Understanding the Kingdom: Clearing Up the Most Misunderstood Teaching of Jesus

[MatthewG]

I just want to point out that from 70Ad to like 146ad would complete the "your house has been left desolate."

I am not gonna go through each thing one by one.

70 AD → 135/136 AD is the full arc of desolation​

• 70 AD: The Temple is destroyed, Jerusalem burned, priesthood ended, sacrifices stopped. This is the initial desolation — the “house” is struck down.
• 70–130 AD: The land is unstable, repeatedly under Roman military control, with Jewish autonomy gone.
• 132–135 AD (Bar Kokhba Revolt):Rome crushes the final Jewish uprising. After this, Emperor Hadrian:
  • renames Jerusalem “Aelia Capitolina”
  • bans Jews from entering the city entirely
  • renames Judea “Syria Palaestina”
  • levels remaining Jewish structures
  • builds pagan temples over Jewish holy sites

By 135–146 AD, the “house” is not just damaged — it is erased, renamed, repopulated, and forbidden to its original inhabitants.

That is complete desolation.


Thank you for sharing what you believe you needed to share!

A lot of people argue that the wall thing they people pray to is like saying that no stone was left unturned or whatever.

It's weird people pray to a wall.

1. The Western Wall is NOT a wall of the Temple.​

This is the key point.

The Temple had:

• outer courts
• inner courts
• the sanctuary
• the Holy Place
• the Holy of Holies

All of that — every part of the actual Temple structure — was torn down in 70 AD.

The Western Wall is not any of those.

It is:

• a retaining wall
• built by Herod (a Roman client king)
• using Roman engineering
• to hold up the expanded platform of the Temple Mount

It is literally a support wall, not a Temple wall.

So when Jesus said:

“Not one stone will be left upon another” He was talking about the Temple buildings, not the retaining walls around the platform.

And those Temple stones? Gone. Every one.

 

[MatthewG]

A

AI can be useful, it can also be useless when you begin to rely on it for spiritual truth.

Access to God was refined at Sinai as a national focal point because everywhere else, literally, was wholly given over to idolatry. Israel was set apart as a nation to bring hope and revelation to those surrounding nations, granting access to God through the same system of sacrifice pointing to a coming Saviour. Israel failed their calling by keeping everything to themselves. They because insular and elitist.

I agree. But not at 70ad. When Jesus declared "your house is left unto you desolate", was an indication that the rulers of Israel had gone past the point of no return. However, those covenant obligations now reside upon the church, and are encapsulated in what is termed "the great commission". Preaching Christ and Him crucified to every kindred, nation, tongue, and people.

God forbid we should become fundamental believers in scripture right?
Demons real? Nuh, Jesus was imagining them.

A real devil? Satan, Lucifer, the dragon, just metaphors right? Once you accept that, Eden becomes a myth, the fall a fable, sin a human condition rather than a transgression against God's Law.

Revelation about the future? That, and more. Primarily about Jesus, who will come again as King of kings and Lord of lords. Revelation is about the past (a sea beast reflecting the characteristics of Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome...all past historical realities)...an earth/ land beast forming an image to the sea beast today a current event reality... and Christ coming to destroy both and to take His children home...a future reality bound up in dozens of promises made from Genesis to Revelation.

Jesus's commands to Israel applying to Gentiles? Some, absolutely.
Like for example, "you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and body, and love your neighbour as yourself".
One prophet said, "To the law and to the testimony, if the speak not according to this word, there is no light in them". Jesus said, "I am not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill". He also said, "upon the above two greatest commandments, hang all the law and the prophets".

The law of Moses still applies? Don't confuse the laws of Moses which were given as an antidote to sin, with the laws of God which transgressed, became sin.

The end times happening now? Without any doubt whatsoever. But one needs a correct hermeneutic to discern that. Your AI doesn't.

I can't say anything else. Other than what I shared from what I see through here brakelite, I dont have anything else to comment on. Aside from the "your house is left desolate." Thank you again for sharing what you felt you needed to share and say.

I understand many people believe a lot of things I am not here to fight or judge you on it. Ya know?

Everyone must be convinced in their own minds is what Paul states.

 

[Brakelite]

I just want to point out that from 70Ad to like 146ad would complete the "your house has been left desolate."

I am not gonna go through each thing one by one.

70 AD → 135/136 AD is the full arc of desolation​

• 70 AD: The Temple is destroyed, Jerusalem burned, priesthood ended, sacrifices stopped. This is the initial desolation — the “house” is struck down.
• 70–130 AD: The land is unstable, repeatedly under Roman military control, with Jewish autonomy gone.
• 132–135 AD (Bar Kokhba Revolt):Rome crushes the final Jewish uprising. After this, Emperor Hadrian:
  • renames Jerusalem “Aelia Capitolina”
  • bans Jews from entering the city entirely
  • renames Judea “Syria Palaestina”
  • levels remaining Jewish structures
  • builds pagan temples over Jewish holy sites

By 135–146 AD, the “house” is not just damaged — it is erased, renamed, repopulated, and forbidden to its original inhabitants.

That is complete desolation.


Thank you for sharing what you believe you needed to share!

Previous to Jesus declaring "your house is desolate", He had described the temple as His Father's house, and My house. Here, He said to the Jews, is now your house, and My Father has abandoned it. His presence will no longer be found there. It's empty. Void of any spiritual advantage to either you or anyone else.
And I think you will agree with me, that any attempt to rebuild the temple in the future, whether successful or not, will not bring God back to Jerusalem. God will never ever sanction the reintroduction of sacrifices to the point where such an ediface could possibly be called the temple of God which belief Christian futurists cling to in connection to 2 Thess.2:4. Such a connection is beyond logic and utterly repugnant.

 

[MatthewG]

Previous to Jesus declaring "your house is desolate", He had described the temple as His Father's house, and My house. Here, He said to the Jews, is now your house, and My Father has abandoned it. His presence will no longer be found there. It's empty. Void of any spiritual advantage to either you or anyone else.
And I think you will agree with me, that any attempt to rebuild the temple in the future, whether successful or not, will not bring God back to Jerusalem. God will never ever sanction the reintroduction of sacrifices to the point where such an ediface could possibly be called the temple of God which belief Christian futurists cling to in connection to 2 Thess.2:4. Such a connection is beyond logic and utterly repugnant.

Well you gotta think that all that land had to be destroyed that was what was promised to happen in the old testament.

1. The Old Testament repeatedly warned that the land itself would be destroyed​

Not just the Temple — the land.

Over and over, God told Israel:

• If they broke the covenant
• If they rejected His prophets
• If they shed innocent blood
• If they turned to idols

Then the land would be laid waste, not just the building.

Examples:

• Leviticus 26:31–33
  

  “I will make your cities waste… I will scatter you among the nations, and your land shall be desolate.”

• Jeremiah 7:34
  

  “I will make the cities of Judah a desolation.”

• Micah 3:12
  

  “Zion shall be plowed like a field.”

• Daniel 9:26
  

  “The people of the prince… shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”

The destruction of the land, the city, and the Temple were all part of the same covenant curse.

So yes — the Old Testament promised total desolation, not just a damaged building.

2. When Jesus said “your house is left unto you desolate,” He was invoking those same curses​

He wasn’t just talking about the Temple structure.

He was declaring:

• The covenant is ending
• The land is under judgment
• The city is doomed
• The Temple is abandoned
• God’s presence is gone

That’s why He immediately follows with:

“Not one stone will be left upon another.” (Matthew 24:2)

That’s land‑level destruction, not just a spiritual metaphor.

3. And once the land was destroyed, the covenant was finished​

This is the part you’re hinting at:

If the land itself had to be destroyed as part of the covenant curses, then rebuilding anything on it cannot restore the covenant.

Because:

• The covenant ended
• The land was judged
• The Temple was abandoned
• The sacrifices were abolished
• The priesthood was dissolved
• The genealogies were lost
• The presence of God departed

So even if they rebuild a temple:

It cannot be God’s Temple. It cannot restart the covenant. It cannot bring God back.

The land’s destruction sealed the end of the old system.

 

[MatthewG]

Here is something I think about, I remember reading Joshua.

He was a king, I believe he gave out all the lands according as God wanted to the 12 tribes.

And considering the Covenant was made with them - they would have that "Great and dreadful day of the LORD" come upon them, and their lands would be taken away.

Great for those who were gonna make it out of the wrath of God coming up them.
Dreadful for those who seen their lands go up in smoke, and desolated.

REGARDLESS of the Tribes splitting they continued to meet at the Temple as well... so...

Those are just some thoughts i have and I sat there and read Joshua a long time ago to myself.

 

[Lizbeth]

Greetings Trevor,

I appreciate your message. I hold a different understanding of the Kingdom based on Jesus’ own words and the timeline He gave to His disciples.

Jesus taught that the Kingdom would not be something people could point to physically — “the kingdom of God does not come with observation… the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:20–21). He also said His Kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), which makes it difficult for me to place it in a future geopolitical setting with a physical throne in earthly Jerusalem.

Jesus repeatedly told His disciples that His coming and the fulfillment of the Kingdom would happen in their generation, not thousands of years later. He said:

• “There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” (Matthew 16:28)
• “This generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” (Matthew 24:34)


The apostles preached the same timeline. Peter said they were already living in the “last days” (Acts 2:16–17), and the early church expected the fulfillment soon, not in a distant age.

Because of this, I understand the Kingdom as something Jesus already established — a spiritual reign, not a future earthly monarchy. The throne He sits on is the throne of God, not a rebuilt throne of David in a physical temple.

I respect your view, but this is why I see the Kingdom as already present rather than awaiting a future 1000‑year earthly rule.

Kind regards,
Matthew

Amen. His kingdom is seen and received by faith, not by sight. Jesus went around preaching that the kingdom was nigh - it is part of the gospel.....it is the gospel of the kingdom - and as you pointed out, that it had already come with the first coming of Christ. The flesh craves something tangible that it can have a part in, to see and touch it with the physical senses, but that is not what the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom, not carnal and fleshly/earthly. As you reminded, it is not something that the flesh can inherit. The flesh is to be denied, died to and put under our/His feet in order that the Spirit may reign.....and of course as we know the flesh fights against and lusteth against that.

When I finally realized thankfully that His kingdom was not a future earthly kingdom I felt a kind of disappointment that was akin to when I realized as a child that Santa Clause wasn't real. The Jews under the Law, being under its tutelage like children, were taking things in the bible too literally and expecting an earthly kingdom with a flesh and blood King (Jesus was correcting them when He said His kingdom comes not with observation). I think this is one of the Jewish fables and childish things the bible says we are to grow out of and put away.

If we keep believing that the kingdom is future and earthly, that leads to accepting an earthly flesh and blood King instead of the true Christ......the tragic lesson of King Saul. One coming in their own name that Jesus mentioned. Such a belief also causes the church to put off the kingdom to a future date and miss seeing and walking in it now, the rule and reign of Christ and reigning with Him now.....so it's important we get that right. It's one reason, I believe, that the modern western church has lost so much ground in recent times. We are instructed in the bible to have our eyes fixed on the UNSEEN, not the seen, and to have all our hopes and affections ABOVE, not on earth below.

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings Bakelite,

And I think you will agree with me, that any attempt to rebuild the temple in the future, whether successful or not, will not bring God back to Jerusalem.

Isaiah 2:1–4 (AV): 1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. 2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. 3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

Kind rega rds
Trevor

 

[stevesonthebay]

Thankyou for this lesson. It is good to have Gods Kingdom clarified from an earthly one. I agree with all that is said. It seems pretty straight forward that Gods kingdom is not of this world and is within. I remember this teaching when first saved in the 80's. I think it has been known before this for some time.

But this has changed in redcent decades and I would say that is because the world has become more prominent and belief has deminished. At the same time the world has infiltrated into the church.

I think this is because the world has become so relative. A gradual chipping away at Gods spirit with materialism and rationalism. Its not that people have outright rejected God. Rather I think many have rationalised a new worldview of Christ church and the gospel.

We see the rising of Christian socialism or social justice. Churches competing in the market place of going good. Its no coincident I think that at the same time we see the world also creating a new social good as part of doing business. I think this is an example of the church building a kingdom on earth. Interpreting that Gods kingdom means the visible signs of good work in the form of social justice and welfare.

Now different denominations are fighting with each other over which is the true way. Ted Talks, seminars, podcasts ect all debating the very same issues that the world is engaging in. In some ways I think some churches are virtue signally that they are the way by showing how relevant they are as far as the same issues society is grappling with.

Though this destinction between Gods kingdom and a world kingdom is pretty clear as you have explained. I think satan has become very good at making people believe that Gods kingdom should be built and visible on earth.

You mention leaders and I think we have compromised church elders. Almost as though you now need a uni degree or be a social justice warrior. Rather than a humble and quiet leader by exampling Christ. I think this is the sign and good fruit. When the elder and church is quietly going about helping the poor, widows and orphans.

Not engaging in the culture war as this just becomes another identity among the worlds identities fighting over how things should be. It does not differenticate from the world and therefore no one can see any differnce. When there should be a destinct difference. One that is obedient to God and humble and even quiet and not arguing.

I think Peter says that humble obedience will expose evil and turn the unjust toward God. Simply by the example of Christ. If a church did this it would shine and no one could hold any charge against them as they are destinguished from the worlds ideas about building some utopia on earth. Something beyond and greater.