The REAL "man of sin"

[Timtofly]

Are you saying John wrote the whole NT, or just simply not comprehending what FOTG posted?

I am saying you seem to stir up trouble. Happy windmill hunting.

 

[Timtofly]

That's why I didn't bother to reply. It's just a distraction. Full of things that would take half an hour to correct. I was answering Davy's post anyway, not Tim's.

Obviously you would not want to correct yourself, and point out that you purposely left out verses that would prove you are wrong.

I guess you don't want to acknowledge the whole entry of Strongs usage of the word either?

Not looking for a reply nor rebuttal. Just simply declaring the Word of the Lord, not debating humans.

 

[Randy Kluth]

With the exception of the New Testament's only reference to a shrine for Diana as the naos, naos is not even once applied to any physical temple again after the verses telling about the tearing of the veil in the physical temple in Jerusalem.

So you certainly have a point to be made, but this is what has thrown me off somewhat. You say that following Jesus' death, and the tearing of the temple veil, "naos" is never again used for a physical temple, with the exception of reference to the temple of Diana?

On its face, that is wrong--unless you meant something else. For example....
Acts 7.48; 17.24 are references to the fact God does not, any longer, dwell in a physical temple, nor can He be confined to an earthly temple. So perhaps this is making your point, that God no longer dwells in an earthly temple, following the tearing of the temple veil?

But my point is that the word "naos" is still being defined as a "physical temple" after the veil was rent. That is, the word itself had not lost its application to physical temples. "Naos" still meant "physical temples" after the rending of the veil. It just referred to the temple itself, as opposed to its extended superstructure, or to its entire holy environment.

So the "temple" in 2 Thes 2.4 cannot be decided as to its construction, physical or not, on the basis of the definition of "naos" after the rending of the temple veil. It may be true that after the rending of the veil, "naos" is used with respect to true NT temples to apply to non-physical buildings, but it is not provable on this basis alone.

Rev 11.1 also refers to a physical temple, but it is clear that in its use of the term soon later, it is being applied metaphorically to the heavenly temple of God. See Rev 11.19.

But I agree with you, that after the rending of the temple veil, "naos" was no longer applied to a physical temple in the sense of its sanctioned use as such. "Hieron" indicated that the temple was being used in a sanctioned way, under Law of Moses, because its environmental features were implied, in that term, as part of sanctioned temple observance.

That is, the courtyard, and the various holy places, were all included with the temple as long as it remained in sanctioned use. Once the temple was destroyed, reference to the extended superstructure would be superfluous, because it had been reduced to something no longer made use of. All that remained was its central sense indicated by the main structure itself.

 

[covenantee]

I am saying you seem to stir up trouble. Happy windmill hunting.

I am saying only you seem to think that.

 

[Timtofly]

You're thinking aloud again, combining different subjects and your own views on them, not answering what I said, answering what I did not say.

You are the one pointing out what you did not say.

So if Paul was talking about a temple in Jerusalem in 2 Thess 2:4, then why on earth he would be inconsistent, - unless of course, Paul isn't talking about a temple in Jerusalem in 2 Thess 2:4.

I understand you were not saying that. Except your whole point has been there was no mention of a temple using the word "naos" in the NT after the veil was torn.

My point was that the Temple in both 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and in Revelation 11:1 are the same Temple and are mentioned after the veil was torn. They are not the temple mentioned in the tearing of the veil. They are not the heavenly Temple either. They are the temple where Satan sits as the 8th king on the earth. Satan does not sit in the heavenly Temple ever.

John and Paul are talking about the same event that is still in the future. I was not addressing your point that you did not say even though you went to great lengths not to say it. I did point out that John made a distinction.

Of course I "think out loud" or I post my thoughts. There is only one subject and that is the "man of sin". So not many unrelated subjects, as even you went to great lengths to post about the word "naos".

 

[Timtofly]

I am saying only you seem to think that.

None of your post that are addressed to my username, has implied otherwise. They all seem to be unrelated to the topic of the thread.

According to you, Paul is John, yes?

If you'd take the time to read your own excerpt from FOTG's post, you'd notice that all of his Scripture references are from Paul's epistles.

Paul is fully consistent in distinguishing between "naós", and "hierón" (and "eidóleion").

And Paul is not John.

 

[covenantee]

None of your post that are addressed to my username, has implied otherwise. They all seem to be unrelated to the topic of the thread.

Only to you do they seem unrelated.

No one else is complaining.

 

[Zao is life]

You are the one pointing out what you did not say.



I understand you were not saying that. Except your whole point has been there was no mention of a temple using the word "naos" in the NT after the veil was torn.

My point was that the Temple in both 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and in Revelation 11:1 are the same Temple and are mentioned after the veil was torn. They are not the temple mentioned in the tearing of the veil. They are not the heavenly Temple either. They are the temple where Satan sits as the 8th king on the earth. Satan does not sit in the heavenly Temple ever.

John and Paul are talking about the same event that is still in the future. I was not addressing your point that you did not say even though you went to great lengths not to say it. I did point out that John made a distinction.

Of course I "think out loud" or I post my thoughts. There is only one subject and that is the "man of sin". So not many unrelated subjects, as even you went to great lengths to post about the word "naos".

Well there was also a tone of arrogance in your previous reply to me, No? It put me off trying to work out what you were actually saying by reading the whole post with the unrelated Revelation subject. My post on the word naos was on topic to the OP of this thread.

But enough of the above. Your post quoted above is the first post to me in a while where you are making sense and making yourself 100% clear. Thank you.

I don't believe you are correct, because the inner court of the physical temple - the holy place and the most holy place - was the place where only God's priests were allowed to enter. Outside of the holy place, and separated by walls, were two courts - one for Jews only, and another one - furthest from the holy place - for the Gentiles (where the Gentiles were allowed into).

The Gentiles were not allowed further than the outermost court. Revelation 11:1-2 uses the physical temple structure in Jerusalem (which was no longer standing by the time the Revelation was written) to create an image that we will understand:

1 And a reed like a rod was given to me. And the angel stood, saying, Rise up and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and those who worship in it.
2 But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it was given to the Gentiles.

And they will trample the holy city forty-two months.

Jerusalem had also ceased being Jewish - conquered by the Romans - by the time the above was written. There was now only one "holy city" - New Jerusalem.

Those who worship in the temple of God are the faithful saints.

IMO John is basically being told to count the sheep (those who worship in the temple of God are being measured - not just the temple and its altar), because the time has come when no more people will be joined to the temple of God. The world is going to become divided between those sealed with the seal of God, who worship in God's temple, and those who are outside, in "the court of the Gentiles":-

5 The beast was given a mouth speaking proud words and blasphemies, and he was permitted to exercise ruling authority for forty-two months.
6 So the beast opened his mouth to blaspheme against God - to blaspheme both his name and his dwelling place, that is, those who dwell in heaven.
7 The beast was permitted to go to war against the saints and conquer them. He was given ruling authority over every tribe, people, language, and nation. --Revelation 13.
8 and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed.

1 And a reed like a rod was given to me. And the angel stood, saying, Rise up and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and those who worship in it.
2 But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it was given to the Gentiles.

And they will trample the holy city forty-two months.

He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God's temple, displaying himself as God. --2Thessalonians 2:4.

I believe that this possibly means that the man of sin = the beast, and he's going to make himself the head of the church, or will be someone who currently holds "the office" of "head of the church" - but whatever the case may be (I don't pretend to myself I know exactly how it's going to play out), the temple of God is going to be defiled:

6 So the beast opened his mouth to blaspheme against God - to blaspheme both his name and his dwelling place, that is, those who dwell in heaven.​

 

[Zao is life]

But my point is that the word "naos" is still being defined as a "physical temple" after the veil was rent. That is, the word itself had not lost its application to physical temples. "Naos" still meant "physical temples" after the rending of the veil. It just referred to the temple itself, as opposed to its extended superstructure, or to its entire holy environment.

I understand what you mean.

I don't think you fully understand what I mean, though, so I hope you have the time on your hands to read this below carefully:

Forget about Diana's shrine for a minute, and let's first look at the word hieron.

[Strongs Greek Dictionary] 02411 (English: Temple)
ἱερόν hierón, hee-er-on' neuter of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts, whereas 3485 [naós] denotes the central sanctuary itself (of the Temple in Jerusalem, or elsewhere).

Note: EVERY reference to Jesus entering the temple in the gospels uses the word hieron (without exception). Jesus was not a priest according to Mosaic law and was not allowed into the holy place (naos). This is a clear indication that naos refers only to the holy place|actual sanctuary of God in the temple.

Every reference to the entire physcical temple structure in Jerusalem - the entire temple complex - uses the word hieron (except where the priests called it "this holy place" and the Greek uses the word "hagios topos").

Temple complex in Jerusalem - hieron - the entire temple complex

Before the tearing of the veil:

Matthew 4:5; Matthew 12:5-6; Matthew 21:12; Matthew 21:14-15; Matthew 21:23; Matthew 24:1; Matthew 26:55; Mark 11:11 & 15-16; Mark 11:27; Mark 12:35; Mark 13:1 & 3; Mark 14:49; Luke 2:27, 37 & 46; Luke 4:9; Luke 18:10; Luke 19:45 & 47; Luke 20:1 & 5; Luke 21:37-38; Luke 22:52-53; John 2:14-15; John 5:14; John 7:14 & 28; John 8:2, 20 & 59; John 10:23; John 11:56; John 18:20.

After the tearing of the veil - hieron - references to the temple in Jerusalem:

Luke 24:53; Acts 2:46; Acts 3:1-3, 8 & 10; Acts 4:1; Acts 5:20-21 & 24-25; Acts 5:42; Acts 21:26-30; Acts 22:17; Acts 24:6, 12 & 18; Acts 25:8; Acts 26:21; 1 Corinthians 9:13.

The holy place|sanctuary of God in the temple complex in Jerusalem - naos

Before the tearing of the veil:

Luke 1:9 & 21-22; Matthew 23:16-17 & 21; Matthew 23:35; Matthew 27:5.

-- Body of Christ as the temple -- (word used - naos) John 2:19 & 21; Matthew 26:61; Matthew 27:40; Mark 14:58; Mark 15:29

-- The veil torn -- Matthew 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45.

After the tearing of the veil - always referring to Christians or the church or the temple in heaven:

Acts 7:48a; Acts 17:24; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21:21; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 7:15; Revelation 11:19; Revelation 14:15 & Revelation 14:17; Revelation 15:5-6 & Revelation 15:8; Revelation 16:1 & Revelation 16:17; Revelation 21:22

"Exceptions"?:

2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation 11:1-2.

To my way of thinking, the pattern seen above makes it obvious that when God's temple is being spoken about, naos never again refers to the temple in Jerusalem (or any future physical so-called "temple of God") after the tearing of the veil.

The only exception to the above pattern seen in the New Testament is when naos is not talking about God's temple, but a shrine of Diana - and there's only once in the entire New Testament where that is found.​

 

[Randy Kluth]

I understand what you mean.

I don't think you fully understand what I mean, though, so I hope you have the time on your hands to read this below carefully:
​

Of course I understood what you meant! As I said, NT theology itself requires that "hieron," ie the entire OT temple superstructure, lose its validity, such that "naos" could no longer refer to the Mosaic Temple, but could only then refer to a heavenly temple.

My point is that "naos" did not stop meaning "temple," whether of the physical type or the spiritual type. It just happens that the term is used primarily in the NT of the spiritual type because the previous physical type, ie the Mosaic Temple, had become delegitimized.

On this basis we cannot positively determine how "temple" is being used in 2 Thes 2.4. We cannot determine whether it refers to a physical or to a spiritual temple without presupposing that simply by arguing that it is *predominantly* used in the NT. It is not even *exclusively* used as a spiritual temple.

Again, the definition of "naos" did not change, and it continued to apply, in the NT Scriptures, to physical temples, depending on the context. I gave you the examples.

Rev 11.1 in particular refers to a physical temple, even the Mosaic one, though only in the sense of it being a symbolic representation of it. The ark and the altar are also depicted as physical in the Revelation, though again, it is a symbolic presentation of their heavenly realities.

The definition of "temple" then, whether hieron or naos, refers to a physical representation of a spiritual reality. This is true OT and NT. How we define these terms doesn't make a difference. But as you suggest, how they are used in the NT does suggest a change in how they are used. What change this is has to be determined not by definition or by predominance of use but largely by NT theology, in my opinion.

In sum, we are saying pretty much the same thing except using different arguments. Your argument of how the term "naos" is used predominantly in the NT does not prove how it is used in 2 Thes 2. But I believe NT theology is sufficient to disprove any NT temple that could be used by Antichrist.

 

[Truth7t7]

In 2 Thessalonians 2, Apostle Paul was warning the brethren against false doctrine some crept in unawares was spreading. So he sent them that 2 Thess.2 Epistle to remind the brethren of what he had taught them at the first.

2 Thess 2:1-5
2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
KJV


If you study all... of your Bible, then it becomes easy to understand just who Apostle Paul is talking about as that coming "man of sin" and "son of perdition" that will appear in Jerusalem in a new stone temple for the end, and set himself up over all that is called... God, or that is worshipped.

Apostle Paul then later links the false working by that coming "man of sin" to Jerusalem with the false one Lord Jesus taught about for the end in His Olivet discourse of Matthew 24:23-26. Jesus warned that if someone comes up to you and says something like, "Lo, Christ is here, or there", Jesus said do not believe it. That is within the time of "great tribulation" He showed, which is only at the very end of this present world. And that is the "man of sin" that Paul was reminding the brethren about (including us today).

That future event about that "man of sin" coming to play God in Jerusalem for the end, also involves another standing Jewish stone temple in Jerusalem, what Paul pointed to with "the temple of God".

Jesus showed that too when He quoted from the Book of Daniel about the "abomination of desolation" idol event that will spiritually desolate the future Jew's temple in Jerusalem, per Daniel 11, Daniel 9:27, and Daniel 8:9-14. Now if you have not studied about that prophecy per the Book of Daniel for the end of this world, then you will default to men's stupid theories that leave Bible Scripture, and who are not given to understand this event for the very end of this world.

Paul's (Man Of Sin) will be a future literal human man, of Jewish-Hebrew decent

 

[Davy]

We Christians build Church's and Cathedrals to worship God in.
If we go to live in the holy Land, as is well prophesied, then we would build a new Temple in Jerusalem. As Zechariah 6:15 says.

Regarding the 'man of sin', he must be alive now and will be revealed when he sits in the new Temple, as described in 2 Thess 2:4.
Jesus was not talking about a past event in Matthew 24:15.......let the reader understand. Seems some don't want to understand.

Jesus wasn't pointing to flesh-born Antichrist either.

 

[Davy]

I have studied it all, and taken note of the fact that It was all written in Greek first, and the noticeable thing about the temple written about in 2 Thess 2:4 is that Paul used the Greek word naós in reference to that temple - a word which he consistently used when speaking about the bodies of individual Christians, and the congregations of Christians as the tabernacle (temple) of God (1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; and Ephesians 2:21-22).

However Paul used the Greek word hierón in reference to the temple in Jerusalem (which was still standing) in 1 Corinthians 9:13.
​

That argument is baseless, simply because Greek naos (NT:3485) is not always used about a 'spiritual temple' idea...

Matt 23:16
16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple (Greek naos), it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
KJV

For what you are suggesting to be true, ALL... New Testament references to a stone temple in Jerusalem would have to be only Greek hieron (NT:2411).

Furthermore, the idea that a false one could sit over the SPIRITUAL TEMPLE which is of The SPIRIT is a ludicrous idea! Reason is because per Paul in Ephesians 2, the spiritual temple foundation is made up of Christ's Apostles, the prophets and Lord Jesus Himself as its Cornerstone!

So all that would have be corrupted by anyone trying to sit over it playing God! That very stupid idea of a false one sitting over the Temple of The Spirit in Christ is an obvious doctrine of the 'crept in unawares'! I am so surprised at brethren falling for that one dreamed up by Christ's enemies!

The "temple of God" that Apostle Paul was talking about in 2 Thess.2:4 is about a STONE TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM FOR THE END OF THIS WORLD. That... is what the coming "man of sin", the Antichrist, is going to come and sit in, and play GOD, and eventually setup an IDOL image in it for false worship. That is what Jesus was pointing to for the end about the "abomination of desolation" event He quoted from the Book of Daniel.

But I see the 'false Jews' of the "synagogue of Satan" trying to work against this simple Biblical fact of a literal stone temple built for the end of THIS world that will house FALSE IDOL WORSHIP by the unbelieving Jews! They are going to WORSHIP that coming "man of sin" thinking he is The Messiah, as written. Nothing you or I can do about it except try to warn them.

 

[Zao is life]

That argument is baseless, simply because Greek naos (NT:3485) is not always used about a 'spiritual temple' idea...

Matt 23:16
16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple (Greek naos), it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
KJV

For what you are suggesting to be true, ALL... New Testament references to a stone temple in Jerusalem would have to be only Greek hieron (NT:2411).

Furthermore, the idea that a false one could sit over the SPIRITUAL TEMPLE which is of The SPIRIT is a ludicrous idea! Reason is because per Paul in Ephesians 2, the spiritual temple foundation is made up of Christ's Apostles, the prophets and Lord Jesus Himself as its Cornerstone!

So all that would have be corrupted by anyone trying to sit over it playing God! That very stupid idea of a false one sitting over the Temple of The Spirit in Christ is an obvious doctrine of the 'crept in unawares'! I am so surprised at brethren falling for that one dreamed up by Christ's enemies!

The abomination of desolation was placed in the sanctuary of the 2nd temple where the Spirit of God met with His people by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who identified himself with Zeus, the king of the gods and idol that he place in the temple sanctuary, causing all Jews to sacrificfe pigs to it on the altar in the temple.

But according to your argument the above is impossible.

I have other posts further up which answer your other objection (Post #29 sums it up), so I won't repeat them here.

 

[Davy]

I partly agree, because this is what Wikipedia has to say about the phrase "Abomination of Desolation":
​

=================================​

"Abomination of Desolation" is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with which the 2nd century BC Greek king Antiochus IV Epiphanes replaced the twice-daily offering in the Jewish temple, or alternatively the altar on which such offerings were made."
(Abomination of desolation - Wikipedia)​

=================================​

​

I refer to the Jewish historian Josephus when speaking about Antiochus IV. He conquered Jerusalem in 170 B.C. with army, didn't he? That's how he got control of the Jew's 2nd temple in Jerusalem. The FINAL Antichrist for the very end of this world doesn't come to power using an army, because the Book of Daniel shows he will come to power as king using peace and flatteries. What does that show about the Daniel AOD event then that Jesus quoted among His Signs of the end?

It shows what Antiochus IV did only serves as a 'blueprint' for the FINAL event at the end of this world. Even the 70 A.D. destruction of the 2nd temple complex by the Romans only serves as a 'blueprint' for the FINAL destruction on the day of Christ's future return.

Thus the Preterists who try to slide the "abomination of desolation" event back in history are just allowing the false crept in unawares of false Jews of the "synagogue of Satan" to fool them.

 

[Davy]

The abomination of desolation was placed in the sanctuary of the 2nd temple where the Spirit of God met with His people by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who identified himself with Zeus, the king of the gods and idol that he place in the temple sanctuary, causing all Jews to sacrificfe pigs to it on the altar in the temple.

But according to your argument the above is impossible.

I have other posts further up which answer your other objection (Post #29 sums it up), so I won't repeat them here.

You shouldn't make FALSE STATEMENTS that shows you don't know what you're talking about.

MY argument is from God's Word as written! Your's is by false Jews of the "synagogue of Satan" that you instead heed. You mean you really don't think there's those of us here that can tell when unbelieving Jews come here trying to push false doctrine on a Christian forum???

Antiochus IV served ONLY AS A BLUEPRINT, he did NOT fulfill all the parameters of the Daniel 11 prophecy.

And you trying to suggest that anyone who DISAGREES with your 'doctrine of men' on that OUTSIDE BIBLE SCRIPTURE is pushing an impossible argument shows your character is NOT to be trusted!

 

[covenantee]

So all that would have be corrupted by anyone trying to sit over it playing God!

What do you call this?

1. “All the names which in the Scripture are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, De Conciliorum Auctoriatate (On the Authority of the Councils) Bk 2, chap. 17
2. “The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God. He is the divine monarch and supreme emperor, and king of kings. Hence the pope is crowned with a triple crown, as King of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions.” Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, vol.6, art. “Papa II”
3. “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” Pope Leo XIII, in an encyclical letter dated June 20, 1894, The Great Encyclical Letters of Leo XIII, p. 304.

That very stupid idea of a false one sitting over the Temple of The Spirit in Christ is an obvious doctrine of the 'crept in unawares'!

There's nothing more stupid than the ravings of the spiritually blind natural mind. 1 Corinthians 2:14

 

[Zao is life]

You shouldn't make FALSE STATEMENTS that shows you don't know what you're talking about.

MY argument is from God's Word as written! Your's is by false Jews of the "synagogue of Satan" that you instead heed. You mean you really don't think there's those of us here that can tell when unbelieving Jews come here trying to push false doctrine on a Christian forum???

Antiochus IV served ONLY AS A BLUEPRINT, he did NOT fulfill all the parameters of the Daniel 11 prophecy.

And you trying to suggest that anyone who DISAGREES with your 'doctrine of men' on that OUTSIDE BIBLE SCRIPTURE is pushing an impossible argument shows your character is NOT to be trusted!

I said according to your post, what Antiochus IV did was impossible, because God's sanctuary where the Holy Spirit met with His people could not be defiled, according to what you said in your post.

I was going to report this post, saying this isn't acceptable (because it is indeed unacceptable). But stooping to the same level isn't in my character. If you are going to become that angry and attack my character because I disagree with your OP, well then that's it.

I stand by what I said because that is my opinion.

Goodbye.

 

[Keraz]

The Antichrist man:

Nahum 1:1-14 An oracle of the Lord against His enemies. The Lord is a jealous and avenging God. He directs His wrath against those who refuse Him. The Lord is slow to anger and of great power. He will not let the guilty go unpunished.
He causes droughts and earthquakes. Who can stand before His anger and wrath poured out like fire, rocks shatter before Him

The Lord is a refuge in times of trouble – He cares for those who trust Him
Why do you conspire against the Lord? He will make an end of you.

From you, Assyria, one has come forth, a wicked counsellor – plotting evil against the Lord.
Assyria; this is what the Lord has ordained for you. I will destroy you and your idols. Your grave is ready, for you are of no account. Isaiah 31:8-9

Nahum 1:12-15 The Lord says; Judah, though your punishment has been great, yet it will pass away and be gone. Your enemies are many, but they will be gone and the yoke laid on you will be lifted.
Look; here is the one who brings good news, who proclaims peace. Keep your festivals, Judah and fulfil your vows. No more will your enemies invade you, they are totally destroyed.

Nahum 2:1 The Lord will restore the pride of Israel, [all 12 tribes, plus those grafted in] though enemies have ravaged them.
Reference: REB, NIV. Some verses abridged.

Nahum chapters 2 & 3 describes the enemies of the Lord, portrayed by Assyria, as it was destroyed in ancient times, but also what will happen in the future to those who reject the Lord and persecute His people.

Nahum: His name means “comfort, consolation”. He lived about 660 to 610BC, after the Assyrian conquest of the Northern tribes of Israel, but before the Babylonian conquest of Judah in 585BC. Capernaum literally means ‘the village of Nahum”.

Nahum shows God to be slow to anger, but One who will not clear the guilty and will bring His vengeance and retribution to pass. Nineveh was conquered by the Medes and Persians in 612BC as predicted so graphically by Nahum- squadrons of horses charging madly... troops dressed in scarlet...the palace topples down...slave girls moaning like doves....myriads of slain, heaps of corpses...all who hear of your fate clap hands, etc.

But, chapter one, particularly, must be future prophecy as well, as Paul quotes Nahum 1:15 in Romans 10:15. Nahum 1:11 tells about a ‘wicked counsellor’ who comes from Assyria. This seems to refer to the Anti Christ, still to come.

Then in Nahum 1:12-13 specifically says that Judah is being punished, but after that, their enemies will be no more. Today, the persecution of the Jews still continues – pogroms, the Holocaust, anti Semitism, etc. Therefore, this prophecy is yet to be completed. The final Judgement and punishment of Judah will happen at the same time as their enemies. Jeremiah 12:14

 

[Timtofly]

Well there was also a tone of arrogance in your previous reply to me, No? It put me off trying to work out what you were actually saying by reading the whole post with the unrelated Revelation subject. My post on the word naos was on topic to the OP of this thread.

But enough of the above. Your post quoted above is the first post to me in a while where you are making sense and making yourself 100% clear. Thank you.

I don't believe you are correct, because the inner court of the physical temple - the holy place and the most holy place - was the place where only God's priests were allowed to enter. Outside of the holy place, and separated by walls, were two courts - one for Jews only, and another one - furthest from the holy place - for the Gentiles (where the Gentiles were allowed into).

The Gentiles were not allowed further than the outermost court. Revelation 11:1-2 uses the physical temple structure in Jerusalem (which was no longer standing by the time the Revelation was written) to create an image that we will understand:

1 And a reed like a rod was given to me. And the angel stood, saying, Rise up and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and those who worship in it.
2 But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it was given to the Gentiles.

And they will trample the holy city forty-two months.

Jerusalem had also ceased being Jewish - conquered by the Romans - by the time the above was written. There was now only one "holy city" - New Jerusalem.

Those who worship in the temple of God are the faithful saints.

IMO John is basically being told to count the sheep (those who worship in the temple of God are being measured - not just the temple and its altar), because the time has come when no more people will be joined to the temple of God. The world is going to become divided between those sealed with the seal of God, who worship in God's temple, and those who are outside, in "the court of the Gentiles":-

5 The beast was given a mouth speaking proud words and blasphemies, and he was permitted to exercise ruling authority for forty-two months.
6 So the beast opened his mouth to blaspheme against God - to blaspheme both his name and his dwelling place, that is, those who dwell in heaven.
7 The beast was permitted to go to war against the saints and conquer them. He was given ruling authority over every tribe, people, language, and nation. --Revelation 13.
8 and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed.

1 And a reed like a rod was given to me. And the angel stood, saying, Rise up and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and those who worship in it.
2 But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it was given to the Gentiles.

And they will trample the holy city forty-two months.

He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God's temple, displaying himself as God. --2Thessalonians 2:4.

I believe that this possibly means that the man of sin = the beast, and he's going to make himself the head of the church, or will be someone who currently holds "the office" of "head of the church" - but whatever the case may be (I don't pretend to myself I know exactly how it's going to play out), the temple of God is going to be defiled:

6 So the beast opened his mouth to blaspheme against God - to blaspheme both his name and his dwelling place, that is, those who dwell in heaven.​

The Temple was being measured because it was new. Paul was mentioning this new Temple as led by the Holy Spirit. Satan is not omnipresent and cannot sit in the body of many believers. Nor is that a corporal spiritual body. The church is not identified as having a central authority over the entire earth. The church is only each individual believer.

"And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations."

Those verses never say the tabernacle was in heaven. People are in heaven.

You are mixing up and conflating the church with some organized religion that may or may not have a central governmental body. The Mormans have a central authority. The RCC operates out of the Vatican. Even some Protestant groups have a central authority. The Church herself is simply a group of local believers.

Religion is represented in Revelation as the whore. Religion is symbolically destroyed by the ten horns or kings without a kingdom.

This mention of a false prophet in these verses you quote from Revelation 13 is not about religion nor the church. It is about the removal of God and religion in totality from the earth. It is Satan worship and the worship of Satan's accomplishments. Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2 is not even talking about any human. That is the point. Paul is talking about Satan sitting on the throne Jesus set up in the Temple in Jerusalem, Jesus set up.

The Temple is this place where Jesus as King and as God is now sitting in authority over all nations, according the the 7th Trumpet.

"And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever."

This is still in regards to the Temple mentioned in verse 1. It was given that after this declaration in verse 15, there is still the possibility that the Gentiles would still trample the courtyard 42 months after the 7th Trumpet has sounded. Certainly they had not been trampling 42 months prior to the 7th Trumpet sounding.

Interpretation is consistent between Paul and John they are both talking about the authority given to Satan who is this "man of sin" and goes into perdition.

I have a slightly different take on Satan being "bound" in the first century. I think Satan walked more openly and freely and those interacting with Satan knew he was a literal angel of God. Others may have just seen him as another male on earth. But the first coming and the Gospel placed Satan in a self imposed moratorium. If Satan walked around freely with authority that would legitimize the Gospel, Jesus, and God. Every point Satan is trying to eradicate from human understanding. So Satan worked behind the scenes, with religion and knowledge, known as science. Thus he has succeeded in removing what humans accept as truth as far from God's Word as possible, and even the church has been decieved.

John even pointed out that Pergamos was Satan's seat of authority. Interestingly the land was sold by a Greek king to a Roman ruler when Greece was ending as the third beast of Daniel and the 4th beast was taking over, Rome. So Satan is symbolized as the beast that was and is not, and will come out of the pit, again to freely walk about among humans. The reason being that Jesus and the angels are also on the earth, and Satan does not need to make people think he does not exist.

The other point about 2 Thessalonians 2 and the wrong claim, about some AC, is the timing.

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand."

Two distinct points of reference: the Second Coming and the Day of Christ.

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come."

The day of Christ is the entire reign of authority as King. The Second Coming is the means of Jesus accomplishing this rule on earth, by coming to the earth.

Even some pre-mill state this is the last day of the earth, but imply the last "24 hour" day.

Paul is consistent with John that Satan will be ousted prior to the 1,000 year reign, not the Second Coming. It will be the Second Coming and the removal of spiritual blindness that allows Satan to come out of hiding.

One can argue interpretation based on bias. But the bias would be both ways. Many explain away the day of Christ or the Day of the Lord. I embrace the Day.