The fallacy of believing Jesus was talking about the temple of stones on the Mount of Olives

[Zao is life]

The words of Jesus; and
biblical new covenant doctrine
vs the false doctrine of Preterism ​

"Every day Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, but at night he went and stayed on the Mount of Olives." (Luke 21:37).

Less than 72 hours before His arrest, trial and crucifixion, Jesus told the priests, scribes and Pharisees in the temple, and His disciples just outside the temple, about what was to befall that (Old Testament) temple.

"Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." (Matthew 23:38).

"Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." (Matthew 24:2).

After hearing Him tell the scribes and Pharisees in the temple that it was going to be left to them desolate, just outside the temple the disciples pointed out the architectural magnificence of the buildings and structure -

- but Jesus merely repeated what He told the scribes and Pharisees - this time making it abundantly clear, saying that not one stone would be left upon another.

The Old Covenant was very soon to be abolished in Jesus's flesh (Ephesians 2:15). The veil in the temple that represented the Old Covenant system would be torn in two the moment Jesus died (Matthew 27:50-51).

"For this is my blood of the New Covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." ( Matthew 26:28).

"Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." (John 2:19).

In order to bring in the New Covenant and the new things that lay ahead, Jesus was soon to sweat blood pleading with His Father that if at all possible, to let that cup pass from Him.

Just a little later, on the Mount of Olives, four of His apostles asked Him when the things He had prophesied would take place, what the sign would be that they were about to take place, and what the sign would be of His coming and the end of the Age.

At the time the apostles asked the above questions, they:-

- still did not know about Jesus's words which He was still to utter at the last supper about His blood and the new covenant,

- nor about what was to transpire immediately after the last supper,

- nor about the veil of the temple between the holy of holies and the holy place being torn in two when Jesus died,

- nor about Jesus's resurrection from the dead,

- nor about His ascension into heaven,

- nor about the Holy Spirit coming down and filling the church on the day of Pentecost.

- They did not know about the New Testament Temple when they asked the question.

.. Continued in next Post

 

[Zao is life]

WHAT WAS JESUS TALKING ABOUT?

Location: On the Temple Mount:​

Luke 21:5-11:
And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,

"As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Mark 13:1-2:
And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, "Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!" And Jesus answering said unto him, "Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Matthew 24:1-2:
"And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

What was Jesus talking about in the above passages?​

The temple of stones on the Temple Mount (which Jesus said would be left not on stone upon another):

When the temple of stones on the Temple Mount would be destroyed:

.. continued in next post

 

[Zao is life]

Location: On the Mount of Olives:​

Luke 21:7-11:
And they asked him, saying, "Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?"

And he said, "Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them. But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by."

Then said he unto them, "Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven."

Matthew 24:3-8:
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age?"

And Jesus answered and said unto them, "Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows [odin G5604 - (like) birth-pains]."

Mark 13:3-8:
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple (opposite the Temple Mount), Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?"

And Jesus answering them began to say, "Take heed lest any man deceive you: For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows."

What was Jesus talking about in the above passages?​

Birth-pain signs of the end of the age:

Who was Jesus speaking to in the above passages?​

And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?" (Mark 13:3-4).

Circa AD 44: James, son of Zebedee: Beheaded by sword in Jerusalem by Herod Agrippa.
Circa AD 62: James, son of Alphaeus (James the Less): Crucified in Ostakrine, Egypt.
Circa AD 62: James the Just: Thrown from the Temple pinnacle, then stoned and clubbed to death.
Circa AD 60: Andrew, brother of Peter: Crucified on x-shaped cross in Patras, Greece.
Between AD 64 and AD 67, but before AD68: Paul beheaded by sword in Rome.
Between AD 64 and AD 68: but before AD69: Peter crucified upside-down in Rome.

By AD 70 when armies gathered around Jerusalem, Peter, James and Andrew were not alive anymore. They would not see the events Jesus had told them about in Luke 21:20-24.

Circa AD 70: Jude (Thaddaeus): Clubbed or axed to death in Edessa, Syria.
Circa AD70: Bartholomew (Nathanael): Flayed alive and beheaded (the place of his death is uncertain)

Apostles who were still alive following AD 70:

Circa AD 72: Thomas (Didymus): Speared to death by soldiers in Mylapore, India.
Circa AD 80: Matthias (who replaced Judas): Stoned and beheaded in Jerusalem.

Crica AD98 - AD 100: John, son of Zebedee: The only apostle believed to have died naturally.

.. continued in next post

 

[Zao is life]

Location: On the Mount of Olives:​

Luke 21:12-19:
"But BEFORE all these (birth-pain signs of the end of the age) they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name’s sake. And it shall turn to you for a testimony.

Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer: For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.

And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake. But there shall not an hair of your head perish. In your patience possess ye your souls."

What was Jesus talking about in the above passage?​

The persecution that the living stones of the New Testament Temple would experience BEFORE any of the birth-pain signs of the end of the age would be seen:

The stones of the temple on the Temple Mount, which Jesus had said would be left not on stone upon another:

.. continued in next post

 

[Zao is life]

Luke 21:20-24:
"And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Then let them which are in Judæa flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

What was Jesus talking about in the above part of the passage?​

He was warning the living stones of the New Testament Temple to flee Judea when they see armies gathering around Jerusalem:

He was talking about the stones of the temple on the Temple Mount, which Jesus had said would be left not on stone upon another:

In what context did Jesus say the above?​

In the context of talking on the Mount of Olives about the persecution that the living stones of the New Testament Temple would experience BEFORE any of the birth-pain signs of the end of the age would be seen:

In the context of talking on the Mount of Olives about the stones of the temple on the Temple Mount, which on the Temple Mount Jesus had said would be left not on stone upon another:

It's easy to imagine the type of conversation that would have taken place between two people who had come to believe in Christ between AD 30 and AD 70. It would have gone something like this:

Henry: "Lilian, see! Jerusalem is being surrounded by the Roman armies! Didn't Jesus say His disciples should flee Judea when they see it happening?"

Lilian: "Yes! We'd better flee then, immediately!"

On the road:

Lilian: "Henry, Jesus said the temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed. Do you think that the prophecy is soon to be fulfilled?"

Henry: "It certainly seems like it could be very soon, Lilian. But I heard from someone else who passed us on the road that the Romans are still battling to breach Jerusalem's walls. Even if they do - before Caesar for some reason changes his mind - they will still have to breach the temple walls.

This is war. Anything could happen. The Jews in Jerusalem may surrender and make a deal with the Romans. Who knows, Lilian. Who knows if this is the time the temple in Jerusalem is going to be destroyed."

etc etc.

Millions of Christians insist that the Christians knew that the temple WAS going to be destroyed AT THAT TIME because Jesus had warned them that when they see armies surround JERUSALEM, they should flee

- as though Jesus had added "because at that time the temple in Jerusalem will be destroyed. This is the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place"

Jesus did not add anything of the sort

- and it's also helpful to note that in Luke 17:22-26 & 31, 36-37, in the context of talking about the end of the age and His coming, Luke records Jesus - while He was still journeying to Jerusalem

- saying the exact same things about "fleeing Judea", and "him which is on the housetop" not going down to take anything out of his house nor "him which is in the field" returning back to take his clothes

- that Matthew records Jesus saying on the Mount of Olives when He was answering His disciples' questions.

.. continued in next post

 

[Zao is life]

Matthew 24:14:
This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Matthew 24:9-18:
"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. Therefore when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand):

Then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes."

Mark 13:9-16:
"But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them. And the gospel must first be published among all nations. But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.

Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judæa flee to the mountains: And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:"

What was Jesus talking about in the above passages?​

He was talking about the tribulation and persecution that the living stones of the New Testament Temple would experience FOLLOWING the birth-pain signs of the end of the age:

He was talking about the stones of the temple on the Temple Mount:

In what context did Jesus say the above?​

In the context of talking on the Mount of Olives about the tribulation that the living stones of the New Testament Temple would experience FOLLOWING the birth-pain signs of the end of the age:

In the context of talking on the Mount of Olives about the stones of the temple on the Temple Mount, which on the Temple Mount Jesus had said would be left not on stone upon another:

.. continued in next post

 

[Zao is life]

"Now when the days drew near for him to be taken up, Jesus set out resolutely to go to Jerusalem." (Luke 9:51).

Luke 17
- on the way to Jerusalem - same things Jesus said to the disciples on the Mount of Olives in the Olivet Discourse

(thanks to @Davidpt for first making me aware of this):

Luke 17:22-26 & 31, 36-37:
"And He said to the disciples, The days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and you shall not see it. And they shall say to you, Lo, here! or, behold, there! Do not go away, nor follow.

For as the lightning which lights up, flashing from the one part under heaven, and shines to the other part under heaven, so also shall the Son of man be in His day.

But first He must suffer many things and be rejected of this generation.

And as it was in the days of Noah, so it also shall be in the days of the Son of man. Even so it shall be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

In that day he who shall be on the housetop, and his goods in the house, let him not come down to take them away. And likewise, he who is in the field, let him not return to the things behind.

Two shall be in the field, one will be taken, and the other left. And they answered and said to Him, Where, Lord? And He said to them,

Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together."

Big tithes and no mercy (same things that Matthew records Jesus saying in the temple of stones in Jerusalem):​

Luke 11 (before arriving in Jerusalem)
42 But woe to you, Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and pass over judgment and the love of God. You ought to have done these, and not to leave the other undone.
43 Woe to you, Pharisees! For you love the chief seats in the synagogues and greetings in the markets.
44 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like unseen tombs and the men walking above are not aware of them.
45 And one of the lawyers answered and said to Him, Master, you reproach us also when you say this.
46 And He said, Woe to you also, lawyers! For you load men with burdens grievous to be carried, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers.

Tombs of the prophets

Luke 11 (before arriving in Jerusalem)
47 Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
48 Truly you bear witness that you consent to the deeds of your fathers. For they indeed killed them, and you build their tombs.
49 Therefore the wisdom of God also said, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute,
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the temple. Truly I say to you, It shall be required of this generation.
52 Woe to you, lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter in yourselves, and you have hindered those who were entering in.

.. continued in next post

 

[Zao is life]

In each case, the gospel accounts of what Jesus was saying in His reply to the disciples' questions on the Mount of Olives make it obvious that Jesus is concerned for the living stones of the New Testament Temple

- He is no longer concerned about the temple of stones on the Temple Mount (which on the Temple Mount He had twice said was going to be utterly destroyed).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

* The gospels contain a number of records of Jesus not answering the disciples' questions in accordance with what was going on in the minds of His disciples - He often answered with an answer that came from the mind of God.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What was in the mind of God when Jesus was:​

(a) on the Temple Mount when He twice said the Old Testament temple of stones was going to be destroyed? and

(b) on the Mount of Olives when He began talking about the tribulation that the living stones of the New Testament Temple were to experience, and would need to endure?

All three of the synoptic gospels record Jesus replying to their questions on the Mount of Olives by immediately embarking on a long discourse about the tribulation and persecution that His disciples (the living stones of the New Testament Temple) were going to experience for His name's sake

- and not once does He use the word "temple" again during His reply.

GOD'S DAY OF JUDGMENT WAS NOT AD 70​

The generation Jesus was talking to in Matthew 23:29-36 were self-righteous and had said to themselves, 'If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have participated with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.'

So Jesus turned it around, telling them that THEY had murdered the prophets ("whom YOU murdered") - because they were going to do the exact same things to the people whom Jesus was going to send to them, hence they will face the same judgement for their actions that their ancestors of previous generations (who had murdered prophets and righteous men) will face - but as the scriptures tell us,

"God has set A DAY on which he is going to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whom he designated, having provided proof to everyone by raising him from the dead." (Acts 17:31).

(a) The Bible (Acts 17:31) tells us that God has set a day. Not different days. Not A.D 70 + another day. One day, and one day only.

(b) The Bible tells us that on that day those whose names are not found written in the Lamb's Book of Life will be thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:15).

The Old Covenant temple of stones was the only "temple of God" the disciples knew the day they asked the questions. The disciples still had:

- the destruction of the temple;
- the end of the age; and
- Christ appearing in His glory,

mixed up (as can be seen by their questions).

No one could have blamed them - but by the time Hebrews 9:11 was written, they no longer needed an answer to the question they had asked on the Mount of Olives about when the temple of stones would be destroyed:

Hebrews 9:11:
"But Christ has come - the high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with (human) hands, that is to say, not of this building.."

 

[grafted branch]

Millions of Christians insist that the Christians knew that the temple WAS going to be destroyed AT THAT TIME because Jesus had warned them that when they see armies surround JERUSALEM, they should flee

- as though Jesus had added "because at that time the temple in Jerusalem will be destroyed. This is the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place"

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260-c. 340), the first to write a comprehensive history of the early church and acclaimed Father of Church History said this …



Church History 3,5,3. But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. And when those that believed in Christ had come thither from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men.

4. But the number of calamities which everywhere fell upon the nation at that time; the extreme misfortunes to which the inhabitants of Judea were especially subjected, the thousands of men, as well as women and children, that perished by the sword, by famine, and by other forms of death innumerable,—all these things, as well as the many great sieges which were carried on against the cities of Judea, and the excessive sufferings endured by those that fled to Jerusalem itself, as to a city of perfect safety, and finally the general course of the whole war, as well as its particular occurrences in detail, and how at last the abomination of desolation, proclaimed by the prophets, stood in the very temple of God, so celebrated of old, the temple which was now awaiting its total and final destruction by fire,—all these things any one that wishes may find accurately described in the history written by Josephus.

 

[Zao is life]

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260-c. 340), the first to write a comprehensive history of the early church and acclaimed Father of Church History said this …

Church History 3,5,3. But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. And when those that believed in Christ had come thither from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men.

1. The above - as my earlier posts showed - is exactly what Luke recorded Jesus as telling the apostles on the Mount of Olives about - things what would occur BEFORE any of the birth-pain signs He mentioned - when He at the same time was telling them about the persecution THEY would endure BEFORE any of the birth-pain signs would begin to occur.

2. Where in your above quote does Eusebius claim that they knew when they saw the above events that this was the time that the temple of stone was going to be destroyed?

Just answer the question.

4. But the number of calamities which everywhere fell upon the nation at that time; the extreme misfortunes to which the inhabitants of Judea were especially subjected, the thousands of men, as well as women and children, that perished by the sword, by famine, and by other forms of death innumerable,—all these things, as well as the many great sieges which were carried on against the cities of Judea, and the excessive sufferings endured by those that fled to Jerusalem itself, as to a city of perfect safety,

1. The above - as my earlier posts showed - is exactly what Luke recorded Jesus as telling the apostles on the Mount of Olives about what would occur BEFORE any of the birth-pain signs He mentioned - when He at the same time was telling them about the persecution THEY would endure BEFORE any of the birth-pain signs would begin to occur.

2. Where in your quote does Eusebius say that because of what they saw happening in Judea and around Jerusalem, the disciples KNEW that that was indeed the time that the temple of stones would cease to exist?

Just answer the question.

and finally the general course of the whole war, as well as its particular occurrences in detail, and how at last the abomination of desolation, proclaimed by the prophets, stood in the very temple of God, so celebrated of old, the temple which was now awaiting its total and final destruction by fire,—all these things any one that wishes may find accurately described in the history written by Josephus.

Have you ever challenged Eusebius by asking him why the abominations (plural) that Josephus wrote about that were taking place in the temple, according to Josephus constituted an abomination of desolation standing in the holy sanctuary of God?

Well, you can't - because both men died long ago

- but you have just proved that you have no answer to the facts made note of in this thread - because you needed to quote the opinion of Eusebius, who was quoting the opinion of Josephus.

Can't you stick to what scripture says Jesus said - and what Jesus did not say - instead of going to extra-biblical sources?

Well you have just proved that you can't (either because you're Catholic, OR you just cant stick to what the scripture says and to what the scripture means by what it says

- because you have no answer without sourcing what the very earliest historians said about what Josephus said, and how Josephus linked the history of what took place, to the abomination of desolation standing in the holy sanctuary of God, and how Eusebius, quoting Josephus, linked the AoD to the same.

 

[grafted branch]

2. Where in your above quote does Eusebius claim that they knew when they saw the above events that this was the time that the temple of stone was going to be destroyed?

I don’t think Eusebius is saying that they knew the exact time to flee by observing events, I think he’s saying when they (approved men) received (vouchsafed) the revelation to flee, they did it. They didn’t go back to get their clothes or things, they got out of Jerusalem and went to Pella.

Seeing Jerusalem surrounded by armies in Luke 21:20 meant that the desolation was nigh but I think Eusebius is saying that it was a revelation given to the believers at that time that caused them to know the exact moment of when to flee.

 

[claninja]

"Every day Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, but at night he went and stayed on the Mount of Olives." (Luke 21:37).

Less than 72 hours before His arrest, trial and crucifixion, Jesus told the priests, scribes and Pharisees in the temple, and His disciples just outside the temple, about what was to befall that (Old Testament) temple.

"Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." (Matthew 23:38).

"Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." (Matthew 24:2).

After hearing Him tell the scribes and Pharisees in the temple that it was going to be left to them desolate, just outside the temple the disciples pointed out the architectural magnificence of the buildings and structure -

- but Jesus merely repeated what He told the scribes and Pharisees - this time making it abundantly clear, saying that not one stone would be left upon another.

The Old Covenant was very soon to be abolished in Jesus's flesh (Ephesians 2:15). The veil in the temple that represented the Old Covenant system would be torn in two the moment Jesus died (Matthew 27:50-51).

"For this is my blood of the New Covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." ( Matthew 26:28).

"Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." (John 2:19).

In order to bring in the New Covenant and the new things that lay ahead, Jesus was soon to sweat blood pleading with His Father that if at all possible, to let that cup pass from Him.

Just a little later, on the Mount of Olives, four of His apostles asked Him when the things He had prophesied would take place, what the sign would be that they were about to take place, and what the sign would be of His coming and the end of the Age.

At the time the apostles asked the above questions, they:-

- still did not know about Jesus's words which He was still to utter at the last supper about His blood and the new covenant,

- nor about what was to transpire immediately after the last supper,

- nor about the veil of the temple between the holy of holies and the holy place being torn in two when Jesus died,

- nor about Jesus's resurrection from the dead,

- nor about His ascension into heaven,

- nor about the Holy Spirit coming down and filling the church on the day of Pentecost.

- They did not know about the New Testament Temple when they asked the question.

.. Continued in next Post

John 2:19 is explicitly interpreted in the text: Jesus is speaking about His body (John 2:21). Matthew 24 is a separate discourse in a different context, where the disciples are pointing to the physical temple buildings, and Jesus describes their destruction WITHOUT any redefinition of “temple.”

Since Matthew often provides explanation and reinterpretations throughout his gospel, just like how John did in John 2:19-21, why didn’t Matthew provide a clear explanation of this in Matthew 24?

 

[Zao is life]

John 2:19 is explicitly interpreted in the text: Jesus is speaking about His body (John 2:21). Matthew 24 is a separate discourse in a different context, where the disciples are pointing to the physical temple buildings, and Jesus describes their destruction WITHOUT any redefinition of “temple.”

Since Matthew often provides explanation and reinterpretations throughout his gospel, just like how John did in John 2:19-21, why didn’t Matthew provide a clear explanation of this in Matthew 24?

Read the gospels. It was a habit of Jesus when He was in Jerusalem to preach in the temple and retire to the Mount of Olives afterward. Like someone who has a home to go to, the Mount of Olives was Jesus's place He went to for a "soft landing" after a hard and busy day

- that's why Judas (Iscariot) knew where to find Him when He arrived there with soldiers to betray Him - the last place Judas had seen Him, was in the house where they had eaten the Passover with Him. Judas knew exactly where Jesus and the other 11 apostles would have been.

Your straws that you grasp and give to others about the Olivet Discourse are not the gold you think they are. They are filings of fool's gold.

 

[claninja]

Read the gospels. It was a habit of Jesus when He was in Jerusalem to preach in the temple and retire to the Mount of Olives afterward. Like someone who has a home to go to, the Mount of Olives was Jesus's place He went to for a "soft landing" after a busy day

- that's why Judas (Iscariot) knew where to find Him when He arrived there with soldiers to betray Him - the last place Judas had seen Him, was in the house where they had eaten the Passover with Him. Judas knew exactly where Jesus and the other 11 apostles would have been.

Your straws that you build and give to others about the Olivet Discourse are not the gold you think they are. They are filings of fool's gold.

Strong arguments do not need to rely on ad hominems. As such, your arguments often come with them to no surprise.

Your OP is built on improper hermeneutics. Your example with John 2:19 is misleading, and results in the over harmonization fallacy. Just because John provides and explanation in 2:21 that Christ referred to his body in that context, doesn’t demand nor require Jesus was talking about his body in the context Matthew 24. There should be contextual clues or clear explanation from Matthew. However, Your entire OP is absent of this.

 

[Zao is life]

Strong arguments do not need to rely on ad hominems. As such, your arguments often come with them to no surprise.

Your OP is built on improper hermeneutics. Your example with John 2:19 is misleading, and results in the over harmonization fallacy. Just because John provides and explanation in 2:21 that Christ referred to his body in that context, doesn’t demand nor require Jesus was talking about his body in the context Matthew 24. There should be contextual clues or clear explanation from Matthew. However, Your entire OP is absent of this.

The fact that your weak and beggarly arguments that you call "sound hermeneutics" will not (not cannot in your case, but refuses to) take into account that - as the vast majority of all scholars know - there are discrepancies that exist between Matthew, Mark, Luke and John with respect to the chronology regarding when Jesus said certain things,

is part of the many straws you grasp at and attempt to hand to others which you think are gold but are indeed just the filings of fool's gold - since as can be seen in your above post yet again, you refuse the honesty of the sound hermeneutics.

For example, John was concerned far more with who Jesus is in his gospel than with correct chronology, and despite your denials (refusal to accept), John 2:19 has everything to do with the fact that JESUS, after mentioning the coming destruction of the temple of stones on the Temple Mount,

never mentioned it again in MATTHEW'S record of what He said on the Mount of Olives when talking to His disciples about what they - the living stones of the New Testament Temple - were going to experience FOLLOWING the birth-pain signs of the time of the end, and the time of His return;

and the fact that you cannot abide the fact that Luke mentioned Jesus saying the exact same things almost using the exact same words when talking about the end of the age and the time of His return, is more evidence you have now once again provided of your weak and beggarly arguments that you call "sound hermeutics"

- because as the vast majority of all scholars would agree, the discrepancies that exist between the gospel accounts with respect to where Jesus was and when He said certain things, are not what matters:

What matters are what Jesus said

- and both Luke and Matthew have Jesus saying the exact same things regarding the end of the age and the time of His return - Matthew in the context of talking to the apostles on the Mount of Olives about the tribulation the disciples of Jesus - the living stones of the New Testament Temple - will face FOLLOWING the birth-pain signs of His return;

and Luke in the context of what JESUS said regarding the end of the age and time of His return while still on His way to Jerusalem.

Those who support you (e.g @Marty fox ) @covenantee in your unbelief of the one and only true gospel, support Josephus - a Jewish priest who was a turncoat - in his imagining that the temple of stones in Jerusalem was still "the holy sanctuary of God" that had been defiled by the abominations that the Jews committed in it between 66-70 AD (or by what the Romans did, or by whatever it was that in your various imaginations you imagine constituted AN abomination in the holy sanctuary of God).

- but you cannot abide the fact that in truth and indeed those abominations already existed in the form of continued sacrifices for sins after Jesus died on the cross - they did not even need to, and could not, get any worse than that.​

 

[covenantee]

Strong arguments do not need to rely on ad hominems. As such, your arguments often come with them to no surprise.

Your OP is built on improper hermeneutics. Your example with John 2:19 is misleading, and results in the over harmonization fallacy. Just because John provides and explanation in 2:21 that Christ referred to his body in that context, doesn’t demand nor require Jesus was talking about his body in the context Matthew 24. There should be contextual clues or clear explanation from Matthew. However, Your entire OP is absent of this.

There are numerous references throughout the NT to the physical temple. Therefore, if he is being consistent (unlikely ), he interprets as follows:

Matthew 21:12
And Jesus went into His body of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in His body, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

I'm completely confident that neither Matthew, nor the Holy Spirit who inspired him, intended such an interpretation.

 

[claninja]

The fact that your weak and beggarly arguments that you call "sound hermeneutics" will not (not cannot in your case, but refuses to) take into account that - as the vast majority of all scholars know - there are discrepancies that exist between Matthew, Mark, Luke and John with respect to the chronology regarding when Jesus said certain things,

is part of the many straws you grasp at and attempt to hand to others which you think are gold but are indeed just the filings of fool's gold - since as can be seen in your above post yet again, you refuse the honesty of the sound hermeneutics.

For example, John was concerned far more with who Jesus is in his gospel than with correct chronology, and despite your denials (refusal to accept), John 2:19 has everything to do with the fact that JESUS, after mentioning the coming destruction of the temple of stones on the Temple Mount,

never mentioned it again in MATTHEW'S record of what He said on the Mount of Olives when talking to His disciples about what they - the living stones of the New Testament Temple - were going to experience FOLLOWING the birth-pain signs of the time of the end, and the time of His return;

and the fact that you cannot abide the fact that Luke mentioned Jesus saying the exact same things almost using the exact same words when talking about the end of the age and the time of His return, is more evidence you have now once again provided of your weak and beggarly arguments that you call "sound hermeutics"

- because as the vast majority of all scholars would agree, the discrepancies that exist between the gospel accounts with respect to where Jesus was and when He said certain things, are not what matters:

What matters are what Jesus said

- and both Luke and Matthew have Jesus saying the exact same things regarding the end of the age and the time of His return - Matthew in the context of talking to the apostles on the Mount of Olives about the tribulation the disciples of Jesus - the living stones of the New Testament Temple - will face FOLLOWING the birth-pain signs of His return;

and Luke in the context of what JESUS said regarding the end of the age and time of His return while still on His way to Jerusalem.

Those who support you e.g (@Marty fox in your unbelief of the one and only true gospel, support Josephus - a Jewish priest who was a turncoat - in his imagining that the temple of stones in Jerusalem was still "the holy sanctuary of God" that had been defiled by the abominations that the Jews committed in it between 66-70 AD

- but you cannot abide the fact that in truth and indeed those abominations already existed in the form of continued sacrifices for sins after Jesus died on the cross - they did not even need to, and could not, get any worse than that.​

Ah yes, more ad hominems. I guess you believe your arguments do require them.

You still haven’t addressed the central issue: where in the text of Matthew 24 is the referent of “temple” changed?

In Matthew 24, the disciples explicitly point out the physical temple buildings, and Jesus responds by saying not one stone will be left upon another. The referent is clearly established, and there is no textual shift to a symbolic or “living stones” meaning anywhere in the passage.

John 2:19 is different because the text itself explains the metaphor (John 2:21). That meaning is controlled by that context and cannot be transferred into Matthew 24 without textual evidence.

Appealing to theology (e.g., “living stones”) or to differences in Gospel chronology does not override the immediate context or redefine the referent.

If you are correct, you should be able to demonstrate the proof from Matthew 24, instead of cobbling together unrelated texts.

 

[Zao is life]

There are numerous references throughout the NT to the physical temple. Therefore, if he is being consistent (unlikely ), he interprets as follows:

Matthew 21:12
And Jesus went into His body of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in His body, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

I'm completely confident that neither Matthew, nor the Holy Spirit who inspired him, intended such an interpretation.

Your weak arguments become more and more desperate and your laughing is what many would do regarding the above ridiculous argument.

Jesus was in a physical temple which He called "My Father's house" and still alive in His physical body. Just a few days later He would call the same house "YOUR house" when telling the Jews it was going to be destroyed.

Your unbelief of the one and only gospel shows in the total insignificance your blasphemous and contemptuous arguments such as the above betray regarding your attitude to the meaning of the veil in that very temple you keep talking about being torn in two when Jesus died on the cross.

I hope that one day I will see the respect that believers in the one and only gospel show regarding this, also coming from those who adhere to the doctrines of Preterism in what they say about it.

I don't mind being mocked - but there is One who can see how the things you say mock Him and what He did on the cross for us.

 

[Zao is life]

I don’t think Eusebius is saying that they knew the exact time to flee by observing events, I think he’s saying when they (approved men) received (vouchsafed) the revelation to flee, they did it. They didn’t go back to get their clothes or things, they got out of Jerusalem and went to Pella.

So you think Eusebius might have meant this or might have meant that but you don't really know what he was saying.

Well I know that the only vouchsafed men who Jesus had told about the coming destruction of Jerusalem were the apostles He was talking to on the Mount of Olives and the only time He did so was in AD 30.

So you may keep on guessing about what Eusebius meant or did not mean and about when those other vouchsafed men (besides those Jesus spoke to in AD 30) may have been told by the Holy Spirit that the place they must flee to was Petra or Pela or wherever it was they decided to flee to

- because they would have already known that when they see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, they must flee Judea - because that information is what they had already learned from the vouchsafed men Jesus gave that information to in AD 30.

So this is all just speculative - and your words are showing that you're only assuming something about history written by someone over 150 years later about information received from outside of the Bible:

Seeing Jerusalem surrounded by armies in Luke 21:20 meant that the desolation was nigh but I think Eusebius is saying that it was a revelation given to the believers at that time that caused them to know the exact moment of when to flee.

 

[Zao is life]

Ah yes, more ad hominems. I guess you believe your arguments do require them.

I believe your arguments do require them, yes - except that there were no ad hominems in my reply - only truth and a fair reaction to nonsense.

And you still have not addressed the issues brought up in the OP.