Two witnesses 2+2=2?

[Elle]

Hi Terry,
You said:
"Ok I was looking for pictorial proof, not just some writing that dates way back in time and could not possibly prove those stones as you claim are sitll there! And after reading your post I did search and found ZERO validation...thus far.

Josephus is the validation that stones were still standing. He said the Tower of Antonia was still standing. You can see the Western Wall, which is a remnant of the 2nd temple, though there is some debate over that wall being an actual part of the 2nd temple.

You said:
"All the ministers and theologians claiming the location of the Temple is unknow as of yet... are liars because those stones remain, and yet I can find no picture nor script claiming they are there or ever was."

I'm sure some are, you know, wolves in sheep's clothing. So you believe them, but not Josephus who was actually there. From my understanding, religious leaders over in Jerusalem give archaeologists a hard time about excavating the Temple Mount.

You said:
I real recently looked up Daily Sacrifice, knowing the Jews have started some sacrifices, yet I discovered many internet sites claiming the Jews no longer do sacrifices, claiming the Jews have substituted animal sacrifices for other means of atonement. Yet my aunt went to Israel and saw first hand .. animal sacrifices.

Well, you need to prove that point, just as you are asking me to prove mine. I need pictures of the Jews sacrificing animals. Your aunt is not proof. Did she take pictures, that would be proof?

You said:
"So with all the photos of the courtyard I have seen and none qualifying stones still standing in the courtyard... my guessis your inforamation is skewed."

Depends what you believe. I never said you had to believe it, make up your own mind.

You said:
"Also I found no web site saying the Jews held these stones as proof against Jesus being Messiah."

The second link I provided you says that. That was where I got my info regarding that the Jews use that as proof that Yeshua was not the Messiah. Might not have been the best source though. Upon further research into "Why Jews don't believe Yeshua was the Messiah?", I could find none.

You said:
"also you said... " Probably, you would have to search for it though. " - I did not make that claim...you did. You also said those stones are still there, but you have no proof of that. If you make the claim, should you not also be able to provide the reference and a reference to those stones standing today given my a person who dies many centuries ago is not proof of validation. I know, you all ready stated that earlier."

Never said you did, you asked "Is there a web site where this can be viewed?. I answered your question, you are the one who needs proof, I don't. I accept Josephus' account, you don't like my source, then I am sorry. Sometimes you have to take things on faith. How can you believe the apostles who died many centuries ago, FAITH!

You said:
I also researched reasons the Jews do not accept Jesus and the claim about the stones was not located anywhere I searched.

I know, you all ready stated that earlier when you said: "Also I found no web site saying the Jews held these stones as proof against Jesus being Messiah."
And I answered accordingly.

 

[veteran]

All Daniel does is prove Jeremiah's prophecy, which came from God's word, true. He does not link the two prophecies together, as you are trying to in determinig a day for a year. Jeremiahs prophecy was explicitly stated as years Jerusalem would be carried away. That was explicit, and not prophetic language. And somehow, you are saying this explicitness shows that Daniel's language is prophetic. It makes no sense whatsoever.

This is why it is agreed that Daniel's language is prophetic, and that in this prophetic language, it is implied.

And as for the "rehash", no one can give me the biblical basis for the 69th week, and the 70th week being split up. It is not even implied in scripture. In prophetic language, "70 weeks" are determined for Israel. Once again I would like to ask, where is the Biblical basis for the division of Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy. There is none. 490 years were given to them from the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem, as was given by Anterexes (very bad spelling).

Please give me the basis that the 490 years actually meant Over 2000 years.

Daniel didn't link the two prophecies, God did by sending the angel to Daniel in answer to his prayer of Dan.9 about deliverance of his people. And since today we already know... the first two periods totalling 69 sevens have been fulfilled already per the given events there, and it is in YEARS, then it doesn't take much common sense to grasp the association of the 70 years prophecy given Jeremiah that Daniel was studying.

 

[Elle]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Hi Terry,[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]First of all, I have noticed in other posts you have made, that unless someone agrees with you, then they are wrong. I have answered you point for point, but you do not have the courtesy to do likewise. You avoid responding to questions. Two that I can think of are when I asked you to prove the 2 witnesses are gentiles from a previous post and also in regards for proof, other than your aunt's word, in regards to her seeing animal sacrifices performed (quite honestly, I could care less on the latter proof, just making a point). You need to lay off. I am not trying to change how you see things. I always state in my posts that I am not out to change what one believes, but to give them a new perspective. They are free to take it or leave it. And I always state it is what I believe or this is the way I have come to understand it. Why does what I believe bother you so much? Might it be because it conflicts with the way you have come to understand what transpires during the end times? Maybe you are one of those people who desperately needs a 3rd temple to be rebuilt because you garner comfort in that belief. Makes you feel like you have control over the situation. Quit forcing your beliefs on me, that is not something a Christian would do. I have to wonder how many people you have turned away from God based on the vibe coming through these posts. I picture you with steam coming out of your ears, eyes bulging, neck vein throbbing and beads of sweat all over your forehead when anyone challenges what you believe. You need to relax and calm down. Now to answer your questions/comments below.[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"Notice below that although i states the foundation trench of the souther wall... is told, no mention of any stones of Solomon's Temple is addressed, of coursse... why would one address something not there."[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Your concern, is not my concern.[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background][/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]If there were stones still standing... then eplain WHY is there a NEW location found... for the stones being there since 70AD would have always shown where the Temple was located.[/background][/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]I am not the one who needs this assurance, you do. Quit demanding explanations that don't concern me, but you. [/background][/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"This one conveys... Since every stone of Solomon's Temple has disappeared..." [/background]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]That's very nice.[/background][/background]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"Every Stone has disappeared,... Yet, it is your contention there are stones still standing???"[/background]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Yes, that is my contention.[/background]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]There[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)] are no[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)] stones[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)] to be found on top one another of this former [/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Temple [/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]as ... as the place where [/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Solomon[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)], Zerubbabel and Herod constructed [/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]their Temples[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]. ..... one of the truly great buildings of the classical world (which is[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)] still standing[/background][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"[/background]

The temple was more than just the temple itself. Go to Blue Letter Bible and click on the word "temple" in Matthew 24:1, it will have this to say about the word "temple" that was used in reference to their not being on stone upon another:

The word "temple" in the NT, with respect to the temple at Jerusalem, often referred to the entire precinct which included the sanctuary, courts, and other buildings. The temple of Jerusalem consisted of the whole of the sacred enclosure, embracing the entire aggregate of buildings, balconies, porticos, courts (that is that of the men of Israel, that of the women, and that of the priests), belonging to the temple; the latter designates the sacred edifice properly so called, consisting of two parts, the "sanctuary" or "Holy Place" (which no one except the priests was allowed to enter), and the "Holy of Holies" or "the most holy place" (which was entered only on the great day of atonement by the high priest alone). Also there were the courts where Jesus or the apostles taught or encountered adversaries, and the like, "in the temple"; also the courts of the temple, of the Gentiles, out of which Jesus drove the buyers and sellers and the money changers, court of the women.

The Greek word used for temple in this verse (Matthew24:1) is: "hiero" which means:
1) a sacred place, temple
a.) used of the temple of Artemis at Ephesus
b.) used of the temple at Jerusalem

The Greek word used for just the temple, excluding all buildings and other structures, is "naos" which means:
1) used of the temple at Jerusalem, but only of the sacred edifice (or sanctuary) itself, consisting of the Holy place and the Holy of Holies (in classical Greek it is used of the sanctuary or cell of the temple, where the image of the god was placed which is distinguished from the whole enclosure)
2) any heathen temple or shrine
3) metaph. the spiritual temple consisting of the saints of all ages joined together by and in Christ What is "covienced"? If you meant convinced, then no, I am not.

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"Still not convienced?"[/background]

What is "covienced"? If you meant convinced, then no, I am not.

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]You said:[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]"Sooner or later I must say these stones are not there, and so, the contention that the Jews still deny Jesus because not all the stones were cast down...is not valid."[/background]

I all ready responded to you in regards to this when you said and then I said:​

You said:​

"Also I found no web site saying the Jews held these stones as proof against Jesus being Messiah."
I said: The second link I provided you says that. That was where I got my info regarding that the Jews use that as proof that Yeshua was not the Messiah. Might not have been the best source though. Upon further research into "Why Jews don't believe Yeshua was the Messiah?", I could find none.

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, people.

Once in a while, some mischievous Jews or Christians will bring up the Western Wall as proof that the stones were not so cast down as Yeshua` predicted. Those stones are of the RETENTION WALL that supports the level ground where once the Temple was assumed to have been built. It is NOT a part of the Temple at all. In fact, much of it has been added by the Ottoman Empire to help support the platform upon which the Dome of the Rock and the Mosque of Omar sit.

The actual stones of the Herodian Temple (the Temple of Solomon was destroyed LONG AGO), were pulled apart by the Romans after the Temple was set on fire. Much of the gold of the Temple melted and ran between the stones, and to retrieve it, they pulled the stones apart.

It happened as Yeshua` said it would, and we can rest assured that Yeshua`s prophecy came true.

 

[Raeneske]

Shalom, people.

Once in a while, some mischievous Jews or Christians will bring up the Western Wall as proof that the stones were not so cast down as Yeshua` predicted. Those stones are of the RETENTION WALL that supports the level ground where once the Temple was assumed to have been built. It is NOT a part of the Temple at all. In fact, much of it has been added by the Ottoman Empire to help support the platform upon which the Dome of the Rock and the Mosque of Omar sit.

The actual stones of the Herodian Temple (the Temple of Solomon was destroyed LONG AGO), were pulled apart by the Romans after the Temple was set on fire. Much of the gold of the Temple melted and ran between the stones, and to retrieve it, they pulled the stones apart.

It happened as Yeshua` said it would, and we can rest assured that Yeshua`s prophecy came true.

Bingo. And as stated before, though not to upset, or to continually post, the 70 weeks of Daniel happened when God said they would. They got 490 years, and that was it. Not 490 + about 2000.

 

[tgwprophet]

Hi Elle, you aksed... I asked you to prove the 2 witnesses are gentiles from a previous post

first, i did not mean to leave your questions un-antended...
The two witnees are not accepted by the Jews, though the power they possess and that they will not sesire to harm any Jew and will agree the Jews are God's chosen people... why are the not accepted... because they are not Jews. Where id proof the gentiles are grafted unto the vine of the Jews? Where are Gentile Christian Prophets? - answer.. the two witnesses. An there wil be more proof... and absolute proof to come.


You posted ... " The word "temple" in the NT, with respect to the temple at Jerusalem, often referred to the entire precinct which included the sanctuary, courts, and other buildings. The ..."
The word " often " does not validate the claim. Thouh you added more it does not add any validation to this. What does validate my claims... fact.. we are in the endtimes, fact.... Jesus is Lord, fact...there has been no other even like him.

Ok Elle, I never meant to anger anyone. Yes, my stand is pretty firm... the knowledge I give is usually followed with fact or guess or speulation. I never meant to offend you, and i am sorry you felt that way. I do realize i can be pretty adamant especilly concerning the two witnesses, later, I hope you will learn why that is so, and will forever be so.

On the internet I have seen both claims of animal scrifices and claims there are no animal sacrifices. Knowing my aunt, I must take her word. That does not mean I am trying to force you to take her word.


Makes you feel like you have control over the situation.
You could not believe the amount of control, but you will. I know that sounds self-righteous but it really is not.

Peace Elle I am not against you, though we have diverse beliefs - and I do appreciate other perspectives, guess I was harsher to you than I intended. I will try to temper my words better. Thank you for pointing it out because it is not my desire to be offensive.

according to the second link you posted... when i click on it..... i get only a green box.

 

[Elle]

Hi Terry,

You said:
"first, i did not mean to leave your questions un-antended...
The two witnees are not accepted by the Jews, though the power they possess and that they will not sesire to harm any Jew and will agree the Jews are God's chosen people... why are the not accepted... because they are not Jews. Where id proof the gentiles are grafted unto the vine of the Jews? Where are Gentile Christian Prophets? - answer.. the two witnesses. An there wil be more proof... and absolute proof to come."

Thank you and for sake of argument, we will agree to disagree.

You said:
"The word " often " does not validate the claim. Thouh you added more it does not add any validation to this. What does validate my claims... fact.. we are in the endtimes, fact.... Jesus is Lord, fact...there has been no other even like him."

That is fine.

You said:
"Ok Elle, I never meant to anger anyone. Yes, my stand is pretty firm... the knowledge I give is usually followed with fact or guess or speulation. I never meant to offend you, and i am sorry you felt that way. I do realize i can be pretty adamant especilly concerning the two witnesses, later, I hope you will learn why that is so, and will forever be so."

It's fine to have a firm stance, it's how the stance is projected that was bothersome. I accept your apology. I am pretty firm in my understanding of the 2 witnesses and doubt much will change in that regard.

You said:
"On the internet I have seen both claims of animal scrifices and claims there are no animal sacrifices. Knowing my aunt, I must take her word. That does not mean I am trying to force you to take her word."

Remains to be seen, but I personally don't believe animal sacrifices will resume until after the 1000 years has started.

You said:
"You could not believe the amount of control, but you will. I know that sounds self-righteous but it really is not."

?????????????

You said:
"Peace Elle I am not against you, though we have diverse beliefs - and I do appreciate other perspectives, guess I was harsher to you than I intended. I will try to temper my words better. Thank you for pointing it out because it is not my desire to be offensive."

Your welcome and peace to you as well.

You said:
"according to the second link you posted... when i click on it..... i get only a green box."

http://www.jesus-mes...-one-stone.html

 

[tgwprophet]

Elle, understand there are allot of cliche's tossed about again and again until people actually take them as wisdom... I have other perspectives... so you used one... " Thank you and for sake of argument, we will agree to disagree. "
I nearly never agree to dis-agree... for in dis-agreement......one is always wrong sometimes both.
Have you ever heard these?
life is not fair or Don't allow your friends to take avantage of you
allow me to introduce you to my wisdom instead of cliche's (all wisdom comes from God)

Life is not fair................untrue Life is fair... people are not
Don't allow your friends to take advantage of you.......... not true... allow your friends to take advantage of you AND take advantageeof your friends that is why we are friends!...however do not allow friends to abuse advantage of you and do not abuse advantage of your friends or others.

you wrote: " I am pretty firm in my understanding of the 2 witnesses and doubt much will change in that regard. " That will definately change, I gaurantee it...

Remains to be seen, but I personally don't believe animal sacrifices will resume until after the 1000 years has started. I never claimed that the Jews would re-start after the 1,000 year reign of Christ begins. However before Tribulation begins the Daily sacrifice will begin and end. I am not sure how or why you thought I had it figured differently than this.

????????????? Yes, i know... but, that will be revealed in time.
Who would know more about the two witnesses than one of the two witnesses? I do know them and I have known them both for a really long time. Consider that true and you can easily understand why my contentions are so strong. Skepticle? I would not prefer anything else, so that is quite ok, but does not mean I lie, so please don't run head-on into denial. Oh, I am not the only one who knows them.

http://www.jesus-mes...-one-stone.html
Nope.... still just a small green box

 

[Elle]

Hi Terry,

You said:
"Elle, understand there are allot of cliche's tossed about again and again until people actually take them as wisdom... I have other perspectives... so you used one..." Thank you and for sake of argument, we will agree to disagree."
I nearly never agree to dis-agree... for in dis-agreement......one is always wrong sometimes both."

True, but neither of us knows who is wrong for sure. You would say I am and I would say you are, so based upon that we must agree to disagree because neither of us are going to convince the other. I am not trying to convince anyone of what I believe. I just came here to read other's perspectives and to offer mine. I know when to speak and when to remain silent.


You said:
That will definately change, I gaurantee it...

I guarantee you it won't.

You said:
"I never claimed that the Jews would re-start after the 1,000 year reign of Christ begins. However before Tribulation begins the Daily sacrifice will begin and end. I am not sure how or why you thought I had it figured differently than this."

I wasn't saying you claimed that, I am saying that that is what I believe. I believe animal sacrifices will resume after the 1000 years have started based on Ezekiel's prophecy.

You said:
"Yes, i know... but, that will be revealed in time.
Who would know more about the two witnesses than one of the two witnesses? I do know them and I have known them both for a really long time. Consider that true and you can easily understand why my contentions are so strong. Skepticle? I would not prefer anything else, so that is quite ok, but does not mean I lie, so please don't run head-on into denial. Oh, I am not the only one who knows them."

There are 4 common and 1 less common view(s) as to who the 2 witnesses are. Some believe it is Enoch/Elijah, some believe Elijah/Moses, some believe the OT/NT, some believe Yeshua/Holy Spirit and some believe Michael/Gabriel. I don't believe it's any of these. Of these 5, the one I did believe at one time was the OT/NT, and from a spiritual perspective it fit. I no longer believe that though.


You said:
"Nope.... still just a small green box"

Hmmmm, I don't know. When I click on it, it takes me to the link.

 

[veteran]

Naw, all the 70 sevens of Daniel 9:24 were NOT fulfilled in 70 A.D. by the Romans destroying Jerusalem and the temple. Right after the 70 weeks being fulfilled the sanctuary is to be cleansed ("anoint the most Holy"). That has NEVER happened yet in history, for there has been no Israelite sanctuary in Jerusalem in order to be cleansed since 70 A.D. You guys are simply following a doctrine of men and not the prophecy as written.

 

[Raeneske]

Naw, all the 70 sevens of Daniel 9:24 were NOT fulfilled in 70 A.D. by the Romans destroying Jerusalem and the temple. Right after the 70 weeks being fulfilled the sanctuary is to be cleansed ("anoint the most Holy"). That has NEVER happened yet in history, for there has been no Israelite sanctuary in Jerusalem in order to be cleansed since 70 A.D. You guys are simply following a doctrine of men and not the prophecy as written.

70 AD does not mark the end of the 70 weeks prophecy. 34 AD does, when the gospel was turned from the Israelites, unto the gentiles. Now, where in Daniel 9 is it asking for the Sanctuary to be cleansed?

And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine. (Leviticus 20:26 KJV)

Exalt the Lord our God, and worship at his holy hill; for the Lord our God is holy. (Psalm 99:9 KJV)

The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works. (Psalm 145:17 KJV)

And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. (Isaiah 6:3 KJV)

As for our redeemer, the Lord of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel. (Isaiah 47:4 KJV)

I am the Lord, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King. (Isaiah 43:15 KJV)

There is none holy as the Lord: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. (1 Samuel 2:2 KJV)

The Lord is holy. So Him being the most Holy, makes sense as well. He was the annointed one, meaning the Messiah.

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; (Isaiah 61:1 KJV)

The Lord, the annointed one, is the Messiah, which means the annointed one. The Lord was annointed by His Father.

Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (Hebrews 1:9 KJV)

We see the Father annointing the Son here. So yes, all of Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy has been fulfilled. It happened when God said it would. Israel got their 490 years, and that was it. Please, show me where the interjectory time is.

 

[veteran]

70 AD does not mark the end of the 70 weeks prophecy. 34 AD does, when the gospel was turned from the Israelites, unto the gentiles. Now, where in Daniel 9 is it asking for the Sanctuary to be cleansed?

Dan 9:24
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
(KJV)

Dan 8:13-14
13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
(KJV)

Christ's crucifixion ended the 69th seven or week. It did not fulfill the final "one week" of Dan.9:27. There was no cleansing of the sanctuary after Christ's crucifixion, because in 70 A.D. the temple and Jerusalem were both destroyed. Around 136 A.D. a temple to Jupiter was even built upon the temple mount and later destroyed, and then around 700 A.D. Islam built their mosque upon it. The time of cleansing and anointing the most Holy is about the temple of Ezekiel being set, which is for Christ's second coming. Still has not happened yet.

 

[Rex]

One of you is speaking of anointing Jesus the other a building.

maybe a verse clearly indicating a future "temple building" is needed?
IMO Jesus was already anointed Messiah

 

[veteran]

One of you is speaking of anointing Jesus the other a building.

maybe a verse clearly indicating a future "temple building" is needed?
IMO Jesus was already anointed Messiah

Well, I'm definitely not speaking of that anointing of the most Holy as being Christ Jesus, especially since He already was Anointed. Afterall, that's what His Title of The Christ means, The Anointed.

God already showed you about that future temple that is represented there in Dan.8:14 and Dan.9:24. It's in the Book of Ezekiel.

 

[Rex]

Well I'm not so sure about Dan 8:14 a lot of interpretation to be done there, lets just say it's not clear to every reader.

The Dan 9:24 ESV includes Most Holy place as we can all see. I just went threw several 8 bibles and found two that designate place Young's LT and believe it or not Darby's. Now I can understand Darby's translation because it bolsters his opinion.

An other thought just accrued to me, lets look for a verse or reference to anointing the most holy, I'll be honest I'm not that versed in Jewish customs. But I can't recall the anointing of the most holly place in re-guards to the "earthly" temple.

 

[veteran]

Well I'm not so sure about Dan 8:14 a lot of interpretation to be done there, lets just say it's not clear to every reader.

The Dan 9:24 ESV includes Most Holy place as we can all see. I just went threw several 8 bibles and found two that designate place Young's LT and believe it or not Darby's. Now I can understand Darby's translation because it bolsters his opinion.

An other thought just accrued to me, lets look for a verse or reference to anointing the most holy, I'll be honest I'm not that versed in Jewish customs. But I can't recall the anointing of the most holly place in re-guards to the "earthly" temple.

Hang around for a while, you'll see their cleansing ritual when the Jews build a new temple in Jerusalem in our time prior to Christ's coming to destroy it. Per Numbers 19, the orthodox Jews in Jerusalem have been looking for an unblemished red heifer to do the purification for sin in order to enter upon the temple mount to lay the cornerstone of the new temple. Some groups in the USA have been sending them red heifers for this purification, the last article I read about that being back in the late 1990's.

Did you catch my phrase about the time of Christ's coming to destroy that temple that's going to be built in our days? The great earthquake to occur in Jerusalem on the 7th trumpet - 3rd Woe is going to take care of that.

One of the reasons God gave the specific layout of the Millennial temple in Ezekiel is to mark its 'pattern' in contrast to any other temple built there in Jerusalem. The near-future temple in Jerusalem will not match the Millennial temple given in Ezekiel. He gave that through Ezekiel specifically to the "house of Israel" (ten tribes), and not to the "house of Judah" (Jews).

 

[Rex]

Well that just my point this temple plays such a great part in end times interpreters presentations but the scriptures are rather silent.
In that there is a lot of speculation "about a temple" IMO. As we just seen the term "anoint the most holy" can take different meanings.

In fact there interpretation hinges on it. So they say a temple must exists for prophesy to be fulfilled, that's the evidence they present.

 

[tgwprophet]

Elle wrote: " True, but neither of us knows who is wrong for sure. You would say I am and I would say you are, so based upon that we must agree to disagree because neither of us are going to convince the other "

That neither of us knows who is wrong..is an error. so we need not agree to dis-agree. You assume I am in error. On this, i know you are in error... that will not change. When you understand why I know to the depth I know, then you will agree, because you will want to.

You wrote (in red): " I wasn't saying you claimed that, I am saying that that is what I believe. I believe animal sacrifices will resume after the 1000 years have started based on Ezekiel's prophecy. "

This belief of yours requires Jesus's payment for our sins to be less than 100%. I wish, You should re-think that poisition.

There are 4 common and 1 less common view(s) as to who the 2 witnesses are. Some believe it is Enoch/Elijah, some believe Elijah/Moses, some believe the OT/NT, some believe Yeshua/Holy Spirit and some believe Michael/Gabriel. I don't believe it's any of these. Of these 5, the one I did believe at one time was the OT/NT, and from a spiritual perspective it fit. I no longer believe that though.\

There is another... a 6th. and that one is the two witnesses are Gentile Christian prophets and none of the above, yet one chosen by God and the other chosen by the witness God chose. This one is accurate.

Elle, i really do realize just how FIRM what I am conveying is, I also realize how difficult it must be to allow validity of it. I am ok with skepticism, but skepticism nor denial cannot invalidate what I contend about the two witnesses... ever.. amen.
=======================================

Veteran, according to this post by you... the Sacrifice must begin before the laying of the cornerstone and the cornerstone is the first stone to be laid, meaning the Temple is built after the sacrifice begins.... This approves what I stated when claiming the Temple is not neccessary for the Daily Sacrifice to take place.

" Hang around for a while, you'll see their cleansing ritual when the Jews build a new temple in Jerusalem in our time prior to Christ's coming to destroy it. Per Numbers 19, the orthodox Jews in Jerusalem have been looking for an unblemished red heifer to do the purification for sin in order to enter upon the temple mount to lay the cornerstone of the new temple. Some groups in the USA have been sending them red heifers for this purification, the last article I read about that being back in the late 1990's. "

 

[veteran]

Well that just my point this temple plays such a great part in end times interpreters presentations but the scriptures are rather silent.
In that there is a lot of speculation "about a temple" IMO. As we just seen the term "anoint the most holy" can take different meanings.

In fact there interpretation hinges on it. So they say a temple must exists for prophesy to be fulfilled, that's the evidence they present.

Your idea that the Scriptures are silent about it is your 'own' supposition, for God's Word does point to a stone temple built for the false one to come sit in and proclaim himself as God.

However, if all one does is study the Old Testament Books, and not the New Testament Books also, then I can fathom how someone could say God's Word is silent about it.

Veteran, according to this post by you... the Sacrifice must begin before the laying of the cornerstone and the cornerstone is the first stone to be laid, meaning the Temple is built after the sacrifice begins.... This approves what I stated when claiming the Temple is not neccessary for the Daily Sacrifice to take place.

" Hang around for a while, you'll see their cleansing ritual when the Jews build a new temple in Jerusalem in our time prior to Christ's coming to destroy it. Per Numbers 19, the orthodox Jews in Jerusalem have been looking for an unblemished red heifer to do the purification for sin in order to enter upon the temple mount to lay the cornerstone of the new temple. Some groups in the USA have been sending them red heifers for this purification, the last article I read about that being back in the late 1990's. "

It would appear you're still looking for an edge to get your time alignments of Daniel to fit. Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem have already for years now been doing passover sacrifice on a hill overlooking the temple mount (Temple Mount Faithful). So does that mean the time of sacrifice per Daniel has begun? Absolutely not.

So what I wrote above about the idea of cleansing is just like I said, a cleansing 'they' believe is required with the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water for purification of the Jews just to 'enter' upon the temple mount. Those do NOT represent the daily sacrifice ritual established with the time of temple worship. Two different things.

 

[Elle]

Hello again Terry

You said:
"That neither of us knows who is wrong..is an error. so we need not agree to dis-agree. You assume I am in error. On this, i know you are in error... that will not change. When you understand why I know to the depth I know, then you will agree, because you will want to."

That psycho-babble nonsense might work on some people, but it isn't working on me. OK, we'll agree to disagree that you are in error if that is the way you prefer it. You are so cocksure that you're right, what happens when the day comes and it doesn't unfold as you imagined? I prefer to keep all views in mind with the way I believe at the forefront. That way I have not painted myself into a corner, scratching my head and exclaiming to myself "What the hell happened? I was so dogmatic and refused to even consider or ponder what someone else was trying to reveal. What a fool I've been."

You said:
"This belief of yours requires Jesus's payment for our sins to be less than 100%. I wish, You should re-think that poisition."

No it doesn't, it only appears that way to the beliefs you hold.

You said:
"There is another... a 6th. and that one is the two witnesses are Gentile Christian prophets and none of the above, yet one chosen by God and the other chosen by the witness God chose. This one is accurate."

Believe me, I'm not denying that most, but not all, are gentile Christians. It rests solely upon what your definition of a "gentile" is. This is why I asked you where in scriptures does it say the 2 witnesses are gentiles. It doesn't, but I know 10/12th's of them who think themselves to be gentiles, are in fact not. And no, according to my understanding, it is not accurate.

You said:
"Elle, i really do realize just how FIRM what I am conveying is, I also realize how difficult it must be to allow validity of it. I am ok with skepticism, but skepticism nor denial cannot invalidate what I contend about the two witnesses... ever.. amen."

Like the old BK jingle, "Have it your way, have it your way!" Now that's wisdom at it's finest.