Third temple

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

zeke25

New Member
May 18, 2014
513
15
0
77
Western USA
toknowthetruth said:
Well I wouldn't deny the possibility of your opinion regarding the little horn. Not very convincing to me though.

In this case, since I don't hold to your opinion, your question regarding the 1st century sacrifice is irrelevant to me. I don't believe the little horn has been manifested yet.

The temple of God can refer to different things depending on the context of what it's referring to. Give me the context which you are talking about and I can better answer your question.

As far as a one way conversation, I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. Maybe you could clarify that as well. If you want an open discussion in which the dialog from both sides is up for consideration and not an "I'm right and you're wrong" type of dialog, then I'm happy to participate.
It is evident that we are miles apart right now. Maybe it would help bring us closer together if I ask some questions and at the same time share some information.

What Scriptures lead you to believe that the little horn is in the future? Is this connected to Daniel’s 70 weeks theory with the 70th week being separated from the other 69: 69 down but the 70th yet to come in the future?

As far as the sacrifices being stopped in the 1st century, it wasn’t Antiochus. He did his dirty work already in 167 BC. By the 1st century he was dead and buried.

So, you’re not interested in the sacrifices that were stopped in the 1st century. And it is evident that you were not interested in the sacrifices that were stopped in 167 BC. So, it would be reasonable to assume that you were not concerned about any disrupted sacrifices in 586 BC when Judah was sacked and carried off to Babylon. This really begs the question: Why on earth are you concerned about sacrifices that may or may not be stopped in the indeterminate future? Especially, considering that there have been no sacrifices for close to two millenniums now. I mean, I’m in a tizzy. What’s this all about?

Regarding the temple of God: The Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. But the New Testament talks quite a bit about a Temple of God that yet exists. What is this Temple of God that yet exists? I didn’t ask the question to stump you, I asked it because I assumed you would be totally familiar with it and I wanted to prompt you to think about it.

When you ignored my question the first time, I thought you were not going to engage the subject. But now I understand why you didn’t answer. So, let’s try again, since you appear to be willing.

Zeke25
 

zeke25

New Member
May 18, 2014
513
15
0
77
Western USA
keras said:
Because of your sneering attitude, Zeke25, I doubt if any amount of proofs will change your mind.

Acts 7:48-49 refers to the Temple Solomon built. He did build a Temple and the Shekinah glory and the Ark were in it. Then Nehemiah and Ezra built another Temple, that was rebuilt by King Herod. Jesus called that Temple God's House.
The prophet Haggai 1:7-14 says the Lord will withhold rain until they build His House and He will bless them when it is completed. Haggai 2:15-19

So a Temple is important to the Lord. As I said before, He does not change and a new Temple will be built in Jerusalem in the last few years of this Church age, as many prophesies confirm.
keras,

We have no disagreement that the Temple is important to God. But you have missed the point of Acts 7:49. God is affirming that He doesn’t need a house to live in, nor does he need man to build one. (Not to mention that is the theme of part of Acts 7, including sacrifices that God says He doesn’t need). In Acts 7:49 He is reinforcing the idea that He is the One Who does the building that counts, not us puny men.

I sneer because what you call proofs do not amount to proofs at all, but highly developed conjectures that you claim are proof. For example, you have assumed that another temple is yet to be built in the indeterminate future. I see a bunch of Scriptures telling us about Solomon’s Temple and Herod’s Temple, but I don’t see how that adds up to another physical temple to be built. Is there an exact verse that says, “A third physical Temple will be built by men”? Or at least one that can reasonably mean this?

There are Scriptures (and I already gave you one) that tell us that a 3rd Temple is already being built, and it is not a physical one. But you ignored that - is that not a sneer on your part? Do you know so much that you can ignore those Scriptures you don’t like? Or, do you still need to consider all of the counsel of God?

Hammerstone took action that he felt was appropriate, and as the administrator he has that right, even duty to do so. But he missed the mark regarding my motivation. My remarks were not prompted by a disagreement in our eschatology, they were prompted by your sneering and disrespect toward a challenge to your pet theories. “Because after all, you’re so right, that anyone who disagrees is being unbiblical”. I haven’t built a ministry or reputation based on my eschatology, I have nothing to defend. I only care about the souls of men who are dragged away by speculative doctrine.

Zeke25
 

keras

Writer of Bible study guides
Mar 18, 2014
1,191
52
48
82
New Zealand
www.logostelos.info
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
We have no disagreement that the Temple is important to God. But you have missed the point of Acts 7:49. God is affirming that He doesn’t need a house to live in, nor does he need man to build one. (Not to mention that is the theme of part of Acts 7, including sacrifices that God says He doesn’t need). In Acts 7:49 He is reinforcing the idea that He is the One Who does the building that counts, not us puny men. Quote Zeke25

We all know how Jesus Christ is our spiritual Temple during this Church age. You are pushing an obvious point, don't treat us like ignoramus's
But we carefully study all the Bible and the prophets, including Jesus say there will be another Temple in Jerusalem.

You can't refute scriptures like 2 Thess. 2:4 that says: the AC will sit in God's Temple. Rev. 3:12 Those who overcome, I shall make as pillars in the Temple of My God......
Then in Rev 21:22 AFTER the Millennium, there will no longer be a Temple, for its Temple will be God and the Lamb. This means there WILL have been a physical Temple up until that time. Jeremiah 3:16-17
Are YOU willing to reconsider your 'pet theory' ? In the light of the scriptures I present, including in #6 ?

ATP - Altar
 

liafailrock

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2015
496
337
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hey all:

As a side note here, I follow the temple institute's posts, web site and FB messages. Did y'all hear there's some sort of a big annouuncement from them coming this July 12? Many assume that it's an announcement to rebuild the temple. However, that said, I know that Yahuda Glick was fighting to allow the Jews back on the mount. They can't even so much as have a bottle of water there for fear they will bless it before drinking it and the Muslims don't like that; riots and attacks then occur. Maybe it has something to do with visiting rights.
 

liafailrock

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2015
496
337
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
ATP said:
Nice video. Thanks for sharing.

To all: Besides the Temple Institute, I ran across this web site awhile back where this lady figured out where she believes the temple was located: http://www.templemountlocation.com . She has a free online book (.pdf format) that cliams it was actually near the Al Aqsa Mosque on Mt. Ophel. The edge of the temple mount today (the south side) was where the temple stood, she claims, and the rest of the mount was where the ruins are south of it off of the present temple mount. Either way, whether the temple was at the Dome of the Rock, or at the Mosque, the Muslims are not going to give anything up without a fight.

Also, I like to watch news reports on this, and I think if we are watching for a temple to be rebuilt, a few common locations ought to be familiar to everyone here, such as the Dome of the Rock, The Dome of the Spirits (or Tablets), the Muslim fountain, Al Aqsa Mosque, Wilson's Arch, Robinson's arch and a few others.
 

ATP

New Member
Jan 3, 2015
3,264
49
0
U.S.A.
zeke25 said:
I've seen this video before. No doubt these apostates are very serious about rebuilding a Temple. Whether or not God allows it is a totally different matter.
zeke25
Nothing wrong with wanting to be with the Lord..2 Tim 4:8 NIV Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.
 

zeke25

New Member
May 18, 2014
513
15
0
77
Western USA
keras said:
We have no disagreement that the Temple is important to God. But you have missed the point of Acts 7:49. God is affirming that He doesn’t need a house to live in, nor does he need man to build one. (Not to mention that is the theme of part of Acts 7, including sacrifices that God says He doesn’t need). In Acts 7:49 He is reinforcing the idea that He is the One Who does the building that counts, not us puny men. Quote Zeke25

We all know how Jesus Christ is our spiritual Temple during this Church age. You are pushing an obvious point, don't treat us like ignoramus's
But we carefully study all the Bible and the prophets, including Jesus say there will be another Temple in Jerusalem.

You can't refute scriptures like 2 Thess. 2:4 that says: the AC will sit in God's Temple. Rev. 3:12 Those who overcome, I shall make as pillars in the Temple of My God......
Then in Rev 21:22 AFTER the Millennium, there will no longer be a Temple, for its Temple will be God and the Lamb. This means there WILL have been a physical Temple up until that time. Jeremiah 3:16-17
Are YOU willing to reconsi

keras said: “We all know how Jesus Christ is our spiritual Temple during this Church age.”

zeke25 replies: I would need to see the Scripture that says that. I haven’t found one. So, is this another fabricated doctrine? Prove me wrong, please show me the Scripture that supports this contention of yours.



keras: “You can't refute scriptures like 2 Thess. 2:4 that says: the AC will sit in God's Temple.”

zeke25: So, this begs the question I asked toknowthetruth in post #21 and previously as well. Here is the question for you as well. “Regarding the temple of God: The Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. But the New Testament talks quite a bit about a Temple of God that yet exists. What is this Temple of God that yet exists? I didn’t ask the question to stump you, I asked it because I assumed you would be totally familiar with it and I wanted to prompt you to think about it.” Keras, you have said that Christ is this Temple (but of course we’re waiting for Scriptural support). So, are you saying that the AC is sitting in Christ right now? But I know that Christ is not our spiritual temple during this so-called church age. But I don’t know what this so-called church age is supposed to be - since it is not in the Scriptures either. A Scripture would be appreciated here as well to prove me wrong.

What I’m seeing here is a totally different language you are speaking that is not supported by the Bible. It’s no wonder we’re having a difficult time communicating. If it is not in the Scriptures, I don’t make a doctrine out it, and I don’t build a cadre of words to support a doctrine that the Bible doesn’t support.

keras: Rev. 3:12 Those who overcome, I shall make as pillars in the Temple of My God……

zeke25: So, you are saying that Revelation 3:12 speaks of a rebuilt physical temple. And, apparently that I’m supposed to be a pillar in this temple. That doesn’t sound like much of a desirable eternity or even a thousand years, to be standing in one spot holding up a building.

But I’ll go one better on Rev. 3:12. You say that men will rebuild a temple. But the temple of Rev. 3:12 is coming down from Heaven. Did He hire migrant workers to go up there and make it?





keras: Then in Rev 21:22 AFTER the Millennium, there will no longer be a Temple, for its Temple will be God and the Lamb. This means there WILL have been a physical Temple up until that time.

zeke25: So, here you reinforce your doctrine that there will be a physical temple up until after the millennium. That’s not what Rev. 21:22 says. Have you noticed that the Greek word for Temple in Rev. 3 & 21 & 2 Thessalonians 2 is not the same Greek word for Temple when it speaks of Christ and His disciples coming to the Temple? Does that give you any pause for concern?

As far as Jeremiah 3:6-17 I’m still not seeing a rebuilt Temple after Herod’s Temple.

There’s more than enough to chew on here without going back to post #6. As I mentioned, we are not even speaking the same language yet. Misunderstandings will abound. We need to try and get on the same page.

In Daniel 9:27, who confirms the covenant and who stops the sacrifices?

zeke25
 

toknowthetruth

New Member
May 11, 2015
113
1
0
zeke25 said:
It is evident that we are miles apart right now. Maybe it would help bring us closer together if I ask some questions and at the same time share some information.

What Scriptures lead you to believe that the little horn is in the future? Is this connected to Daniel’s 70 weeks theory with the 70th week being separated from the other 69: 69 down but the 70th yet to come in the future?

As far as the sacrifices being stopped in the 1st century, it wasn’t Antiochus. He did his dirty work already in 167 BC. By the 1st century he was dead and buried.

So, you’re not interested in the sacrifices that were stopped in the 1st century. And it is evident that you were not interested in the sacrifices that were stopped in 167 BC. So, it would be reasonable to assume that you were not concerned about any disrupted sacrifices in 586 BC when Judah was sacked and carried off to Babylon. This really begs the question: Why on earth are you concerned about sacrifices that may or may not be stopped in the indeterminate future? Especially, considering that there have been no sacrifices for close to two millenniums now. I mean, I’m in a tizzy. What’s this all about?

Regarding the temple of God: The Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. But the New Testament talks quite a bit about a Temple of God that yet exists. What is this Temple of God that yet exists? I didn’t ask the question to stump you, I asked it because I assumed you would be totally familiar with it and I wanted to prompt you to think about it.

When you ignored my question the first time, I thought you were not going to engage the subject. But now I understand why you didn’t answer. So, let’s try again, since you appear to be willing.

Zeke25
I mentioned several passages in my first post here about the little horn being manifested in the end-time. I can elaborate more on those if you like. I do believe the last 7 years is yet to be fulfilled. I assume you're familiar with this interpretation so I won't go into detail unless you want me to. I will say though, that the reason for being concerned about the sacrifices being restarted and then stopped again is because of the interpretation of prophecies that I hold to. I assume you must be aware of that, but if not I'm happy to explain it to you.

Regarding your interpretation, I'm not so familiar with it, although I have heard some things here and there. I assume you hold to the Preterist view of all prophecy being in the past, or something to that affect. Why is it you don't see the little horn as in the future, and what is the problem you see with the last week not yet being fulfilled? I do know one thing that's brought up is the argument about the gap in time. Any other reason besides that?

As I said about the temple, it depends on the context of what it's referring to. If the reference is about God's presence in our hearts then it's referring to the temple of our bodies. If the reference is about sacrifice and oblations then it's a temple built of stone that's being referred to. Of course there's the question of whether or not the language being used is symbolic or not, but that's a whole other topic in itself.
 

zeke25

New Member
May 18, 2014
513
15
0
77
Western USA
toknowthetruth said:
I mentioned several passages in my first post here about the little horn being manifested in the end-time. I can elaborate more on those if you like. I do believe the last 7 years is yet to be fulfilled. I assume you're familiar with this interpretation so I won't go into detail unless you want me to. I will say though, that the reason for being concerned about the sacrifices being restarted and then stopped again is because of the interpretation of prophecies that I hold to. I assume you must be aware of that, but if not I'm happy to explain it to you.

Regarding your interpretation, I'm not so familiar with it, although I have heard some things here and there. I assume you hold to the Preterist view of all prophecy being in the past, or something to that affect. Why is it you don't see the little horn as in the future, and what is the problem you see with the last week not yet being fulfilled? I do know one thing that's brought up is the argument about the gap in time. Any other reason besides that?

As I said about the temple, it depends on the context of what it's referring to. If the reference is about God's presence in our hearts then it's referring to the temple of our bodies. If the reference is about sacrifice and oblations then it's a temple built of stone that's being referred to. Of course there's the question of whether or not the language being used is symbolic or not, but that's a whole other topic in itself.
Hi toknowthetruth,

Thanks for responding.

In Daniel chp 8, we are given a story that begins with a two horned ram. With all the previous info we have been given, it is easy to see that Daniel is talking about the kingdoms of the earth again. The two horns represent the Medo-Persian Empire (verse 20). The one horned goat that defeated him was Alexander the Great (verse 21). When Alexander died four of his generals divided the empire between themselves (verse 8). The little horn was a successor of one of these kings. He was Antiochus IV.

So, with this type of explanation going on, it is easy to see that for us these are past events, though for Daniel they were future events.

No, I’m not a preterist at all. There are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled. Just not from Daniel chps 8 & 9.

In chp 9 the archangel Gabriel spoke with Daniel and gave him a time marker for counting the 70 weeks of years (verse 25). When counting those 70 weeks from the time marker, the end of the 69th week brings us to the beginning of Yahoshua the Christ’s ministry as the Son of Man. Moving from the 69th week to the 70th has no time gap at all. In verse 27, “he” (Christ) confirmed the covenant for one week. But in the midst of the week (about 3 ½ years) “he” (Christ) caused the sacrifice to cease. So the 70 weeks have been finished since Christ died on the tree.

How did Christ cause the sacrifice to cease? He became the final sacrifice ever needed for all time. The requirement to continue the sacrifices ended when He died on the tree. The fact that the Jews continued the sacrifices for another 40 years did nothing for them. God had enough after 40 years and destroyed their blasphemous sacrifices and the Temple. Temple worship was definitely ended.

Much more can be said, but not in this posting.


Zeke25
 

keras

Writer of Bible study guides
Mar 18, 2014
1,191
52
48
82
New Zealand
www.logostelos.info
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Zeke25, if you really studied the Bible as I have, you would know the truth of God's plans for our future.
As it is, I see you are locked into false teachings that say God is just a God of love, He won't kill anyone.
Deut. 7:10, Nahum 1:2, Romans 9:22
 

zeke25

New Member
May 18, 2014
513
15
0
77
Western USA
keras said:
Zeke25, if you really studied the Bible as I have, you would know the truth of God's plans for our future.
As it is, I see you are locked into false teachings that say God is just a God of love, He won't kill anyone.
Deut. 7:10, Nahum 1:2, Romans 9:22
keras,

Yo shouldn't try to read my mind. You're making a fool of yourself. I guess we're through here. No sense in talking to someone who wants the conversation to degenerate into fantasy character assassinations. Repent and come to the Living God.

Zeke25
 

toknowthetruth

New Member
May 11, 2015
113
1
0
zeke25 said:
Hi toknowthetruth,

Thanks for responding.

In Daniel chp 8, we are given a story that begins with a two horned ram. With all the previous info we have been given, it is easy to see that Daniel is talking about the kingdoms of the earth again. The two horns represent the Medo-Persian Empire (verse 20). The one horned goat that defeated him was Alexander the Great (verse 21). When Alexander died four of his generals divided the empire between themselves (verse 8). The little horn was a successor of one of these kings. He was Antiochus IV.

So, with this type of explanation going on, it is easy to see that for us these are past events, though for Daniel they were future events.

No, I’m not a preterist at all. There are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled. Just not from Daniel chps 8 & 9.

In chp 9 the archangel Gabriel spoke with Daniel and gave him a time marker for counting the 70 weeks of years (verse 25). When counting those 70 weeks from the time marker, the end of the 69th week brings us to the beginning of Yahoshua the Christ’s ministry as the Son of Man. Moving from the 69th week to the 70th has no time gap at all. In verse 27, “he” (Christ) confirmed the covenant for one week. But in the midst of the week (about 3 ½ years) “he” (Christ) caused the sacrifice to cease. So the 70 weeks have been finished since Christ died on the tree.

How did Christ cause the sacrifice to cease? He became the final sacrifice ever needed for all time. The requirement to continue the sacrifices ended when He died on the tree. The fact that the Jews continued the sacrifices for another 40 years did nothing for them. God had enough after 40 years and destroyed their blasphemous sacrifices and the Temple. Temple worship was definitely ended.

Much more can be said, but not in this posting.


Zeke25
Yes, I've heard these arguments before. Not very convincing to me, but obviously you find them convincing. There are so many ways to interpret scripture, especially prophecy. I like to approach prophecy by looking at the big picture first and then working down to the details. I figure if the interpretation of the details doesn't fit the bigger picture then it's probably not the right interpretation. That's why I hold to the interpretations I do because for me the pieces of the puzzle fit together this way better than any other I've come across so far.
 

liafailrock

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2015
496
337
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
liafailrock said:
Hey all:

As a side note here, I follow the temple institute's posts, web site and FB messages. Did y'all hear there's some sort of a big annouuncement from them coming this July 12? Many assume that it's an announcement to rebuild the temple. However, that said, I know that Yahuda Glick was fighting to allow the Jews back on the mount. They can't even so much as have a bottle of water there for fear they will bless it before drinking it and the Muslims don't like that; riots and attacks then occur. Maybe it has something to do with visiting rights.
The announcement came out. It's a program to support red heiffer raising. They can't build a temple without one. This way more people can feel a part of rebuilding it. Knowing me, I'd raise one and it would end up on my dinner table before it got to Israel. :p :lol:
 

ATP

New Member
Jan 3, 2015
3,264
49
0
U.S.A.
Is the red heiffer a baby cow right now? It might take two years to raise, then sacrifices begin.