Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What does Christianity think about the First Temple's destruction?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What does Christianity think about the First Temple's destruction?

    In 586BC king Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians. The Jews were exiled from their land. 70 years later, king Cyrus 'God's anointed' (see Isaiah 45) allowed the Jews to return and the Temple to be rebuilt.

    What does Christianity make of the destruction, exile, and eventual return and rebuilding?

  • #2
    Originally posted by Fenris View Post
    In 586BC king Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians. The Jews were exiled from their land. 70 years later, king Cyrus 'God's anointed' (see Isaiah 45) allowed the Jews to return and the Temple to be rebuilt.

    What does Christianity make of the destruction, exile, and eventual return and rebuilding?
    I do not know about Christianity as a whole, but I personaly think that is what happens to people who refuse to repent, stop sinning, and return to the ways of God written in His Torah. Hence, this is a reoccurring thing both individually and cooperately. God removes Himself from the physical things we possess and the enemy comes in as judgment to steal, kill, and destroy.
    Edify the brethren, love the brethren, and forgive the brethren until I have nothing left.

    www.woc-church.org

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by manichunter View Post
      I do not know about Christianity as a whole, but I personaly think that is what happens to people who refuse to repent, stop sinning, and return to the ways of God written in His Torah. Hence, this is a reoccurring thing both individually and cooperately. God removes Himself from the physical things we possess and the enemy comes in as judgment to steal, kill, and destroy.
      No argument.

      But the Temple was rebuilt 70 years later. What do you make of that?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Fenris View Post
        No argument.

        But the Temple was rebuilt 70 years later. What do you make of that?
        I think that our disobedience creates a barrier between us and God; but it's not an impossible barrier to overcome. Not because we are capable of reconciling to Him, but because he desires to reconcile with us.

        Jeremiah 31
        20 Is not Ephraim my dear son,
        the child in whom I delight?
        Though I often speak against him,
        I still remember him.
        Therefore my heart yearns for him;
        I have great compassion for him,"
        declares the LORD.
        Even when God is punishing us, He desires to be reconciled to all men.
        One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God and Father over us all.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Steve M View Post
          I think that our disobedience creates a barrier between us and God; but it's not an impossible barrier to overcome. Not because we are capable of reconciling to Him, but because he desires to reconcile with us.
          Right, that's true. But does this mean one can be reconciled with God even without sacrifice?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Fenris View Post
            No argument.

            But the Temple was rebuilt 70 years later. What do you make of that?
            That was because God said he would let the land get all her sabbaths back. So she was in exile one year for each sabbath year that was ignored. This shows the great patience of God in that he waited around 490 years or so before finally bringing out the belt.

            As for the rebuilding of the temple, thank God that he is a God of second chances! Samson in rebellion, lost his strength. But in repentance gained it back. Over and over and over again in scripture we see the patience, severity and kindness of God. Let us not overlook the role of the prayer of Daniel in the rebuilding of the temple either. Nor the prayer of Nehemiah. Sometimes, it helps when a Godly man repents not only for himself, but for his fathers and his country.
            Matt 9:13
            13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
            NASU

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Fenris View Post
              Right, that's true. But does this mean one can be reconciled with God even without sacrifice?
              No. But the sacrifices that are acceptable to God are a broken heart and a contrite spirit.

              Yet if we dig further, I think we can discover that David was not bound to the Law of Moses in a way that many others are. He saw it but knew the heart of God behind it. David saw the spirit of the law beyond the letter. That's one reason he was allowed to live when he did that which the law demanded death for. He, knowing the mercy of God, ate the shewbread and was held guiltless. But taking the sword of Goliath caused many issues because it betrayed his lack of faith in the Lord to deliver him from Saul as he had from Goliath, and this after God had anointed him to be King!

              Digging further, I think we find David understood the ultimate sacrifice that was coming. You know where I am going with that one.
              Matt 9:13
              13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
              NASU

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                Right, that's true. But does this mean one can be reconciled with God even without sacrifice?
                Why, no. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness for sins. (cough cough, book of Hebrews, cough couch, New Testament theology again...)

                There may yet be another temple--but I think we already have a better temple.
                One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God and Father over us all.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                  No argument.

                  But the Temple was rebuilt 70 years later. What do you make of that?
                  I'm not following what you're getting at. Considering that Moses' warning about the covenant curses contained a warning that Israel would be scattered to the "nationS", and that they were only deported to one nation, Babylon, and, most importantly, that there were still some Israelies left in the land during that time, the ultimate fulfillment of the covenant curse appears to me to have not occurred until the diaspora of 70 AD.
                  ----------------------------------------------
                  When the plain sense of Scripture make sense, seek no other sense.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Brother Mark View Post
                    No. But the sacrifices that are acceptable to God are a broken heart and a contrite spirit.
                    Of course.
                    Yet if we dig further, I think we can discover that David was not bound to the Law of Moses in a way that many others are. He saw it but knew the heart of God behind it. David saw the spirit of the law beyond the letter. That's one reason he was allowed to live when he did that which the law demanded death for. He, knowing the mercy of God, ate the shewbread and was held guiltless. But taking the sword of Goliath caused many issues because it betrayed his lack of faith in the Lord to deliver him from Saul as he had from Goliath, and this after God had anointed him to be King!

                    Digging further, I think we find David understood the ultimate sacrifice that was coming. You know where I am going with that one.
                    Our beliefs color or view of scripture. that goes for both of us.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Steve M View Post
                      Why, no. Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness for sins.
                      Then why did God allow the Second temple to be built and exiles to return?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Literalist-Luke View Post
                        I'm not following what you're getting at. Considering that Moses' warning about the covenant curses contained a warning that Israel would be scattered to the "nationS", and that they were only deported to one nation, Babylon, and, most importantly, that there were still some Israelies left in the land during that time, the ultimate fulfillment of the covenant curse appears to me to have not occurred until the diaspora of 70 AD.
                        Well...yeah. that's true. Having said that, the second temple era was definitely 'lower' than the first. No prophets, no miracles, majority of the Jews never returned to israel...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                          Right, that's true. But does this mean one can be reconciled with God even without sacrifice?

                          This is only if we believe the sacrifices ever saved anyone. I'm a strong proponent of the belief that it was the ancient Israelites faith that saved them, not the sacrifices. The sacrifices were a manifestation of the faith that already existed. The sacrifices served as an example of what was to come.

                          As for what the Jews did for 70 years, we can look to the exile narratives and see that the Jews were faithful in thought and deed. Again, these were manifestations of the faith that already existed within.

                          The problem with modern Judaism is that it makes the same mistake some of the Pharisees did (I don't mean that in a derogatory manner, but merely as a way of comparison) in believing the Law, the actions, and so on actually were the path to salvation.

                          I know you won't agree with 90% of what is above, but that is the orthodox Christian explanation.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            OK, fair enough. I don't agree with some of what you said, but I see what you're saying.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                              In 586BC king Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians. The Jews were exiled from their land. 70 years later, king Cyrus 'God's anointed' (see Isaiah 45) allowed the Jews to return and the Temple to be rebuilt.

                              What does Christianity make of the destruction, exile, and eventual return and rebuilding?
                              Personally, I don't know what Christianity thinks about it. Speaking for myself, I cried when I read the account. I'm kinda choked up over it as I type this. I'm not joking about this. I feel/felt sad when I read it.

                              I don't condemn the people back then at all. If I were them, I probably would have done the same thing. I'm only sad in retrospect. I'm guessing of course, but I bet the walk to Babylon was silent. I don't think I would have opened my mouth the whole way. And I would be wondering if I was ever coming back. I think the others would be talking about how their dads worked on the temple and how all the families helped out. I think my heart would hurt so bad, I wouldn't be able to feel how tired my feet were.

                              And I would have felt the deepest sense of how much I disappointed God and I would also feel a deep sense of regret; my head would hurt but not from thinking. I would feel so numb. My only comfort would be the stars at night, the only familiar sight that remained. I think I would start to pray, try to make my apology, but the words wouldn't come out. Just silence and a diversion of the eyes.

                              At that point my faith would grow into the next generation beyond my lifetime. I'm not going back. Seventy years is a long time and I'm not likely to live that long. I will never see home again. My kids might see it. I'll tell them about it. Maybe they will do better than I did. I just don't know. Kids don't seem to be listening, but then they surprise me. They're good kids. I'll tell them the stories, and say, "we really messed up. If you go back, don't do what we did. Don't screw this up again. Take my bones back please."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X