

But what happened was this.

Malachi 4
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Matthew 17
10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

The 1st century Jews triggered the curse. And it's a bad one. After working out the details I figured this out.

Read Leviticus 26 on how curses work in Judaism. Then read the book of Hosea and the day of Jezreel prophesy. Then take a close look at verse 6-1 and 2.
Hosea
1 Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up.
2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

Those "days" are thousand year periods of time according to 2nd Peter 3-8. The curse of Malachi is 2000 years long. And it's still running.

So what happened was the 69th week ran out and the curse started. And the nation was destroyed and most of the people were killed or emigrated in the Diaspora. And the Apocalypse of Revelation is to happen at the end of the curse.

reply to post by ntech

The Jews were correct in expecting a warrior king that was to expel the Romans and restore the country back to the days of Solomon. The Lord and the messengers were to appear at the temple and fulfill the prophesies.

But is it right for the expectations that the Judaists place upon their deity somehow reflects exactly what they have seen in the surrounding nations? And then somehow a prophet pops up and says,"Oh yeah, the god has approved your change of plans."


Moses says, "You are not to imitate the nations"

The people want a king, like the surrounding nations
Samuel says no, the god is your king.
"Oh, Okay, the god says yes, you can have a king like other nations"

David takes a fortress city on a hill
decides that his god should have a temple just like the nations.
The god says no.
The prophet says, "change of mind, your son can build a temple like the other gods of the nations"

The nation becomes exposed to mighty empires
Assyria, Neo-Babylonian, Persian
The nation sees what a king of kings is, ruler of the world.
The prophets and poets suddenly get these revelations of a world ruling Messiah

Look how far all this has drifted from Moses, "don't be like the nations you see."
And even though the god has rejected to live in a temple the people insist on it
Even though they ignore Moses, they claim to follow Moses.

I think these prophets pop up quite conveniently whenever some nation imitation is desired.

Was God God before or after emperors?
Was God God before or after temples?
Was God God before or after kings?
Was God God before or after prophets?

Why must any god have all those things? Is it just because some man wrote it down?

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by deadeyedick

If it takes more temples then that will happen.

Even the author of Acts would have a problem with that.

Acts 17:22Then Paul stood in the middle of Mars' hill, and said, You men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. 23For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore you ignorantly worship, him declare I to you. 24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands; …

So when exactly do you think you'll be ready to give up on temples?
And new Messiahs to build them.

edit on 3-6-2013 by pthena because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-6-2013 by pthena because: (no reason given)

Pthena, no one said it was right. We're only saying that the Bible said that it's going to happen. The Bible is prophecy, yet at the same time, the Bible is one long story of the Jews' wrongdoings and how God/Jesus came in to straighten them out. That's what we're trying to tell you. Don't dwell on why it's wrong. Dwell on what Jesus says he's going to do to straighten it out. Remember, God chose them to make an example out of them and that includes wrongdoings and punishment. Guess what, you haven't seen the last of it yet either.

reply to post by pthena


It sounds like this commentary on "God's Covenant with David" might help to answer all of the questions you just posted.

www.enduringword.com...